Dude Weather Subscribe to Secrets Minneapolis / St. Paul
Photo copyright 2009 NBAE (Photo by David Sherman/NBAE via Getty Images)
Game #58, Home Game #29: Minnesota 82, Portland 102
Game #59, Home Game #30: Minnesota 94, Houston 105
Season Record: 18-41
1. Moot Scrappy
The Wolves played their worst game under Kevin McHale Friday night versus Portland, an abomination of insufficient talent parlayed with lackluster effort and an inappropriately appropriate defeatist attitude. McHale didn't make excuses in his postgame. "We didn't muster any energy, didn't play with energy or effort and that's discouraging. Tomorrow we'll have a hard practice and get back at it. That effort is not acceptable...if we had two guys on the boards, they had three; if we had three, they had four...but we'll get better, tomorrow we'll practice and we'll play better the next game."
That would be tonight's tilt against Houston, another hellish matchup for the Jefferson-less Wolves, for the Rockets are the Clydesdales of the NBA, with a bunch of big-footed thoroughbreds such as Yao Ming, Luis Scola, Ron Artest and Shane Battier, with the pocket-point guard Aaron Brooks rounding out their otherwise brawny starting five. Confronting them was a team that, ever since Jefferson went down, has been like a grapefruit, sliced in half (starters and bench), with the two sides then alternately placed face-down on the electric rotary juicer. A lot of their juice was spent trying to stay with the vastly superior Lakers and Jazz last week--strong efforts that ground up their sinew, leaving soft, dented hunks of mostly rind. That's what got put back on the rotor of the Trailblazers and Rockets this weekend. The Portland game featured a Wolves team that fully grasped how overmatched they were, the mental inferiority catching up with (and catching on to) the physical interiority. It felt like the beginning of the end for this season.
I showed up at Target Center tonight to see if McHale could be as good as his word: Would the Wolves "get better," and not roll over against another ballclub that was generally ready and willing to put a whupping on the vulnerable squads around the league? Or was Minnesota indeed ready to be taken out with the eggshells and coffee grounds?
The suspense from that tortured analogy is killing you, I know, but alas, there was no satisfying answer either way. The Wolves played hard almost the entire time, played well in spurts, didn't disgrace themselves or prompt disgust, and, worse, boredom, as often as they had against Portland. That said, it wasn't hard to discern that if the Rockets performed with even a modicum of interest and cohesion, the Wolves were going down, and the chances of it getting ugly were relatively high. This was, after all, an opponent that had already beaten Minnesota twice, by 7 and 17 points, and those were games in which Jefferson made 90-inch mincemeat out of Yao, racking up 34 and 36 points, respectively. As the starting lineups were introduced, and Big Al was off somewhere setting his surgically repaired knee on something soft, one could span the evening's matchups and pronounce most of them ludicrous.
To spare the 6-8 rook Kevin Love the indignity of pretending to play center against a legit big, McHale reprised the large frontcourt he trotted out against Portland. Thus, out-of-shape Jason Collins would contend with Yao, Love would face the Argentinian power forward Scola and Ryan Gomes would test his mettle against Artest. Uh huh. But it was in the backcourt where things really got hincky. The 6-4 Randy Foye drew the 6-8 defensive specialist Shane Battier. And the little waterbug Brooks would go up against not his near-equal in Bassy Telfair, who was injured and in street clothes, but the slow, aging vet Kevin Ollie.
The Rockets hit their first 7 shots, then four of their next five--that's 11-12 FG, folks--before Love blocked a Scola jumper. Fortunately, it was coming so easily on the offensive end that Houston was lulled into exchanging baskets via humdrum D. To the extent the Wolves pressed the action, Foye was the most impressive, using his speed to gain space for his jumpers, hitting 3-6 FG versus Battier. Gomes was burning the mercurial Artest, who seemed more intent at stopping penetration and let his man pop out for perimeter J's, making 5-6 FG for 11 points in the first. Love likewise stepped out for a pair of midrange jumpers. After one, it was only 29-23. And after getting 19 points out of its bench in the second period--with Craig Smith and newcomer Bobby Brown earning most of the kudos, as was true versus the Blazers--while outscoring Houston 30-25, the Wolves were down a mere point at the break.
