Reggie Miller Discussion

[Nashty]

1993: 8-29 (18 win pace)
1998: 1-11 (7 win pace)

This is what Richmond had to work with in Sacramento...

They would still not win more than 30 games with him, he was 90s Devin Booker, good player on a bad team, Reggie was a better player on a better, it's that simple.

[Roundball_Rock]

Revisionism. Richmond was considered better at the time when both were in their primes. All-NBA teams:

1994: Richmond 2nd, Miller N/A
1995: Richmond 2nd, Miller 3rd
1996: Both 3rd
1997: Richmond 2nd, Miller N/A
1998: Both 3rd


We don't have the vote totals for 1996 and 1998 for the third team (I saved the first team results from a NYT article), but I bet Richmond got more votes than Miller all five of these years. Richmond was 2nd team three times--Miller never reached that ceiling.

[warriorfan]

Revisionism. Richmond was considered better at the time when both were in their primes. All-NBA teams:

1994: Richmond 2nd, Miller N/A
1995: Richmond 2nd, Miller 3rd
1996: Both 3rd
1997: Richmond 2nd, Miller N/A
1998: Both 3rd


We don't have the vote totals for 1996 and 1998 for the third team (I saved the first team results from a NYT article), but I bet Richmond got more votes than Miller all five of these years. Richmond was 2nd team three times--Miller never reached that ceiling.

Kobe has more all defensive teams than any perimeter player of all time...Tied with Kevin Garnett, only trailing Tim Duncan.

That must mean he’s the defensive GOAT perimeter player....Right?

[Nashty]

Revisionism. Richmond was considered better at the time when both were in their primes. All-NBA teams:

1994: Richmond 2nd, Miller N/A
1995: Richmond 2nd, Miller 3rd
1996: Both 3rd
1997: Richmond 2nd, Miller N/A
1998: Both 3rd


We don't have the vote totals for 1996 and 1998 for the third team (I saved the first team results from a NYT article), but I bet Richmond got more votes than Miller all five of these years. Richmond was 2nd team three times--Miller never reached that ceiling.

Again you are talking about regular season which is less important than playoffs but ok. Richmond was getting those All NBA teams purely because he had better regular stats, like 3 points, 1 assist and 1 rebound more. But the fact is that he played for shit team that played fast paced offense where he could pump up these stats by taking more shots, while Miller was more efficent and a better defender. Advanced stats were not a thing back in the day like they are now, but when you look at those stats Miller was better than Richmond even in the regular season.

Richmond played just one playoff series in these years, and he was outplayed by his own teammate Olden ****ing Polynice, while Miller outplayed guys like Shaq, Penny, Ewing and reached conference finals 3 times.

[Roundball_Rock]

Were Richmond's FGA inflated by being on a bad team?

Richmond 1989-1991: 17.5 FGA
Richmond 1992-1998: 18.1 FGA

About the same. A first option taking 18 FGA isn't unusual--what is unusual is a "first option" taking 14 and having his teammate also taking 14 (much higher usage but Smits played less minutes). Miller is the outlier here, Richmond the norm.

Richmond played just one playoff series in these years, and he was outplayed by his own teammate Olden ****ing Polynice

Richmond was 21/4/3 on 61% TS (against the #2 defense) that year in the PO--exactly the type of performance Miller gets praised for...This is another example of the low standards Miller's own advocates hold him to: other players get criticized for doing what Miller does.

Polynice was 14/12/1 on 55% TS.

while Miller outplayed guys like Shaq, Penny, Ewing

True--although notice two of the players you mention are centers. Who was guarding them? Rik Smits again. When we look under the hood, time and again we find Smits was a bigger contributor than remembered.

It is true, though, Miller was better than those guys in some series. It also is true each of those players outplayed Miller in other series.

Let's isolate his biggest series and us GS (10.0 is considered average).

