Build around today: Reggie Miller vs Ray Allen

[No-more-rings]

If both were coming in as rookies who would you pick in today’s league? Both are 3 point snipers, and would translate well. Ray is a better on-ball playmaker, while Reggie is likely a better overall scorer.

[Stalwart]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

[No-more-rings]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

The last top 100 project had Miller 39th, and Ray 50th. So he may be the more popular pick. Still think there’s probably a pro-Ray side.

[Colbinii]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

I would be shocked if someone had Miller Top 20. Could you quote a post by someone who says they do have Miller Top 20?

Otherwise I think we all need to chalk it up as another Stalwart Day Dream.

[Stalwart]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

I would be shocked if someone had Miller Top 20. Could you quote a post by someone who says they do have Miller Top 20?

Otherwise I think we all need to chalk it up as another Stalwart Day Dream.

No but I can quote someone making a case for it and then rigorously defending that case. Would be so much easier if that someone would just admit they were wrong and concede...

[henshao]

In baseball there's a term, a "five tool player," which denotes a player who can throw, run, field, hit consistently and hit with power. If I had to draft a player picking between Ray and Reggie it would first matter what kind of roster I already had, but in a vacuum I'd pick Ray every time because he has more "tools" than Reggie. This has been a long-winded way to say Ray could play point guard or shooting guard, Reggie not so much.

[AEnigma]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

I would be shocked if someone had Miller Top 20. Could you quote a post by someone who says they do have Miller Top 20?

Otherwise I think we all need to chalk it up as another Stalwart Day Dream.

No but I can quote someone making a case for it and then rigorously defending that case. Would be so much easier if that someone would just admit they were wrong and concede...

The hypothetical process needed to call Reggie top twenty is a lot more coherent and principled than the one rejecting his placement in the top fifty, yet you seem to have no interest in conceding that real position.

[falcolombardi]

In baseball there's a term, a "five tool player," which denotes a player who can throw, run, field, hit consistently and hit with power. If I had to draft a player picking between Ray and Reggie it would first matter what kind of roster I already had, but in a vacuum I'd pick Ray every time because he has more "tools" than Reggie. This has been a long-winded way to say Ray could play point guard or shooting guard, Reggie not so much.

Is not the whole five tool thingh a precautionary tale over focusing in "completeness" more than effectiveness?

[henshao]

In baseball there's a term, a "five tool player," which denotes a player who can throw, run, field, hit consistently and hit with power. If I had to draft a player picking between Ray and Reggie it would first matter what kind of roster I already had, but in a vacuum I'd pick Ray every time because he has more "tools" than Reggie. This has been a long-winded way to say Ray could play point guard or shooting guard, Reggie not so much.

Is not the whole five tool thingh a precautionary tale over focusing in "completeness" more than effectiveness?

It can be, if two players are not comparable in effectiveness as these two are

[HeartBreakKid]

ray allen isn't close to Miller as a shooter which is their main uses. Ray Allen gets pumped up as the better shooter because of totals, ie he made more 3 point shots than anyone at one point - which is an era thing.


Really just look at their shooting percentages, it's not close.

Allen is a bit more versatile because people have images of him playing with the ball, but it's a really supplementary skill for these type of players. It would make way more sense to take the premium shooter here which is easily Miller.

I guess Allen does have seasons where he had high PPG on bad teams where Miller never bothered to score into his 20s (unless it was the playoffs because he obviously could if he wanted too).

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Remember how well young Ray Allen drove to the hoop with the Bucks. Carrer wise and for being the bail out man on the pacers hitting big shotsm makes me favor Miller. But I think young Ray Allen was faster and more of the prototypical star off guard with a versatile game who coukd beat his man without a screen. Pacers and Miller did screens beautifully but the screens were needed.

[70sFan]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

No, according to the PC Board both are top 50 players ever and Reggie is usually ranked slightly higher.

You will never find a list when Reggie was ranked inside top 20. You found one example (that you didn't understand) of making a case for Miller to be that high. One example doesn't equal to "according to the PC Board, Miller is top 20".

Why are you arguing in a bad faith?

[clearlynotjesse]

ray allen isn't close to Miller as a shooter which is their main uses. Ray Allen gets pumped up as the better shooter because of totals, ie he made more 3 point shots than anyone at one point - which is an era thing.


Really just look at their shooting percentages, it's not close.

Allen is a bit more versatile because people have images of him playing with the ball, but it's a really supplementary skill for these type of players. It would make way more sense to take the premium shooter here which is easily Miller.

I guess Allen does have seasons where he had high PPG on bad teams where Miller never bothered to score into his 20s (unless it was the playoffs because he obviously could if he wanted too).

Ray 3P% peaked at 45% (43% in a peak-ish season) and Reggie peaked at 43% (shortened line, 42% normal line). Full career %s also lean Ray slightly. They're absolutely comparable as shooters. Reggie had a better TS% because of better 2P% and a ridiculous FT rate. Plenty of reasons to pick Reggie, but not because he was an "easily better shooter."

[Stalwart]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

No, according to the PC Board both are top 50 players ever and Reggie is usually ranked slightly higher.

You will never find a list when Reggie was ranked inside top 20. You found one example (that you didn't understand) of making a case for Miller to be that high. One example doesn't equal to "according to the PC Board, Miller is top 20".