Yet, as was also true Friday against Portland, everything fell apart in the third quarter. Down just 5 with 10:30 to play in the third versus the Blazers, the Wolves suffered a 5:02 stretch in which they were outscored 18-2 (a Love jumper prevented a whitewash). Tonight, the Wolves did that a bucket better, or worse. Actually up by a point with 8:17 to go in the third, Minnesota's offense again seized up like an engine without oil. Houston burst out on a 20-2 run--and the basket was registered on a 16-foot set shot by Jason Collins, who unforgivably tried a heat check and airballed a 17-footer on the next possession. It was grisly. Brooks ran circles around Ollie and then Brooks, thus reducing Ollie's comments in the Sunday Strib--about how Brooks will stay in the league a long time because, like Ollie himself, he emphasizes defense--to the level of farce. Brooks, the second-year pro who owns the point with the trade of Rafer Alston to Orlando, had 9 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists, zero turnovers and a steal for the period.
It was also farce watching Craig Smith take a shot at guarding Yao. McHale more accurately referred to it as "circling the wagons," as the Rhino mostly fronted this biggest of bigs, while the weakside help and wing players were on constant alert. Yao being Yao, he didn't try to clear the rabble with rim-shaking slams a la Shaq, but mostly fumbled around like a scene from Gulliver's Travels and/or dished it out to his open teammates,primarily Artest, who converted jumpers. After three periods it was 83-69 Houston, making the final period garbage time--turn that Rhino loose!--for the second straight game. This time after the final whistle, McHale didn't vow getting better, conceded his squad is worn down, and, when asked what he is learning from these games, segued into saying that nobody feels sorry for you in this league and you have to keep fighting, etc, etc.
Okay, so what have *we* learned from these dual shellackings? That large, long, physical, deliberate opponents present the most dreadful matchups for this current conglomeration of Wolves. That although Jefferson is at best a mediocre defender, his absence makes opponents' point totals skyrocket, because the Wolves are forced to push the pace and don't have the defensive goods to sustain it at the other end. That Love may be a very good rebounder but he is not superhuman, and can be eclipsed by bigger and often-wiser foes making him the sole source of their attention. In a composite 51:27 this weekend, the rook grabbed a mere six caroms, and just one was off the offensive glass. That Jason Collins needs a pair of shorts another size up--a couple of parachutes stitched together might do the trick. That Kevin McHale is still doing a pretty good job motivating his troops, but that an ugly reckoning is still easy to behold in the future. (Although it still won't be as ugly as the days of Mark Blount and Ricky Davis, let alone Christian Laettner and Chuck Person.) That if you gave Craig Smith 38 minutes per night, both he and the man he was guarding would be a good bet to go off for 30 points. That Brian Cardinal is already auditioning to be the heavy in Guy Ritchie shoot-em-ups, clubbing opponents every time they have the temerity to beat him or one of his teammates off the dribble. That general manager Jim Stack's pronouncement that the team most needs a playmaker and a physical defensive presence at the rim still holds true two months later, but that neither Bobby Brown nor Shelden Williams seem to fit the bill.
2. The Fad
We're probably going to be hearing a lot about Bobby Brown in the next few days. It is the time of year when the doldrums really become entrenched for bad ballclubs, and any swatch of apparent good news is flogged for all its worth. By dint of his name-sharing with the r&b/reality antihero, Brown has already exposed the most shamelessly cliched wannabe comics covering the team. One media wag sitting behind me tonight openly yearned for a game-winning shot by the Wolves' new acquisition, so he could write: Brown Beats Houston for his headline, and that is actually one of the more creative bon mots thus far.
