Reggie Miller Only Made Two Consecutive All-Star Appearances

[Real Men Wear Green]

He was 11th-12th in scoring in some of the years he missed the ASGs ('91, '97 for example), which would be the equivalent of averaging 26 ppg right now. He was also way up there in TS%, even leading the league at 65% when he wasn't an All-Star in '91.

He played in an era that did not understand advanced stats & efficiency and how volume 3-Point shooting could lead to a better offense. His raw numbers weren't flashy enough.

His career high, 24.6, was hit once. Most of his career he averaged in the high teens. 12 out of 18 seasons under 20. His career average is 18.2. And when he was playing people didn't talk about things like TS% so it would be irrelevant to any kind of allstar discussion. He was generally a guy that could make the allstar game but if he missed it it wasn't going to be seen as some kind of outrage.

[dankok8]

^Good point on TS%. People back then used to just look at his FG% and didn't realize how insanely efficient Miller was scoring the ball.

[L.Kizzle]

He was 11th-12th in scoring in some of the years he missed the ASGs ('91, '97 for example), which would be the equivalent of averaging 26 ppg right now. He was also way up there in TS%, even leading the league at 65% when he wasn't an All-Star in '91.

He played in an era that did not understand advanced stats & efficiency and how volume 3-Point shooting could lead to a better offense. His raw numbers weren't flashy enough.

The 91 Pacers were 19-27 at the All-Star break. Hard to get in that way. East guards that season are Isiah, MJ, Pierce, Hawkins and Alvin Robinson.
In 97, the guards were MJ, Penny, Timmy and Terrell Brandon. Ewing and Zo were injured and replaced with Joe Dumars and Webber. He couldn't even get in as an injury replacement.

[ImKobe]

The 91 Pacers were 19-27 at the All-Star break. Hard to get in that way. East guards that season are Isiah, MJ, Pierce, Hawkins and Alvin Robinson.
In 97, the guards were MJ, Penny, Timmy and Terrell Brandon. Ewing and Zo were injured and replaced with Joe Dumars and Webber. He couldn't even get in as an injury replacement.

I get the team success part but he definitely deserved it over Robertson in '91.

[ImKobe]

His career high, 24.6, was hit once. Most of his career he averaged in the high teens. 12 out of 18 seasons under 20. His career average is 18.2. And when he was playing people didn't talk about things like TS% so it would be irrelevant to any kind of allstar discussion. He was generally a guy that could make the allstar game but if he missed it it wasn't going to be seen as some kind of outrage.

For sure. He was ahead of his time. He definitely translates to more than 22 ppg in today's era though, but we don't need to have the same Reggie discussion for the 100th time. He'd be crazy in today's era if he actually got to shoot the three 10 times a game man.. The 12 out of 18 stat sounds bad, but he was .1, .4 and .5 ppg off in 3 of his sub-20 ones.

[Real Men Wear Green]

For sure. He was ahead of his time. He definitely translates to more than 22 ppg in today's era though, but we don't need to have the same Reggie discussion for the 100th time. He'd be crazy in today's era if he actually got to shoot the three 10 times a game man.. The 12 out of 18 stat sounds bad, but he was .1, .4 and .5 ppg off in 3 of his sub-20 ones.

"22ppg" isn't my predicting of what he would average in modern times it's just me saying he wasn't an elite scorer. There were a lot of guys scoring at his level. As someone that actually watched the NBA back then I remember how he was viewed by the general public. A pretty good player, which lead to him being what he was, which was a borderline allstar. The shock some posters have at discovering that most years he didn't make the ASG is because of all the clutch shots he hit that rightfully get remembered. But the thing people should realize is that that was postseason and much of it happened after '94 ASG.

[L.Kizzle]

I get the team success part but he definitely deserved it over Robertson in '91.

Interesting stat, Bucks had two All-Stars that season Alvin and Ricky Pierce. Ricky was the 6th man. Ricky was traded after the All-Star break.

[Kblaze8855]

Michael Redd did it once.

Reggie scored like a monster for 12 straight years in the playoffs. Including in later rounds. The Pacers made 5 Conference Finals during Reggie's prime.

reggie never scored like a monster. Luca scores like a monster. Reggie scored like the borderline All-Star he was. Thats was 23-24ppg is. There is literally no other person in history who has that level of production called monstrous because nobody gives a shit about it.

Why is it so hard to admit that the coaches simply got it wrong? Even if Miller is "overrated" he STILL should have made like 10 all-star teams. It's not like Reggie didn't play defense either. He was solid. Passing he didn't do much of because he rarely had the ball in his hands. And again his scoring is historic. It's not like T-Mac that someone mentioned who scored high volume at league average efficiency. Reggie from 1992-1996 as per the graph scored at +11 efficiency and from 1998-2002 at +8. That kind of production flat out wins games.

There is no reason to believe they got it wrong. I’m talking to people about players they don’t even remember, but still feel necessary to judge. Fans and coaches are simply not looking at the same thing. That’s just how it is. Very few of the people with a strong opinion can actually break down Joe Dumars game to me. None of them can break down Alvin. These are just names to the people complaining. The people making the decision factually know more than these people do. Fans having a problem admitting their ignorance doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

I’m talking to people who don’t even dispute that they don’t know anything about the players in question. Why exactly should I care about what somebody who was 7 at the time thinks about Terrell Brandon versus Reggie Miller? If I have to talk to somebody about it, I’ll talk to somebody who might have a clue.

Like me who very very clearly remembers 1997 don’t remember it as well as the coaches in the league in 1997 knew it at the time.

You don’t have to agree to acknowledge when you’re on the less informed end of a discussion. The refusal to acknowledge it is sheer immaturity on the parts of many people.

