Reggie Miller playing differently... 1995 Playoffs Knicks vs Pacers Game 3

[Reggie43]

Highlights of his makes and misses with a lot of rare plays.

[Gudo]

Aggressive game by reggie. Good share. Not used to seeing this kind of defense now.

[Reggie43]

He was hitting the floor a lot because of that agressiveness and the amount of times he whines about perceived non calls was pretty funny and classic Reggie.

[DABIGSALSISHA]

Aggressive game by reggie. Good share. Not used to seeing this kind of defense now.

There is no Defense in the NBA today. Non-existent. I miss games that were played with that 90's intensity. Pure and true Rivalries.

[Kblaze8855]

Generally speaking aggressive Reggie is more effective. And it presents an obvious issue I cant figure out why the efficiency lovers never grasp. In the end....what does it matter how efficiently you score less points than the other team?

Theres this belief that any missed shot shouldnt have been taken and all shots that went in were good and its such a surface level glance...

I think Bird explained it best when he was coaching the pacers. Reggie was asked to be aggressive and said he was....but he was 5-15....and Bird told him if he was being aggressive hed be 5 of 25. All the time there were issues like this:

Asked yesterday if he ever deferred to Kevin McHale in that type of situation, the coach of the Indiana Pacers curtly said, ''Never.''
''I told him to get his behind out there and stand, and I'll go in the post for a while,'' he said. ''Jordan is the same way. Scottie could score 6 or 8 points, but when it came down to the last two minutes of the game, you knew who was going to have the ball.
''That's what we have to do with Reggie. Reggie's got to have the ball in his hands.''
On the day the Pacers were recovering psychologically from Larry Johnson's devastating 4-point play that stole Game 3, Bird challenged his best player to return to his clutch ways. His words were spare, his demeanor matter-of-fact. But the message was clear: from one superstar to another -- behave like one.

People see highlights of game winners and think Reggie was just taking over all these games late when he was often a spectator....and being called out for it from inside and outside the team. The idea Reggie would go get the ball and take over late is a pure revisionist fabrication. Shit like this was written all the time:

''Go get the ball,'' Bird said, referring to Indiana's last ill-fated possession that ended with Mark Jackson's fumbling in the lane and releasing a difficult turnaround jump shot that fell a few inches short. ''If you have to run out there and take it out of Mark's hands, go get the ball. That's the way it is. Superstars are supposed to go and get the basketball. Reggie didn't do it last night.''

Reggie would stand there while Jackson, Travis Best, and even Haywood Workman would be deciding games.


He was specifically told that just because they focus on you....that doesnt mean you let the role players decide the game:

''Sometimes, Reggie gets in this mind-set: 'Well, they're playing well, they're moving the ball well. I come off the pick, they're going to double-team me, so let's let them play and go ahead and finish this game out,' '' Bird said. ''But you don't do that.''

20 years later we have efficiency whores posting shooting numbers like 6/9 overall 2/3 from 3 and 4/4 from the line means you had an incredible game when your team had like 83 points and lost with you unable or unwilling to come get the ball for key baskets. Actual coach says:

''I can remember back when they were in the Eastern Conference finals, when I wasn't coaching,'' Bird said. ''I'd watch and look in the paper and say: 'Wow, Miller just shot 12 times. You can't win games with Miller shooting 12 times.' Well, now I'm in it and he's shooting 9. So it shows what I've done.''

Dudes posting ortg and TS acting like that makes a performance dominant.

Truth is....a Reggie who missed more shots might actually have been more effective.....but you have to think it through past the math and some just arent willing to do that.

Multiple coaches, teammates, and Reggie himself have talked about his lack of aggression costing them. Fans praise it like being unselfish counts on the scoreboard when youre deferring to guys not built to score under duress. Yea....guy is open....give him the ball. But Reggie wouldnt even have the ball to give. He might bail on a possession and stand still when the back pick didnt free him with 9 seconds on the clock. IF Smits isnt in now its some non scorer left to pound the ball for 6 seconds of confusion then hoist a bad shot Reggie would be more likely to make himself even if it being a bad shot....would over time lower his efficiency.