But Brown's 15 points in limited burn versus Portland on Friday, followed by four quick dimes in the first half against Houston Sunday will have the hope-mongers hauling out their pumps and inner tubes. I confess the cluster of assists were a pleasant surprise, but hold to my position that Brown is a poor man's Randy Foye, meaning he simply doesn't have the DNA to be even a solid backup point guard in the NBA, but can cobble together enough moments to foster a good delusion about his potential as floor general. To be fair, the Wolves' looked better with Brown running the show than with Ollie at the point, although it helps that McHale thinks he needs some scoring off the bench and is thus bringing Brown in with Mike Miller and/or Craig Smith, a duo that can really lighten the load for a point in the half court. Like Foye, Brown is a volume shooter--he was a collective 8-17 FG in a combined 38:59 this weekend--who can dazzle with a fancy pass and impress with a smart one every now and then. But thus far he also seems like Foye in that his dribbling isn't impregnable and the consistency of his passing (and decision to pass or shoot) remains a work in progress. Aside from prodding bad humor out of people, there really isn't anything wrong with having him around. But in my admittedly snap judgement, he doesn't feel like the answer to anything on this team. At best, he's a Kirk Snyder redux; a diversion for the dog days of March.
3. The Future of Miller
Remember when Michael Jackson changed from black to white? It was bizarre, fascinating, seemingly rooted in some sort of deep-seated impulse, that, regardless of whether it was macabre or utterly reasonable, cried out for an explanation. The stubborn metamorphosis of Mike Miller from scorer to ball distributor has a similar vibe. For a while, the rationale was that Miller was undergoing a terrible shooting slump and shrewdly utilizing his complementary skills until the deadeye regained focus. But Miller has had the hot hand for well over a month now, and continues to prefer trying to dish to his less accurate teammates, a pattern that, if anything, is growing more outlandish. Over the past three games--all double-digit losses for Minnesota--Miller is shooting a scintillating 18-23 FG, which is an amazing 77% but also amounts to less than 8 shots per game. Meanwhile, in each of those three games, Miller has led the Wolves in both assists and turnovers. Clearly he has become the team's most impactful passer.
It is very easy to run hot and cold on a player who withholds a skill that is vital to the team's success while promoting a lesser skill that fosters ball movement and generally enhances team unity. My fascination has been mostly negative, which is a sign of my stupidity--fascination is an exercise and engagement of the mind that should rarely if ever be wasted or besmirched--so I've tried to look upon this personality change of Miller's more kindly. Against Portland, that was easy. With Collins in the lineup to lessen the Blazers' size advantage, someone had to sit, and McHale opted for Miller so he could also generate more scoring in the second unit. Miller handled all this was pure enthusiasm, a classy move redolent of veteran leadership. In his first stint in his new role, he came in and immediately grabbed a rebound and delivered a pass to Gomes for a slam, played great defense on Travis Outlaw, tipped in a missed layup by Telfair, buried a long jumper and assisted on a three--pointer by Carney--all within the final 3:56 of the first quarter.
My postgame questions to McHale about Miller generally have had a negative undercurrent, so it was nice to note after Friday's game that he seems to have settled into his 6th man role without a hitch. But McHale, who had generally rebutted my negativity in those previous press conferences, had also switched places. Specifically, he noticed that while Miller was converting 85.7% of his shots (6-7FG), his teammates were converting just 38.3% (23-60 FG). "We'd like to get Mike shooting 12 to 15 shots per game," McHale said with a downcast tone, adding ruefully, and with perhaps a little sarcasm, "but Mike doesn't take bad shots."
On Sunday, Ron Artest presented all kinds of problems for Miller with his length and aggressiveness. At the end of the Wolves' sound thrashing, Miller, as noted, had led Minnesota in assists with 5, but also committed a team high five turnovers in 32:20. But most obviously he once again seemed loathe to shoot, going 3-5 FG in 32:20. Of the ten players who logged double-digits minutes, only Brian Cardinal put the ball up with less frequency per-minute-played. This is by now a typical occurrence.
It's natural to wonder if Miller's change of persona has anything to do with his uncertain status on the team. He is making between nine and ten million dollars per season, second only to Al Jefferson on the ballclub, but the contract expires at the end of next season--the golden 2010 era when LeBron and Wade and Bosh, etc., can be free agents.
The Wolves frequently have stated that the draft day trade involving Love and Mayo would not have occurred without the inclusion of Miller, and they professed great excitement about Miller joining the team and providing them with an outside option that could spread the floor and stretch the defenses away from Jefferson. Yet just as frequently they have expressed great excitement about all the salary cap flexibility they will have in 2010--much of it because Miller's deal comes off the books. According to people close to the team, Miller was very aware of preseason trade rumors that had him going to LA (among other places) for Lamar Odom. To this day, he has kept his wife and children down in Memphis, where he toiled for the Grizzlies. And among the major pieces on the team, Miller's name was again prominently bandied about in rumors near the close of last month's trade deadline.
