I’m looking forward to X’s response…

Andre Miller has taken 508 three-point attempts in his career. That’s an average of 56 attempts per season. He doesn’t shoot threes. He knows he doesn’t have range out there, so he doesn’t shoot them. That doesn’t mean he can’t shoot. Rip Hamilton didn’t shoot a lot of threes until recently. He was always a good shooter. Glen Robinson was a helluva shooter but he didn’t go beyond 18 feet the way you think a shooter of his caliber would. I mean, just because a guy doesn’t shoot threes doesn’t mean he’s a bad shooter.

Jason Williams on the other hand has launched 3525 attempts over the course of ten seasons–that’s 352.5 attempts per season. For his career, he has attempted 5.2 threes per game. Miller has attempted 0.7.

Who’s the bad shooter? The guy who can’t shoot threes and attempts a lot of them, or the guy who can’t shoot threes and doesn’t attempt a lot of them. The fact Miller shot 20% on 50 attempts–who cares? Half of them were probably heaves at the buzzer.

By that token, a good 41 percent of Jason Kidd’s attempts the past few seasons have been from three-land. He has shot about 36 percent on threes during that span. So, if he stopped shooting threes (like Miller), and his FG percentage climbed to 46% or so, would we be saying he’s a good shooter?

My point is you can’t ONLY go by the numbers. Do I know that Jason Williams can go down court at full speed, stop and pop a 25-footer? Yes. We’ve all seen it. But because he CAN do that, and Miller CAN’T, doesn’t mean Williams is a better shooter. Like I said before, a huge part of shooting is shot selection. And any way you cut it, the guy who shoots 46% from the field is a better shooter than the guy who shoots 40%. Bad shots are like turnovers. And while Williams CAN shoot, he takes so many ridiculous shots (off-balance, feet crooked, etc.) that he HURTS his team.

But as far as ball control, Williams DOES NOT turn the ball over. I mean, again, cut it any way you want, but the guy has a career assist-to-turnover ratio of 2.8-to-1. That’s very good. You’ll never see a defender take the ball from him either.

Rajon Rondo over Andre Miller? Are you serious?

If salary weren’t a factor, there isn’t one GM in the league who wouldn’t take Miller over Rondo. Give me a break. It’s easy to impress when you’re your team’s fifth most important guy on the floor, and the other cats are all-stars. I’m not convinced Rondo will even stick in the NBA. He’s back-up material, at best.

Arenas isn’t a point. Baron is hardly a point. Miller is a team-first floor general. Watch the Sixers this year. I guarantee you Miller is going to have his best season.

There is a statistic that does something of the sort. It’s called usage rate, and it estimates what percentage of a team’s possessions a player uses. It’s not perfect, certainly, but it does give a general idea of who is getting a lot of touches. For example, the top 5 in the league last year were LeBron, Kobe, TMac, Melo and Dirk. While Williams usage rate has dropped off in recent years, his career usage rate is about average at 19.5 (average is, of course, 100%/5 = 20%). Miller’s usage rate the last few years has hovered around 20, and he has a 21.1 usage rate for his career. It’s slightly higher than Williams, but not a really significant gap.

“Williams isn’t a prototypical point guard. Meaning he doesn’t make a lot plays for his teammates and aside from bringing the ball up the floor, he’s really not a point guard at all…That’s the reason that Miller and Williams’ turnover rates are comparable. Because Miller has the ball in his hands more and is asked to create for his team.”

If that were true, we would expect Miller to A) have significantly higher assist numbers or B) have significantly higher scoring numbers. That doesn’t really apply in either case. Their assist numbers are very close, and Miller’s career average of 14.9 points per 26 minutes is only 1.5 higher than Williams’.

I’d be mildly surprised if Nene made an All-Star team too. But only because he’d have to beat out some phenomenal players to make that team.

You’re right, he was terrible last summer. His conditioning was subpar.

You compared Miller and Williams’ turnover rates. I think that’s misleading X. You know I’m not a big proponent of advanced statistics. I think they have a place in today’s game but I’d prefer to analyze the game myself than go by numbers.

But there is one statistic that I would love to see. And that is what percentage of the game a player has the ball in his hands. Williams isn’t a prototypical point guard. Meaning he doesn’t make a lot plays for his teammates and aside from bringing the ball up the floor, he’s really not a point guard at all. Unfortunately, I don’t have a statistic to back up that claim.

That’s the reason that Miller and Williams’ turnover rates are comparable. Because Miller has the ball in his hands more and is asked to create for his team.

I used to be a big AI fan. I was actually in favor of the Nuggets trading for him. But he’s a ball-stopper. Again, there isn’t a statistic that measures this but when Iverson gets the ball, the offense comes to a standstill. I don’t care what his shooting percentage is or how often he turns the ball over, he kills the timing of a team’s offense.