It both makes you more efficient...and the team worse.

Reggie didnt have the handles to be a guy you always played through....but he likely should have been more active at times. He wore people out running around but often to no result as hed bail on plays that didnt get him open as if he were Kyle Korver(who did have many plays run for him on the Hawks).

Stir like....a dash of AI/Kobe into Reggie....you get a better player with worse efficiency I think. He wasnt a Kobe type but his bag was deep enough to not chill out and let(relative) scrubs decide plays so often. Thats what older posters mean when we say hed go ghost. A well defended Reggie might not even make an effort to get involved. It does help your standing when nerds shift analysis to efficiency numbers only but it does not help Travis Best on an island one on one with the clock running down.

Reggie shouldnt have been an ISO attacker but he should have been more aggressive at what he could do. Reggie had 25 a night talent held to 19 or so due to unselfishness and occasionally showing its head in the playoffs when he should have been playoff Reggie(aggression wise) every night and stepped it up from there. Brown was right to stop him doing some of his early career 1 on 1 shit to focus on Smits more but when he transitioned to an off the ball guy....he didnt have to stop looking for his shot.

Not shooting isnt as helpful to a team with middling to low offensive talent as efficiency whores think it is.

[fourkicks44]

Generally speaking aggressive Reggie is more effective. And it presents an obvious issue I cant figure out why the efficiency lovers never grasp. In the end....what does it matter how efficiently you score less points than the other team?

Theres this belief that any missed shot shouldnt have been taken and all shots that went in were good and its such a surface level glance...

I think Bird explained it best when he was coaching the pacers. Reggie was asked to be aggressive and said he was....but he was 5-15....and Bird told him if he was being aggressive hed be 5 of 25. All the time there were issues like this:







People see highlights of game winners and think Reggie was just taking over all these games late when he was often a spectator....and being called out for it from inside and outside the team. The idea Reggie would go get the ball and take over late is a pure revisionist fabrication. Shit like this was written all the time:





Reggie would stand there while Jackson, Travis Best, and even Haywood Workman would be deciding games.


He was specifically told that just because they focus on you....that doesnt mean you let the role players decide the game:





20 years later we have efficiency whores posting shooting numbers like 6/9 overall 2/3 from 3 and 4/4 from the line means you had an incredible game when your team had like 83 points and lost with you unable or unwilling to come get the ball for key baskets. Actual coach says:







Dudes posting ortg and TS acting like that makes a performance dominant.

Truth is....a Reggie who missed more shots might actually have been more effective.....but you have to think it through past the math and some just arent willing to do that.

Multiple coaches, teammates, and Reggie himself have talked about his lack of aggression costing them. Fans praise it like being unselfish counts on the scoreboard when youre deferring to guys not built to score under duress. Yea....guy is open....give him the ball. But Reggie wouldnt even have the ball to give. He might bail on a possession and stand still when the back pick didnt free him with 9 seconds on the clock. IF Smits isnt in now its some non scorer left to pound the ball for 6 seconds of confusion then hoist a bad shot Reggie would be more likely to make himself even if it being a bad shot....would over time lower his efficiency.

It both makes you more efficient...and the team worse.

Reggie didnt have the handles to be a guy you always played through....but he likely should have been more active at times. He wore people out running around but often to no result as hed bail on plays that didnt get him open as if he were Kyle Korver(who did have many plays run for him on the Hawks).

Stir like....a dash of AI/Kobe into Reggie....you get a better player with worse efficiency I think. He wasnt a Kobe type but his bag was deep enough to not chill out and let(relative) scrubs decide plays so often. Thats what older posters mean when we say hed go ghost. A well defended Reggie might not even make an effort to get involved. It does help your standing when nerds shift analysis to efficiency numbers only but it does not help Travis Best on an island one on one with the clock running down.