How do Mike Miller and Timberwolves really feel about each other, and how is that affecting the bizarre style of play Miller is performing this season? I invite the beat writers from the dailies to take a crack at this. Otherwise, sooner or later, I'm going to ask around and put a little reporting behind my own speculation. Right now, however, it remains a mystery. Perhaps even to the principals themselves.
As long as they at least keep trying to develop their talent, I'm happy when the icefish lose and recognize the garbage-time state of their season. It's not as if they were smart enough to trade for Noah or Chandler. So if Miller wants to take this time to discover he's never going to get another big contract by trying to be a point guard or playmaker, look at it as a positive development for next season - more lotto balls and a Miller rededicated to shooting.
Miller isn't going to shoot more. The game against the Rockets is the perfect game to explain why. Here's a little snippet from the NY Times article about Battier:
"Just after that, the half ended, but not before Battier was tempted by a tiny act of basketball selfishness. The Rockets’ front office has picked up a glitch in Battier’s philanthropic approach to the game: in the final second of any quarter, finding himself with the ball and on the wrong side of the half-court line, Battier refuses to heave it honestly at the basket, in an improbable but not impossible attempt to score. He heaves it disingenuously, and a millisecond after the buzzer sounds. Daryl Morey could think of only one explanation: a miss lowers Battier’s shooting percentage. “I tell him we don’t count heaves in our stats,” Morey says, “but Shane’s smart enough to know that his next team might not be smart enough to take the heaves out.”
...Miller is still known as a shooter. He's no dummy and neither is his agent. No matter what happens next year, he's in a contract season and he will be playing to maintain his salary. He's still known as a shooter and if he can maintain career averages in a tough spot, you can be damn sure that is what he and his agent will talk about instead of the lack of shots on a young and bad team. He came into a bad situation, didn't make waves, fit in, didn't force anything, and maintained averages.
He shouldn't be blamed for this. It's a pretty clear incentive and his real value to the Wolves still remains: he has a nearly $10 mil expiring 09/10 contract that can bring back roughly $12.5 mil in returning salary in a trade. Combined with Cardinal and Craig Smith, the Wolves can trade for a max player without breaking the bank in a bad economy. Glen had a quote about it yesterday: this doesn't change their off-season plans and they are still in position to do what they want to do. For the first time in a long time, I feel confident that they are positioned well and that they can make something good (and big) happen. Miller will be a part of that. That's his value.
Speaking of that NYTimes article, anyone notice how many of Yao's blocks were retained by the Rockets rather than swatted out of bounds?
From just watching the game it seemed like every block of Love (by Yao) was grabbed by the Rockets and pushed up court. This was cool to see as the rockets GM had stressed the importance of maintaining possession of blocked shots in the NYTimes.
Love seemed pretty discouraged by about the 3rd time his shot was blocked. He just couldn't create enough contact to get the foul call. Hell, Yao could stand 3 feet away and still block those shots.
Should Love have passed the ball out or is it good for him to keep trying to go up strong and learn how to score again big guys underneath?
He needs to learn to initiate contact against bigger players. The Wolves ended the game with 10 FTAs. They don't need kick outs for mid-range jumpers. They could shoot 55% from mid-range and still lose if they don't get to the line and convert shots from in the lane.
One of the most discouraging thing about Mike Miller is the way he seems to regard his teammates at certain points in the game.
There was one moment when Bobby Brown had the ball at the top of the key and Miller was open only a few feet away. Miller was calling for the ball, yet Brown shot and made the three. As they ran back down the court, Miller very noticeably rolled his eyes and scowled at Brown, which I thought was odd, considering that Miller probably wouldn't have shot it anyway.
Later on in the game, after another Yao block on Kevin Love, Miller ran back with a smirk on his face, as if he was delighting in the rookie's problems.
I get the feeling that Miller thinks he is too good to be sharing the floor with most of the other players on this team.
I tend to agree with S-n-P about Miller's value to the Wolves. I remember last summer often making the claim that Mchale is now trying his best to do an Ainge imitation, stockpiling young players and trade assets with the hope of one day parlaying that into impact players.