I said Williams had the reputation of being a turnover-prone guy. He’s actually improved a ton in that area since early in his career and has continued to improve. Like I said above, Miller has actually gotten worse in that department. Williams is also, certainly not, “one of the most sure-handed point guards in the history of the NBA”.

“Williams has a career .325 shooting percentage on threes. That’s shit.”

No. Miller has a 20% career 3PT shooting percentage. THAT is shit.

“And who said he can’t shoot? Career 46% FG, 80% FT.”

He’s a point guard who shoots 20% on 3s and shot 43% on anything not a layup last year (and keep in mind, that was the best shooting performance of his career). He’s not a good shooter.

Look, I’m not going to deny that Miller is “solid” or “good”. He’s not an All-Star though. He has mediocre assist/turnover numbers, he doesn’t shoot the ball well, he doesn’t get a ton of assists, he’s not a great defender (if you look over the past five years, his teams have been significantly better defensively when he’s off the floor) and he scores about 15 a game. He’s decent, not remotely approaching great.

Just off the top of my head, point guards I would rather have than Miller: Rondo, Calderon, Billups, Arenas, Paul, Williams, Nash, Davis, and Parker. And that’s just the clear picks, and I’m not going into guys like Iverson or Brandon Roy, who are combo guys. Miller is borderline top 10 at his position, not an All-Star.

I’m disappointed you don’t know that Jason Williams post-Sacramento has been one of the most sure-handed point guards in the history of the NBA. He has been amongst the league leaders each year in turnover-to-assist ratio over the course of the past seven years.

2003: 8.3 aspg, 2.2 topg
2004: 6.8 aspg, 1.9 topg
2005: 5.6 aspg, 1.8 topg
2006: 4.9 aspg, 1.7 aspg
2007: 5.3 aspg, 1.6 topg
2008: 4.6 aspg, 1.4 topg

Per 36 minutes for his career, he’s 7.2 aspg, 2.6 topg.

He was a little wild early on, but for most of his career he’s been a solid point who protects the ball.

And I don’t know who said Andre Miller is turnover-prone but that’s ridiculous too. He’s steady–always has been, always will be.

Career averages for Miller: 7.5 aspg, 2.7 topg. That’s good.

And who said he can’t shoot? Career 46% FG, 80% FT.

To me, he has been solid, dependable, durable (missed only six games his whole career). He has been a poor man’s Jason Kidd with better scoring ability.

He has been on bad teams for most of his career. That’s not his fault.

And the whole Jason Williams is a far superior shooter…

Career FG%

Miller .458
Williams .396

Career FT%

Miller .799
Williams .816

Williams shoots threes while Miller doesn’t, but Williams has a career .325 shooting percentage on threes. That’s shit. In two years, Williams actually shot below 30% on threes.

Part of being a good shooter is knowing your limitations and when to shoot. I’ve always defending Jason Kidd’s shooting ability because (a) he usually made the open jumper, and (b) he shot well in clutch situations. But any time his feet weren’t set or he was well-guarded, forget it, he bricked it. But Kidd didn’t shoot a lot. He knew his limitations.

To me, that self-awareness is an element of being a good shooter. Sure Iverson and Arenas hit ridiculous shots, but they also brick a ton of other shots. And those shots that they miss lead to long rebounds and fast break points. A guy with bad shot selection might as well average ten turnovers per game.

So I’ll take Miller any day. Put him on a team with some talent and the guy is an All-Star.

“The Nuggets aren’t running any more than they were before because Iverson isn’t a fastbreak guard.”

Gee, it’s too bad we don’t have a number that could completely refute that…oh wait, we do. In three years under Miller, Denver averaged 93.3, 93.5, and 93.9 possessions per game. In the last two seasons, they averaged 97.4 and 99.7. Not only have they run more than before, but it’s a significant margin.

“You’re reaching by comparing Andre Miller to Jason Williams.”

How is it a reach? If you look at Williams’ career post-Sacramento, it’s very comparable to Miller’s. Williams has the reputation of being turnover-prone, but Miller actually turns the ball over more. Miller scores more, but Williams is a far superior perimeter shooter.

Miller is also 31, only one year younger than Iverson. Guards who can’t shoot historically do not age well.

Honestly, I don’t get the disdain for Iverson. I’ll be the first to admit that throughout his whole career he’s been the definition of a high-volume, low-efficiency player. However, in Philadelphia he rarely had a choice in that, and last year with the Nuggets he cut way down on his role and was very efficient. He’s going to be able to play a ton of minutes and always gives you a ton of effort.

Why wouldn’t Portland want him? They’re flooded with prospects, it’s not like the package I mentioned would really hurt their future plans. Iverson immediately makes them a really scary team next year, and he would give them huge amounts of cap relief next offseason.

You’re reaching by comparing Andre Miller to Jason Williams.