Why are you arguing in a bad faith?

I said top 20 to 40. Other posters said 25-40. So yeah.

Several of you have said that Reggie in the top 20 was a reasonable position. Even in this thread AEnigma said there was a better case for Reggie in the top 20 than Reggie being out of the top 50.

There should be swift and universal condemnation for such a position. If nothing else to protect the integrity of your board.

[Jaivl]

There should be swift and universal condemnation for such a position. If nothing else to protect the integrity of your board.

shades of 2017's Top 100

[HeartBreakKid]

ray allen isn't close to Miller as a shooter which is their main uses. Ray Allen gets pumped up as the better shooter because of totals, ie he made more 3 point shots than anyone at one point - which is an era thing.


Really just look at their shooting percentages, it's not close.

Allen is a bit more versatile because people have images of him playing with the ball, but it's a really supplementary skill for these type of players. It would make way more sense to take the premium shooter here which is easily Miller.

I guess Allen does have seasons where he had high PPG on bad teams where Miller never bothered to score into his 20s (unless it was the playoffs because he obviously could if he wanted too).

Ray 3P% peaked at 45% (43% in a peak-ish season) and Reggie peaked at 43% (shortened line, 42% normal line). Full career %s also lean Ray slightly. They're absolutely comparable as shooters. Reggie had a better TS% because of better 2P% and a ridiculous FT rate. Plenty of reasons to pick Reggie, but not because he was an "easily better shooter."

3 point shooting isn't the only type of shooting. Being better from mid range or long 2, much less in an era where mid range was a high volume shot isn't irrelevant.

Reggie Miller shot over 40% from 3 point territory 11 times. I don't know why we would go by single season peak, and that's not to mention Miller was more of an outlier from his era than Allen was.

Miller shoots a higher % of volume shots on better %, and that's only including his seasons from when he is 31+ years or older. Naturally, that isn't going to show up in 3 point %.

[70sFan]

According to the PC Board Reggie Miller is between top 20 and 40 all time. Should be him, no?

No, according to the PC Board both are top 50 players ever and Reggie is usually ranked slightly higher.

You will never find a list when Reggie was ranked inside top 20. You found one example (that you didn't understand) of making a case for Miller to be that high. One example doesn't equal to "according to the PC Board, Miller is top 20".

Why are you arguing in a bad faith?

I said top 20 to 40. Other posters said 25-40. So yeah.

Several of you have said that Reggie in the top 20 was a reasonable position. Even in this thread AEnigma said there was a better case for Reggie in the top 20 than Reggie being out of the top 50.

There should be swift and universal condemnation for such a position. If nothing else to protect the integrity of your board.

Nobody has Reggie inside top 20 here. Again, you create a strawman and then try make this community look bad by using it.

I don't think Reggie inside top 20 is more reasonable than having him outside top 50. Neither position is reasonable for me. Some people go too far with Reggie's offensive profile and overrate him. People like you look at his accolades and conclude he's not top 50 player, without acknowledging the idea that he might be highly underrated by his contemporaries because his style was unique and ahead of his times.

Reggie inside top 40 sounds very reasonable to me. He's one of the best postseason scorers ever and has enormous offensive impact with his shooting and off-ball play. His longevity is also top notch. Lack of all-around game hurt his case for top 30 to me though.

[Masigond]

The problem with Reggie Miller's ranking is that he concentrated so much on being a typical off-ball shooting guard. Thus his highest usage rate was barely top 20 for a season and outside of it for all other seasons, and his assist rates are rather pedestrian, especially for an alleged superstar. But it's another approach to the game that has its own benefits: It lets your teammates the opportunity to create for themselves (and other teammates), so you can use a true point guard at his side. Guys like Mark Jackson who aren't exactly very capable scorers themselves can work in such a situation (not that much when playing with guys like LeBron), and you won't see Miller turn over the ball often. That makes him a very efficient player in a somewhat limited role in comparison to all those jack-of-all-trades players.
I wouldn't say that Reggie wasn't able to take over the playmaking more like Ray Allen did especially with the Sonics, but we've seen it quite rarely. So Reggie was somewhat reduced to providing spacing and being a scorer and little else.

Actually I don't find it easy to decide which player I would prefer to build around as I would want them in that off-ball role for most of the time (given that I have the luxury of a capable PG and some other able scorers on my team), and they are quite similar in their capabilities of finding open spots and shooting. Allen has the advantage of entering the league some years later when long-range shooting became more of the norm but Reggie lit it up quite often in the playoffs, taking about 5 (and up to 8.8 in 00-01) attempts per game from outside from 1992-93 on (that was before the 3P line was shortened!) which is quite comparable to Ray's volume in the playoffs. Both have their reputation of being able to hit clutch shots, so I don't see that much of a difference there either. Defensively I don't see much of a difference, but Reggie had the advantage of playing on better defensive teams in his prime.
I think Ray's ballhandling was better, so he gives you a bit of an advantage and slightly more possibilities to build around him. So I'd take him but you can't go wrong with Reggie either.

[CharityStripe34]

I'd take Ray Allen in a heartbeat. More versatile.

[Case2012]

I'm taking Jesus all day.