Unfortunately, while Ainge was finding draft diamonds late the Wolves have been whiffing on their lottery selections. But on the plus side, there's the hope that with a sheer number of young players and picks you eventually are bound to strike on something.
The other thing that Ainge was good at was making sure to flip the expiring/near-expiring deals so that he always had one handy. Raef LaFrentz became Theo Ratliff, with Wally in the hole for the next season if need be. Miller's deal is a commodity now...he can't just be allowed to expire if the right deal doesn't come along next year, so one way or another this has to be his last year in Minny. Either because he's been swapped for an impact guy or for more assets/future expirings, Miller should be on the move before this time next year.
Maybe it is all as crass and cynical as you guys make it out to be, and I'm incredibly naive. But I think there is a huge difference between being cautious about end-of-half heaves and deliberately shunning open jumpers that would boost your scoring average without much expense to your shooting percentage and, not incidentally, give your team its best chance of winning the game. Ah, isn't that what awarding contracts are all about? I mean, if you guys can see through Miller's ultimately selfish stat-consciousness, wouldn't the general managers whose paychecks depend on wise decisions be able to see through it too?
Second point: If Miller is really being that disingenuous, why is his shot selection so haphazard? What the guy elects to throw up isn't measurably different than what he turns down, in my view.
Third, let's flip it over: If Miller is here pretty much for salary purposes only, if you're Glen Taylor, why not hang on to Antoine Walker and stash the cash a year early? Everything I heard was that the inclusion of Miller was the key to the deal going through. It is still hard for me to believe that was primarily a salary cap issue rather than a team performance issue.
Maybe it is silly of me to think primarily in basketball terms, but I think a deadeye shooter like Mike Miller who can also dish and rebound a little bit, a semi-local who can spread the floor and provide some locker room leadership, that guy might be a decent asset to the franchise. And in the coming economic crunch that is only going to get worse, that guy is probably better off doing everything possible to help his current team rather than jiggering his stats to plan for another payday. Because in the current economic climate, the days of Mike Miller at $9 million per year are kaput.
Finally, isn't the financial juggling NBA teams will execute over the next two or three years going to be more dependant on an owner's willingness (or lack thereof) to spend money than on any shrewd cap management? I mean, if a sore-footed Tyson Chandler or some other star on a financially strapped team can be had for nickels on the dollar, isn't coming up with those nickels while everyone else clings to their change what the future is going to be, aside from the LeBron/Wade/Bosh bonanzas?
Even with the Rockets' noted size across the board, the subtraction of Bassy from the lineup last night was the deal-breaker. We played Yao as well as he could be played, given our size and unwillingness to let Shelden Williams pick up minutes (which is fine by me). Bassy has that ability to draw the attention of defenders, especially players like the hyper-aware version of Artest we saw last night. Instead of Telfair breaking down his man and firing a pass from the free throw line, we hit that wall where drive-and-kicks from Mike Miller just aren't creating. The best case scenario is that it leads to the Rhino dropping his Tony Parkeresque teardrop.
Can't really say I'm feeling Bobby Brown at this point, but hey, that's My Prerogative. Every Little Step he takes makes me yearn for a real PG - his ballhandling is suspect and his shot selection reminds me of another player who wore #1 for the Wolves. The ghost of PGs past will have to be a battle we fight On Our Own. Don't Be Cruel regarding this assessment - though I'll also admit we could use a center just as bad - maybe we can get Roni Seikaly out of retirement? (okay, that's out of my system. forever.)
Also, I don't think we're going to hear as much about Bobby Brown as we will regarding our "studs" returning next year. Al, Corey, plus multiple #1s next year means that Wolves PR will scrub the painful memories of our Al-less team this year.
Also, Kevin Love is going to have to work on mental toughness during the offseason. I don't always advocate the "smashmouth" style of play, but that rook needs to learn to hit back (though as a rookie he obviously is at the bottom of the totem pole right now).
Good points on Miller. I think he brings a lot to the table beyond his shooting, and the Wolves were hoping to play a bit more inside-out with knockdown 3-point shooters this year. Unfortunately, Foye and Rashad had terrible shooting starts to this year, and Al was/is pretty much a black hole anyway. He doesn't give shooters their shots when they're open, but rather only when Al is too swarmed to do anything but pass out. The two scenarios overlap, of course, but are by no means exclusive.