I don’t think there’s any way that Portland trades for AI. Why would they? Iverson isn’t the type of player you want around a young team. He’s not a leader and he would delay the development of Roy and Oden just like he’s delayed the development of Anthony. I think Golden State would be an ideal destination for Iverson. He’d be able to shoot to his hearts content playing Nellie ball.

I agree with your opinion of Miller. The Nuggets traded Miller because he’s a half-court point guard and the Nuggets have been searching for a way to get out and run like the Suns did, in order to take advantage of the mile high altitude in Denver. It hasn’t worked out. The Nuggets aren’t running any more than they were before because Iverson isn’t a fastbreak guard.

On one hand, I think Iverson should be playing as a facilitator and I blame him for dominating the basketball so much. On the other hand, I think it’s George Karl’s responsibility to get him to play that way and Karl hasn’t even really experimented with AI at the point. Maybe he’s incapable of playing that position, but I think Denver should have at least tried to put him there.

Yeah, I think Nene-Martin can be a viable frontcourt. Nene is extremely talented. It’s unfortunate that he’s been dealt so many setbacks this early in his career. But he defended Duncan extremely well in the 2007 NBA playoffs. He’s big and explosive. He’s an All=Star talent.

Martin is one of the most gifted athletes in the league.

You said, “They had a significantly better chance of being competitive with AI than with Miller.”

But they were “competitive with Miller. They won 45 games.

I’d trade Iverson for Camby and Miller in a heartbeat.

They’re the only team I can think of you might a) Want Iverson b) Have the expiring contracts and young prospects to get him c) Be a place Iverson might want to go.

I’m not calling Camby Mutumbo or Wallace. Mutumbo is one of the greatest defensive players of all time. Wallace was spectacular in his prime (which was short). What I am saying is that Camby is an elite defensive center, in a class with only 3-4 other guys in the league right now.

“I think he’s a winner 100%.”

With a career 46% winning percentage.

The Nuggets won 50 games last year, more than they ever won with Miller (they averaged 45 wins a year in his three years there).

Miller has had two very good seasons. One in his last year with Cleveland when he lead the league in assists, and last year with the Sixers. Other than that, he’s had a decidedly mediocre career. He can’t shoot and he’s been turnover-prone his entire career. He’s actually quite comparable to Jason Williams (in his post-Sacramento career).

They just let Camby go for nothing. I mean, come on.

Iverson is in a walk year so the Nuggets are going to end up getting less in return. It’s just a bad situation.

Camby
Martin/Nene
Anthony
Smith
Miller

is better than:

Hunter
Martin/Nene
Anthony
Iverson
Anthony Carter

You know, I’m in agreement with Hoff that Camby isn’t Dikembe Mutombo defensively (at his best), or even Ben Wallace (at his best)–I don’t think he’s as good as the numbers would leave you to believe. However, with that said, as X will argue, Camby has finished in the top five in DPOY voting a bunch of times. On top of that, the stats say he’s one of the top seven or so shot blockers of all-time. It’s hard to argue against that. But I will say I can understand where Hoff is coming from–and doesn’t he, being out in Denver, watch Camby a lot more than X and I do?

I will say something in the Nuggets defense because I was REALLY high on this team the past couple of years, especially the year in which Voshon Lenard went down. Did they overpay for Kenyon? Absolutely. Did they overpay Nene? Absolutely. But for Christ’s sake, what was the likelihood BOTH of them would go down with serious injuries? I mean, if both were healthy, wouldn’t the Nuggets have given Tim Duncan and the Spurs serious trouble? I think so.

So, as much as I want to hate on the Nuggets for some of their turned-out-to-be-bad moves, I can’t help but say they were the victims of bad luck. I think you guys will agree to an extent.

Where I disagree with you guys is on Andre Miller. I think X is crazy for his comments on Miller, whom I believe is one of the best–and most underrated–point guards I have ever seen. I think he’s a winner 100%. The problem in Denver–and correct me if I’m wrong, I’m going just off of memory–is that they lacked a perimeter scorer, and have for some time. I think they figured because Miller made so much and wasn’t a big scoring threat, they’d deal him away for a scoring point guard along the lines of Baron Davis, Stephon Marbury, etc. I bet those names came up in rumors. The Nuggets got Iverson. Fine.

To me, that was a mistake. To me, point guard is the most important position. After that, center is the most important. I think bringing in Iverson, who’s NOT a playmaker but rather a scorer who racks up assists simply by logging long minutes and dominating the ball, was a mistake. They should have kept Miller, and instead gone out looking for one or two Kyle Korver types.

I haven’t done the research, but I’m willing to bet a testicle the Sixers have improved since acquiring Andre Miller. Meanwhile, I’m willing to bet the Nuggets lost a step since gaining Iverson.

You can tell me until you’re blue in the face how Iverson is better than Miller, etc., but to me, winning is more important than simply selling tickets. If my goal is to win, I’ll take Miller over Iverson any time. Leadership is huge.

I think the Nuggets are done. I think that window opened and closed. Time to start building for a title run in five years.