1994 ECSF: Manning 16.8, Blaylock 12.1, Miller 10.8, Smits 8.6, McKey 8.5
1994 ECF: Ewing 17.3, Miller 17.2, Oakley 11.4, Starks 8.8, Harper 8.4
1995 ECSF: Smits 15.4, Miller 14.9, Oakley 13.7, Ewing 13.2, Starks 11.7
1995 ECF: Shaq 21.6, Penny 17.5, Miller 17.1, Smits 14.0, Jackson 12.3
1998 ECF: Jordan 22.4, Pippen 13.0, Kukoc 12.6, Miller 11.6, Smits 10.9
1999 ECF: Camby 15.5, Jackson 11.1, Johnson 11.0, Houston 10.2, Davis 9.4 (Miller 8.6)
2000 ECF: Miller 14.7, Sprewell 11.8, Childs 11.5, Rose 11.4, Davis 10.4
2000 Finals: Shaq 30.6, Miller 17.6, Rose 14.0, Croshere 12.8, Jackson 10.7

He is all over the map--not the picture of a consistent playoff performer that is painted. Some very good series but he also was outplayed by half a dozen players in the 99' ECF, outplayed by even Kukoc in the 98' ECF, outplayed by Danny Manning and Mookie Blaylock, outplayed by Smits, etc. in other series.

Strikingly, he is 1st in only one series.

[Phoenix]

It's another history rewrite that Richmond was a statpadder. We've seen guys with the kind of mediocre offensive support he had in Sacramento jack up 22-23 shots a game. His shots per game numbers were pretty tame considering. You look at 96 when he averages 23ppg on 17 shots,45% and 44% on threes. In 97 he ups to 19.5 shots and 26ppg. His efficiency must have suffered surely? Nope, 45% and 43%. If Mitch was some stadpadding shotjacker he could have dropped 26ppg or more several seasons and maintained 45/43% shooting splits.

[Roundball_Rock]

It's another history rewrite that Richmond was a statpadder. We've seen guys with the kind of mediocre offensive support he had in Sacramento jack up 22-23 shots a game. His shots per game numbers were pretty tame considering. You look at 96 when he averages 23ppg on 17 shots,45% and 44% on threes. In 97 he ups to 19.5 shots and 26ppg. His efficiency must have suffered surely? Nope, 45% and 43%. If Mitch was some stadpadding shotjacker he could have dropped 26ppg or more several seasons and maintained 45/43% shooting splits.

This helps explain some of the disconnect. They think Miller taking 14 shots a game and Smits another 14 was a normal "first option" set up in the 90's. Richmond was the norm, Miller the outlier.

To your point, his stats were similar in GS and SAC.

Richmond in GS: 23/6/3 56% TS
Richmond in SAC: 23/4/4 56% TS

One of the things that makes ISH entertaining is how agendas foot differently thread by thread. In this thread Richmond is a loser, a stat padder, implicitly would put up pedestrian numbers on a good team, etc. compared against Miller, a favorite (for whatever reason) of certain types. In another lengthy thread running at the same time people (including people who are in this thread) there was talk about how Richmond may have been the best second option in the NBA when he was in GS and how good he was when compared against Pippen (a player "Miller advocates" revile--I wonder why). Which is it? He was a bum stat padding on bad teams but would be scoring the same on all-time great teams?

[Nashty]

Were Richmond's FGA inflated by being on a bad team?

Let's not act like Miller had some super team, and Richmond had some scrubs.

From 1993 to 1998, Richmond had 10 teammates that posted a season with 25+ MPG with 15+ PER over the course of a regular season.

From 1993 to 1998, Miller had 15 teammates that posted a season with 25+ MPG with 15+ PER over the course of a regular season.

Richmond was 21/4/3 on 61% TS (against the #2 defense) that year in the PO--exactly the type of performance Miller gets praised for...This is another example of the low standards Miller's own advocates hold him to: other players get criticized for doing what Miller does.

Polynice was 14/12/1 on 55% TS.

You forgot to mention that Richmond and Polynice had the same GmSc at 12.8, and that Polynice had better PER with 18.7 to Richmond's 16.7, and also better ORtg and DRtg.