I think it's disingenuous to compare "we got him for his skill" vs. "we got him for his contract" - both are at play here. Did anyone really want to watch Marko, Antoine, and Greg Buckner this year?
Discounting Al Jefferson's scowls, I have been somewhat amazed at how there seems to be no overt dissension and dysfunction amongst the players.
However, Britt's new take on Mike Miller (and perhaps McHale's too) seems to hint at some sort of disconnect between what *everybody* thought Miller would bring to the team and what he has actually done. I was strongly in the camp that Miller's all-around efforts - hampered by repeated injury - made the case for waiting for improvement in his scoring.
But some statistical analysis shows that McHale (and Britt before him) have a point: Miller just isn't taking shots at his historical rate.
Before joining the Wolves, Miller had generally been a 10-12 shot per game player. The differences in his shooting percentage is statistically insignificant between his higher volume seasons and his lower volume seasons.
Counter to S&P's assertion, his current shooting percentage isn't significantly better than his historical average.
What HAS changed with the Wolves is that Mike historically averaged about 0.356 shots per minute court time. This season, he is down to about 0.235 shots/min. That translates to less than 8 shots per game.
In an earlier edition, someone wondered if Mike's reluctance to shoot and style of play was part of some coaching strategy of McHale's. Britt's recent interview seems to adequately put that theory into the discard pile.
Mike has simply got to stop turning down shots.
As far as the Battier article and Miller go, I wanted to use it more as an example of a player willingly passing up shots in order to maintain a high shooting percentage; not so much to make a comparison of where the shots were coming from (i.e. half court in Battier's example).
This is where internal team stats would be really interesting to see and compare for past seasons. All I have access to is NBA Hot Zones and 82 Games' inside/jumper stats. If you look at the past few years of data and compare it to this year, you can see that Miller is limiting the vast majority of his shots to areas where he has done well in the past: inside, top of the key, right corner, and left wing. Granted, players tend to do what is comfortable so that probably explains away a bit of what's happening, but his shot totals look to be slanted even more than normal from these spots compared to last season. Anywho, it would be interesting to see internal stats about what sorts of shots he is passing up...if they have those stats at all. For fan purposes, we'll have to wait until the end of the year, add up the net shots from the hot zones and then work backwards for percentages.
I think the inclusion of Miller in the Love deal is McHale left-overs. Miller is a nice player and maybe they just wanted a peak at him. I personally don't know why he was needed to make or break the deal. Toine was just as good of a salary to work with. I honestly think Miller was "needed" by McHale because of the type of player he seemed to be.
Also, it's not like Miller isn't helping the team. His agent is going to be able to enter negotiations with the next team he works with and say that his client came to a young team, moved the ball around, got a lot of rebounds, made a high percentage of his shots, and was a good team mate. There are still a bunch of stats that are in his favor for being one of the 2-3 best players on this team. He still produces above the replacement level and I believe he's still 3rd on the squad in wins produced.
It will be interesting to see how the economy and the coming CBA play into how guys like Miller will get paid. He's in the 8-12 mil no-man's land of guys that aren't stars but aren't crap. His value next year will be this: he comes off the books. I have no idea how that will play out in terms of owners being willing to re-sign a guy like that. I do have a pretty solid feeling that they will want to have him come off the books.
Also, Levi, I didn't assert that his shooting percentage was above his historical average. I'm just saying that I think you can explain his lack of shooting as being more selective with the shots he takes; i.e. less volume and only really, really open looks and inside shots. I think we agree on that point.
Thanks S+P--
Maybe I am not cynical enough, but I'm still not sold on Miller primping his stats--or simply don't want to believe it. Nevertheless, it is a compelling hypothesis that isn't pulled out of thin air. For those of you who enjoy the caliber of S+P's contribution here (and you'd be crazy not to), it is worth your time to check out canishoopus.com, where today the man explains why the Wolves had a less than 1% chance of beating Houston last night.
Gaming a half-court heave and redesigning your game away from your inherent strength are opposite ends of the "me-me-me" spectrum. The former makes sense, the latter seems almost laughable.