Reggie shouldnt have been an ISO attacker but he should have been more aggressive at what he could do. Reggie had 25 a night talent held to 19 or so due to unselfishness and occasionally showing its head in the playoffs when he should have been playoff Reggie(aggression wise) every night and stepped it up from there. Brown was right to stop him doing some of his early career 1 on 1 shit to focus on Smits more but when he transitioned to an off the ball guy....he didnt have to stop looking for his shot.

Not shooting isnt as helpful to a team with middling to low offensive talent as efficiency whores think it is.

Bravo, Kblaze.

Well overdue take

[Kblaze8855]

Ive always felt it was pretty obvious but efficiency whores have been arguing shooting numbers here for 20 years without understanding. Doesnt matter if the subject is Jordan or a step down with Kobe or down to AI or Reggie or Ben Gordon....whoever it is. The bad shots they might take are often in place of bad shots taken by others who are even less likely to make them. Even a Jordan or Kobe might shoot 47% in a season...which counts dunks...layups...comfortable in rhythm one on one pullups they convert at a great rate. Obviously when they miss most shots overall a huge percentage of the "bad" shots must miss. But if Jordan misses 60% of them...Kobe 65....AI 69...the issue isnt those shots lowering their numbers. The issue is....what would Randy Brown, Smush Parker, or Eric Snow miss? 75-90%?

Volume scorers who get those shots up often shoot worse while preventing even less likely shots from being taken and theres no way to account for the value of a shot not being taken by someone worse. Over time....a lot of it....you put lesser guys in that position often enough they get better at it. Young guys especially. Established vets? Not so much. It just isnt everyones game. Give me AI taking an ugly pullup over Lue over Eric Snow trying to take Kobe one on one or George Lynch facing up to create something. AI will probably miss...Snow is nearly certain to...but how do you account for that when AI is 10-24 and Snow 2-6 when the alternative is AI 10-22 and Snow 2-8?

Some people are built to score and some arent. And sure some role players cant find a way to help when they dont get the ball. They get disinterested and chill. Some move.....cut....pass...set screens....take the open ones when they have to. You have to know your roster. A scorer with a gang of guys comfortable chilling cant keep putting them in bad spots just because its personally efficient to pass up bad shots in favor of a teammates worse one.

There isnt one "right" way which is why Larry Brown....Mr "Play the right way" himself was yelling at AI to keep shooting when hed be 4-16 entering the 4th.

The right way is the shot most likely to have a good outcome....score...get fouled. Often a stars bad shot....is the right one compared to the other options. Its so clear even on lower levels. Theres always dudes who cant score being left open. The guy who can doesnt just give him the ball and hope he learns on the fly. You can call that being a ballhog but in real life....its not being an idiot.

Paul Pierce can miss the **** outta that 18 foot fadeaway. Walter Mccarty was gonna miss it anyway....Paul at least may have drawn a foul.

[Reggie43]

I dont really see anything wrong with how he plays especially in the playoffs where he is much more agressive compared to the regular season. When he was coached by Bird they had their deepest and best team ever so him trying to set up teammates to promote chemistry and teamball shouldnt be deemed as a negative because those are pretty good players in their own right and Miller himself is already a few steps out of his prime at 32-33 iirc.

[Kblaze8855]

There was nothing “wrong” in how Reggie played. He’s in the hall of fame. There’s nothing inherently wrong in how anyone great manages to get to being great. These right and wrong things are what the issue is to me. It’s too absolute. There are degrees. Aspects of Reggies approach would help some and aspects of others would help Reggie.

It isn’t as simple as him or a Kobe type being right or wrong. They are all great to begin with. Starting there....it’s more of an issue of finding a sweet spot for specific situations and teams. And being too unselfish can hinder teams just as much as being too aggressive.

Steve Nash is probably another one. He’s said so himself. He was too good a shooter to shoot so little even if his efficiency was otherworldly. It happens.

Reggies teams were gonna lose anyway usually and they had plenty of good but largely irrelevant runs(Like the Celtics recently who have made 3 ecf trips nobody cares about). So it’s not like I’m saying if he took more shots they win 2 rings. I’m saying him not taking shots obviously wasn’t getting them over the hump when often offense was the issue. I’m saying when you’re Reggie Miller and the other guy is Haywood Workman maybe you go get the ball when the play didn’t spring you.