1994 ECSF: Manning 16.8, Blaylock 12.1, Miller 10.8, Smits 8.6, McKey 8.5
1994 ECF: Ewing 17.3, Miller 17.2, Oakley 11.4, Starks 8.8, Harper 8.4
1995 ECSF: Smits 15.4, Miller 14.9, Oakley 13.7, Ewing 13.2, Starks 11.7
1995 ECF: Shaq 21.6, Penny 17.5, Miller 17.1, Smits 14.0, Jackson 12.3
1998 ECF: Jordan 22.4, Pippen 13.0, Kukoc 12.6, Miller 11.6, Smits 10.9
1999 ECF: Camby 15.5, Jackson 11.1, Johnson 11.0, Houston 10.2, Davis 9.4 (Miller 8.6)
2000 ECF: Miller 14.7, Sprewell 11.8, Childs 11.5, Rose 11.4, Davis 10.4
2000 Finals: Shaq 30.6, Miller 17.6, Rose 14.0, Croshere 12.8, Jackson 10.7

I said before, he had 2 big choke jobs in 1998 and 1999, and got outplayed by Smits in 1995 ECSF. But you also did not include some other series here.

1993 1R: Miller 22.6, Smits 17.5, Rivers 16.8, Ewing 15.2. Miller averaged 32 pts per game on 53/53/95 splits.
1994 1R: Miller 23, Shaq 16.4, Penny 12.6
1995 1R: Miller 22.6, Smits 13, Steve Smith 12.5
1998 1R: Kemp 19, Miller 11.5, Smits 11, Ilgauskas 11
1998 ECSF: Miller 16.6, Mark Jackson 13.1, Starks 10.9
1999 1R: Miller 17.9, Ray Allen 16.7, Cassell 13.2
1999 ECSF: Miller 17.7, Iverson 15.7, Mark Jackson 14.4
2000 1R: Ray Allen 16, Miller 15.9, Cassell 12
2000 ECSF: Miller 19.9, Rose 14.8, Iverson 14.6

So, from 1993 to 2000 he played in 17 playoff series in which he was 14 times the best player on his teams, and 8 times best player on both teams. in 9 series where he was not the best player he had 3 really bad series where he choked. But, in other 6 series where he was not the best player, he was worse than top 10 GOAT Shaq twice, was worse than HOF Ewing and HOF Ray Allen by 0.1, worse than Kemp, and worse than his teammate Smits, but still better every than Knick in that series.

Mitch Richmond played 5 series where he was not a role player in his career.

1989 1R: Stockton 27.3, Mullin 26.8, Malone 22.4, Richmond 21
1989 WCSF: Mullin 19.6, Kevin Johnson 19.1, then 7 more players, then Richmond 10.7
1991 1R: Robinson 25.7, Mullin 19.7, Tim Hardaway 19.2, Richmond 15.5
1991 WCSF: Hardaway 27.1, Magic 25.4, Mullin 17.6, Perkins 17.6, Worthy 17, Byron Scott 14.4, Richmond 13.8
1996 1R: Payton 17.9, Polynice 12.8, Richmond 12.8

So, from 5 series he played, he was arguably never the best player on his team because Polynice had the same GmSc but better PER, ORtg, DRtg in 1996 1r, and never the best player on both teams.

[Phoenix]

One of the things that makes ISH entertaining is how agendas foot differently thread by thread. In this thread Richmond is a loser, a stat padder, etc. compared against Miller, a favorite (for whatever reason) of certain types. In another lengthy thread running at the same time people (including people who are in this thread) there was talk about how Richmond may have been the best second option in the NBA when he was in GS and how good he was when compared against Pippen (a player "Miller advocates" revile--I wonder why). Which is it? He was a bum stat padding on bad teams but would be scoring the same on all-time great teams?

I saw that. I can't keep up anymore.

[Roundball_Rock]

I saw that. I can't keep up anymore.