If Mike Miller wants to max his value in 2010, remaking himself in some new image while keeping his "career percentages" up doesn't seem like a wise approach. Mike needs to dance with the one who brung him. And if his agent is whispering something different in his ear, he should shop for a new agent.
Britt: with all due respect to the beat writers, why don't you do a little gumshoe work on this issue and not wait for them to defer. You are well-positioned on something like this in a way they are not.
First, they've got 82 articles to write, not to mention the occasional puff-piece and the "pre-game" junk. Second, although their paychecks say Strib or Pi Press on them, they are far more beholden to the team than you. They fly, bus, eat and stay with the team 50 nights a season - then they cover 43 from mid-court.
You get free coffee and pretzels and sit in the corner 43 times a season. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.
To my knowledge, the rumor of a Miller move was instantaneous with his arrival. In four months the beat guys have yet to even touch the story. I'll throw in five bucks for gas money...
Apologies, S+P. Upon review, I indeed overstated your assertion re Miller's current shooting percentage. My basic counter point was that Mike's shooting percentage appears to be relatively constant regardless of his shot volume.
To my mind, a nice percentage would be great to have at negotiation time. But probably better to have is "Points Per Game". It seems like all he had to do was take 4-6 more shots per game to keep his PPG average up.
What is interesting is that I see an echo of Mike's first full year with the Grizzlies in that his assist to turnover ratio is elevated above his norm and his shot attempts were lower than his average. Maybe this is just "what he does" when joining a new team.
Ach, Mike, just shoot the damn ball.
No biggie. I just wanted to be clear. I'll put something up about it this Thursday on Hoopus but one question I don't think we've asked yet about Miller's lack of shooting is this: Where is he not shooting from. Surprisingly, the big spot on the floor where he has fallen off from is the right wing 3. In fact, his right side shooting is where the really big and unprecedented low numbers are coming from, mainly from the wing beyond the arc. My best guess as to why this is is because Al Jefferson sets up on the left block. I obviously don't have access to the type of data it would take to make a solid conclusion, but perhaps Miller is a "right handed" type of player who doesn't perform as well with volume set up next to a "left handed" type of player like Big Al. Again, this is where you really, really hope the team has solid internal stat keeping.
BTW: thanks for the kind words Britt and I second AK's hopes that you look further into the matter. It's a pretty glaring story on the team from here on out and I wonder what is going on behind the scenes with Miller's shooting and his attitude towards him being here long or short term.
Keep digging, S+P, I think you're on the right track re Miller's production with the Wolves. As someone wondered (I lost patience trying to dig up who posted, sorry) awhile back, is Miller's play being directed by coaching?
Likely a resounding yes -- as an unintended consequence of the sets that McHale chooses to run.
Looks like Love hasn't quite hit the rookie wall yet (18/14 against GS's Biedrins). Is it a coincidence though that his production declined in the two games where he played PF alongside a non-scoring C?
Nothing much has improved for the rest of the team though, including Miller's persistent non-shooting.
Baseball:
Warning Track Power by Alex Halsted
Sports:
On the Ball by Britt Robson
Weather:
Dude Weather by Jimmy Gaines
Fiction:
Write Now! by Terry Faust
Hockey:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Style:
Hook & Eye
Misc:
Is This News?
Fiction:
Yo, Ivanhoe by Brad Zellar
Food:
Consider the Egg by Stephanie March
Wine:
Beyond the Cask
Food:
Food Fight!
Media:
To the Slaughter
Misc:
Outrage by Staff
Food:
Chef's Table
Guest Commentary:
Just Passing Through
Humor:
Spazz Dad by Todd Smith
Cars:
Road Rake by Chris Birt
Commentary:
Read Menace by Tom Bartel
Society:
The Adventures of Melinda by Melinda Jacobs
Politics:
Defenestrator by Rich Goldsmith
Food:
Breaking Bread by Jeremy Iggers & Ann Bauer
Books:
Cracking Spines by Max Ross
Music:
Hear, Hear by Staff
Art:
The Vicious Circle by 6 Critics
Secrets:
Secrets of the Day by Kate Iverson
Theater:
Seen in the City by Staff
Film:
Talk About Talkies by Staff