|
Post by Walt Frazier on Mar 26, 2014 14:15:40 GMT
Current Rating: 80
Facts & Stats:
From 2004-05 through 2009-10, Mike played 30-39 mpg in every season. He was a useful and impact player.
Since the 2010-11 season, he has played 20, 19, 15, and 20 mpg. Again, that alone shows that his skills have been declining, otherwise he would be playing more and making more of an impact.
I wouldn't touch his 3pt ratings, he's 40.9% in his career, and he's improved all his %'s this year actually, up at 45.9% this year.
Other than this season (where he's rebounded a bit), his FG% has dipped from a career 46.1% to 40.1 in 2011, 43.5 in 2012, and 43.3 in 2012. This year he's up to 47.5 but only taking 5 shots a game when he averages 9+ for his career.
Much like Al Harrington, all of his counting stats are down, but again to be fair that is tied to playing time. I would argue again that the fact his PT has dipped by 33% from his career shows that his skills are deteriorating.
Suggested Rating: 76 at most.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremiah Hill on Mar 26, 2014 16:20:47 GMT
Another good rating 76 from me as well.
|
|
|
Post by Danny Longley on Mar 26, 2014 16:37:50 GMT
Respect him enough to give him a 76.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Mar 26, 2014 16:40:08 GMT
Just saying...Jeremiah, you don't think Miles Plumlee is a better, more impactful player right now than Mike Miller or Tayshaun Prince? You think Plumlee is worse? Again, not asking that he be given a great rating, but 77-78 seems kind of obvious considering these guys are 76 while being clearly worse players.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremiah Hill on Mar 27, 2014 12:40:55 GMT
I would agree with that, but I also know that Bigs in these game typically have lower OVRs across the board because they don't have as high of a speed which gets weighted more.
|
|
|
Post by Bryan Colangelo on Mar 27, 2014 22:47:58 GMT
76
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Mar 28, 2014 2:33:13 GMT
Billy you've just rated Mike Miller better than miles Plumlee. You really think they have similar impacts on the game?
Our big man ratings are so F'd up.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Mar 28, 2014 2:56:54 GMT
I hear you, he does need to prove more. As I've stated, I just personally think we've seen what he is. I don't really think he's going to develop much, but I think who he is, is about a 77-78 rating. I can respect people want to see it longer, I've seen it for basically a whole season but to each their own.
I just think there are times people get too conservative. Plumlee isn't going to develop all that much, he just will keep doing his thing. But, just my opinion. That's where I am but again I can respect needing to see it longer. Sorry it gets so heated sometimes, I do get peeved when little to no explanation is given (sometimes) to a rating.
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Mar 28, 2014 3:08:43 GMT
75. It's been 5 or 6 years since Miller deserved his rating.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 27, 2024 8:53:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2014 13:24:40 GMT
77 because his three point percentage is insane.
|
|
|
Post by James Kay on Mar 28, 2014 15:04:17 GMT
78
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Mar 29, 2014 2:47:05 GMT
77 because his three point percentage is insane. I don't think you'd find anyone wanting to lower his 3's. So, keep his 3's high and lower everything else a lot. Miller is not a 77 man.
|
|
|
Post by Walt Frazier on Mar 29, 2014 2:47:52 GMT
Just b/c this is an outlier of a few points compared to most other ratings, why are you still at a 78 for him? Just curious.
|
|
|
Post by Shane Battier on Apr 2, 2014 3:53:36 GMT
76
|
|
|
Post by Allen Iverson on Apr 2, 2014 5:55:13 GMT
75
|
|
|
Post by Mike Krzyzewski on Apr 3, 2014 13:49:28 GMT
76
|
|