I never thought I would see the day Terry Porter would get so much hype. He was 18.2 PPG for his career high and people are talking about him like he was Curry.

Let's not act like Miller had some super team, and Richmond had some scrubs

1993: 8-29 (18 win pace)
1998: 1-11 (7 win pace)



Miller had a team that nearly knocked off the Bulls dynasty. If you are looking at a single series, no one else came closer (the Knicks got blown out in their Game 7). The Pacers had the chip there for the taking down to the final minute.

From 1993 to 1998, Richmond had 10 teammates that posted a season with 25+ MPG with 15+ PER over the course of a regular season.

From 1993 to 1998, Miller had 15 teammates that posted a season with 25+ MPG with 15+ PER over the course of a regular season.

You said it yourself: the Pacers had more good players. It is harder to get a 15+ PER on a good team than a bad team.

You forgot to mention that Richmond and Polynice had the same GmSc at 12.8, and that Polynice had better PER with 18.7 to Richmond's 16.7, and also better ORtg and DRtg.

Polynice didn't have Gary Payton guarding him. Polynice was 10/9/1 for his prime. Not exactly Smits or Detlef Schrempf.

I said before, he had 2 big choke jobs in 1998 and 1999

In other words, during his two best shots at winning a ring (94' they were a 47 win team, 95' 52 win team). That's a big deal. He wasn't choking in those 1st round series we keep hearing about.

Of course the excuse is "everybody lost to Jordan". Except that Miller wouldn't have lost if he showed up. You want to be what they say he is? Outplay Toni Kukoc in a major series and in a Game 7. In 99', no Jordan and the Pacers get the great fortune of Ewing going down in Game 2. What does Reggie do with the series tied 1-1?

Game 3: 12 points on 4 for 9
Game 4: 12 points on 3 for 10
Game 5: 30 points on 9 for 19
Game 6: 8 points on 3 for 18

These are legacy altering defeats. If Miller wins a ring, he is seen differently.

1989 1R: Stockton 27.3, Mullin 26.8, Malone 22.4, Richmond 21
1989 WCSF: Mullin 19.6, Kevin Johnson 19.1, then 7 more players, then Richmond 10.7
1991 1R: Robinson 25.7, Mullin 19.7, Tim Hardaway 19.2, Richmond 15.5
1991 WCSF: Hardaway 27.1, Magic 25.4, Mullin 17.6, Perkins 17.6, Worthy 17, Byron Scott 14.4, Richmond 13.8
1996 1R: Payton 17.9, Polynice 12.8, Richmond 12.8

That isn't a good record but the sample size is too small to reach any conclusions. Two of those series were when he was a rookie. That leaves us a total of 3 other series.

He is called the "2nd option" because he outscored Hardaway but Hardaway was considered the better player. Hardaway was second team all-NBA in 92' along with Stockton and ahead of prime Price and KJ (MJ and Drexler were 1st team).

[Nashty]

1993: 8-29 (18 win pace)
1998: 1-11 (7 win pace)

Miller had a team that nearly knocked off the Bulls dynasty. If you are looking at a single series, no one else came closer (the Knicks got blown out in their Game 7). The Pacers had the chip there for the taking down to the final minute.

From 1994 to 1998 Pacers went 6-6 (41 win pace) without Reggie, and also lost in the 1st round in 1996 when he got injured. With him they were having 49 wins per seasons, and reached ECF 3 times. Kings with Richmond went from like 13 to 30 wins, and only one playoff where he played like garbage, being not much better or even outplayed by Polynice.

You said it yourself: the Pacers had more good players. It is harder to get a 15+ PER on a good team than a bad team.

Yes, the Pacers had better players, but not 5 playoff apperances, 3 conference finals more and 16 wins per season better.

Polynice didn't have Gary Payton guarding him. Polynice was 10/9/1 for his prime. Not exactly Smits or Detlef Schrempf.

Even if he was the best Kings player that does not matter much, because Reggie was still the best player on his team in 14 from 17 series he played from 1993 from 2000 despite all those "great" players he played with. Richmond in his only playoff series had trouble outplaying Olden Polynice, and got absolutely destroyed by Payton, while Reggie outplayed some great players.