Im not saying doing one thing makes the team a dynasty...I’m saying doing the other thing isn’t always right either. It just makes numbers look good for people who decide to value them. I’m saying efficiently scoring less points than needed doesn’t really....matter. When there’s nobody to pick up the slack when you aren’t involved maybe....stay involved. Even at the cost of some misses someone else was probably gonna miss anyway.

[Reggie43]

What would have been the perfect approach for him? Any specific player? Would the team really have been more successful if he took away shots from Smits, Davis Bros, Mckey etc? Its not as if he refuses to shoot to protect his efficiency its just how he really plays.

[Kblaze8855]

I don’t know why you even mentioned the Davis brothers or Mckey. Mckey specifically had an even worse case of too unselfish than Reggie. He would absolutely chill for like....4 games at a time. I’m sure you recall. And of course Reggie wasn’t doing it to protect his efficiency. Next to nobody cared about nonsense like that back then. It was just his nature. And no they wouldn’t win anyway. I say what I say for the same reason Bird did. You don’t let teams remove you from plays because you aren’t open. Saying “Sometimes the superstar needs to go get the ball” doesn’t mean their teams would win titles if they do. It means it isn’t the best basketball to watch worse players in a bad position just because it isn’t your nature to attack.

No matter what anyone does all but one team will lose and most of the great players won’t play a single game that matters the whole season.

But the approach can still be refined. Even hopeless teams should look for ways to do better with every situation likely to present itself.

[Kblaze8855]

Let me alter my take on Mckey actually. He would chill for long periods of time....as a scorer. He was exactly the kinda player who didn’t need or care to score and wouldn’t let it change his effort level. He’d do everything well on the floor....on both ends...and just not shoot.

Didnt wanna throw dirt on his name like he wasn’t trying....he just didn’t choose to score....though he could. He played the “right” way....to a fault.

[Reggie43]

I dont really see how giving the ball to Smits to exploit a better matchup is a bad idea or giving the ball to Dale/Antonio Davis when they are covered by someone like Kukoc. He is still in the play by spacing the floor for those guys to prevent the double team.

Would the Pacers have been competitive against the Bulls in that one playoff series if they relied too much on one player to be their "superstar"? Miller was hobbled by an ankle injury mid series and without the strong play of Smits, the Davis boys etc. they would probably have lost early but those guys gave the Pacers a chance to win.

Miller would probably turn Smits into Ilgauskas if he had a different approach to the game.

[3ball]

.
95' Miller vs Magic...'... 25.9 on 52%
95' Pippen vs Magic.... 19.0 on 40%

94' Miller vs Knicks...'... 24.7 on 44%
94' Pippen vs Knicks.... 21.7 on 40%

00' Miller vs Lakers...'... 24.3 on 41%
00' Pippen vs Lakers.... 15.1 on 41%


MJ and Curry, I mean Miller would've been unbeatable.

Miller routinely averaged 27 and 29 against the Celtics and all the best teams in the playoffs.. with goat efficiency and clutch..

[tpols]

.
95' Miller vs Magic...'... 25.9 on 52%
95' Pippen vs Magic.... 19.0 on 40%

94' Miller vs Knicks...'... 24.7 on 44%
94' Pippen vs Knicks.... 21.7 on 40%

00' Miller vs Lakers...'... 24.3 on 41%
00' Pippen vs Lakers.... 15.1 on 41%


MJ and Curry, I mean Miller would've been unbeatable.

Miller routinely averaged 27 and 29 against the Celtics and all the best teams in the playoffs.. with goat efficiency and clutch..

You're not really giving Reggie his due though because of how good his 3pt and FT shooting were. Can't just use FG% for somebody whose so prolific scoring outside 2 pt shots. His umbrella efficiency and volume blow Pippen's away... which is why it's funny people complain he didn't score more. 24 PPG in a low scoring era for over a decade in the playoffs is no joke... Pippen couldn't even peak at Reggie's averages over 100+ game sample size.