[Roundball_Rock]

From 1994 to 1998 Pacers went 6-6 (41 win pace) without Reggie, and also lost in the 1st round in 1996 when he got injured. With him they were having 49 wins per seasons, and reached ECF 3 times

He is a top 50-60 all-time player. Of course he had an impact.

Kings with Richmond went from like 13 to 30 wins

What do you think that 13 win team would be with Miller?

Yes, the Pacers had better players, but not 5 playoff apperances, 3 conference finals more and 16 wins per season better.

Richmond was the only all-star during his time in Sacramento. Smits, Dale Davis, Schrempf were all all-stars during Miller's prime. This doesn't count Jalen Rose, who was the leading scorer on the 2000 team in the RS.

Miller received MVP votes twice, 98' and 00'. He tied Smits for 13th and Rose for 16th. If Miller is carrying an elite team why is 1) he not a MVP candidate 2) tied with a teammate?

Reggie was still the best player on his team in 14 from 17 series he played from 1993 from 2000 despite all those "great" players he played with

GS doesn't capture defense. When Smits shuts down Shaq or Ewing, GS doesn't capture that.

Richmond in his only playoff series had trouble outplaying Olden Polynice, and got absolutely destroyed by Payton

The same Payton who did this to MJ the same year:

Jordan’s numbers:

First three games: 31 points, 46 fg%, 50 3fg%, 12.3 FTA.
Last three games: 23.7 points, 36.7 fg%, 11.1 3fg% 10 FTA. (Payton guarding MJ)

Richmond was 21.0 on 44.6%/34.8%/8.8 FTA.

[Nashty]

What do you think that 13 win team would be with Miller?

Better than what they were with Richmond.

Richmond was the only all-star during his time in Sacramento. Smits, Dale Davis, Schrempf were all all-stars during Miller's prime. This doesn't count Jalen Rose, who was the leading scorer on the 2000 team in the RS.

Yes, Reggie had 3 all star teammates, Schrempf in 1993, Smits in 1998, and Davis in 2000 but that does not change the fact that he was still the best player on his team most of his prime, and also better than Richmond.

If Miller is carrying an elite team why is 1) he not a MVP candidate 2) tied with a teammate?

Because they played team basketball like mid 00s Pistons, but Reggie was still the best player on most of these teams, specially in the playoffs.

GS doesn't capture defense. When Smits shuts down Shaq or Ewing, GS doesn't capture that.

Again, Miller had better teammates no doubt, but he was still the best player on these teams, and better than Richmond who had decent players but was barely winning 30 games.

The same Payton who did this to MJ the same year:

Jordan’s numbers:

First three games: 31 points, 46 fg%, 50 3fg%, 12.3 FTA.
Last three games: 23.7 points, 36.7 fg%, 11.1 3fg% 10 FTA. (Payton guarding MJ)

Richmond was 21.0 on 44.6%/34.8%/8.8 FTA.

Tough matchup without a doubt, too bad he only managed to lead his team to the playoffs only once, so we do not have bigger sample size vs some other players.

[Roundball_Rock]

Because they played team basketball like mid 00s Pistons

Billups was 5th in MVP in 06' and 6th in 09' (in Denver). He wasn't tied with Richard Hamilton or Ben Wallace in MVP.

[Nashty]

Billups was 5th in MVP in 06' and 6th in 09' (in Denver). He wasn't tied with Richard Hamilton or Ben Wallace in MVP.

Ben Wallace was 10th, 8th and 7th in the 3 seasons before. But, those awards are not important too much, because people do make mistakes on these voting. Nash has more MVPs than Shaq, was Nash a better player? Kobe Bryant has 2nd most All Defensive Teams in the history, you are telling me that you believe he is the 2nd best defender of all time? Duncan has 0 DPOY's, does that make Noah with 1 DPOY better defender than Duncan?