Yeah, I was around in 1982 with basketball on in front of me. Do I specifically know how well everybody was playing as well as the coaches who were sitting 10 feet away watching the ****ing games? Of course not. Why are we playing so stupid?

Not knowing what you’re talking about used to be a reason to shut the **** up. I think that ended when the Internet gained prominence. Everybody is free to disagree with anybody’s opinion. But almost every single person talking is factually less informed on this issue.

I was a grown ass man at the time and I can’t tell you with any certainty how well everyone was playing in February 1996. I can Google some numbers, but that isn’t close to the same thing. Feel free to disagree with the selections they made, but acting like they don’t know more than you do about the situation is just being dishonest.

Dudes act like “I don’t know” is the worst thing they can say when it’s actually one of the most honest.

[Kblaze8855]

Man you out here like Hopper from a Bug's Life trying to convince us Reggie was worse than Mookie or Starks or Pierce or whoever.



Most slaves will believe what their masters told them even if it was all a lie.

tell me, Ricky Pierces go to the move. If you feel confident you should have an opinion about how good he was at basketball. You should know that. Tell me something about how he played without googling it.

Did Alvin have a floater?

Could Detlef in Indiana shoot off the dribble or only drive?


Why do you feel so comfortable having a strong opinion about shit you know absolutely nothing about? Tell me that. It’s established you don’t know shit about the people we’re talking about. Why do you have such a strong opinion about how good they must’ve been?

[ImKobe]

"22ppg" isn't my predicting of what he would average in modern times it's just me saying he wasn't an elite scorer. There were a lot of guys scoring at his level. As someone that actually watched the NBA back then I remember how he was viewed by the general public. A pretty good player, which lead to him being what he was, which was a borderline allstar. The shock some posters have at discovering that most years he didn't make the ASG is because of all the clutch shots he hit that rightfully get remembered. But the thing people should realize is that that was postseason and much of it happened after '94 ASG.

There were a lot of guys putting up a similar or better scoring averages, but his efficiency was on a different level in comparison to most of them. You can look at PER, WS, BPM & VORP numbers and Reggie was top 10-15 in most (if not all) of them in his prime. I've gone through that a bunch of times but he was much better than his raw averages would suggest. Not enough volume though like you said so that's why he didn't make more ASGs. Simple as that.

[dankok8]

reggie never scored like a monster. Luca scores like a monster. Reggie scored like the borderline All-Star he was. Thats was 23-24ppg is. There is literally no other person in history who has that level of production called monstrous because nobody gives a shit about it.




There is no reason to believe they got it wrong. I’m talking to people about players they don’t even remember, but still feel necessary to judge. Fans and coaches are simply not looking at the same thing. That’s just how it is. Very few of the people with a strong opinion can actually break down Joe Dumars game to me. None of them can break down Alvin. These are just names to the people complaining. The people making the decision factually know more than these people do. Fans having a problem admitting their ignorance doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

I’m talking to people who don’t even dispute that they don’t know anything about the players in question. Why exactly should I care about what somebody who was 7 at the time thinks about Terrell Brandon versus Reggie Miller? If I have to talk to somebody about it, I’ll talk to somebody who might have a clue.

Like me who very very clearly remembers 1997 don’t remember it as well as the coaches in the league in 1997 knew it at the time.

You don’t have to agree to acknowledge when you’re on the less informed end of a discussion. The refusal to acknowledge it is sheer immaturity on the parts of many people.

Yeah, I was around in 1982 with basketball on in front of me. Do I specifically know how well everybody was playing as well as the coaches who were sitting 10 feet away watching the ****ing games? Of course not. Why are we playing so stupid?

Not knowing what you’re talking about used to be a reason to shut the **** up. I think that ended when the Internet gained prominence. Everybody is free to disagree with anybody’s opinion. But almost every single person talking is factually less informed on this issue.

I was a grown ass man at the time and I can’t tell you with any certainty how well everyone was playing in February 1996. I can Google some numbers, but that isn’t close to the same thing. Feel free to disagree with the selections they made, but acting like they don’t know more than you do about the situation is just being dishonest.

Dudes act like “I don’t know” is the worst thing they can say when it’s actually one of the most honest.

Ok I commend you for your post but I have two points of contention.

The first is you dismissing Reggie's production. Look at that chart I posted. From 1994-1996 he's at a pace adjusted 29 points on +11 efficiency. It's utterly ridiculous. People who don't give a shit about it don't know any better. From 1998-2002 he's at a much more human but still impressive 26 points on +8 efficiency. For the record, except for peak MJ who was at 34 points on +7 efficiency, no other scorer was even doing way more volume than Miller and pretty much no one except Kareem touched his efficiency. Mller's 5-year playoff scoring is literally one of the most impressive ever. EVER!!

The second point of contention is assuming I don't know about Miller because I was young when he played. I was 10 years old in 1997 when I started watching the NBA but I've watched hundreds of 90's games as an adult in the last few years. I've watched at least a hundred Reggie Miller games as an adult and dozens of games of Mookie Blaylock, Terrell Brandon etc. I actually know how these guys play and I don't see them as anywhere near the level of Reggie. Even commentators during those playoff games, if you go back and watch, they constantly rave about how Miller is underrated.

The general sentiment of people not knowing what they are talking about and still talking, I agree with but my opinion regarding Reggie is with all due respect not one of those instances.

[tontoz]

In the 90/91 season, which Miller didn't make the AS game, he averaged 22.6 ppg which was 12th in the league. Of the guys scoring more than him only Barkley had a higher EFG. The only guard within 5% of his EFG was Jordan.

https://www.basketball-reference.com...ats::pts_per_g

[Kblaze8855]

For the record I didn’t mean you. I have no idea of your history. I’m talking about who I was talking to. Now…you being 4-7 when he was “snubbed” many times would apply but I wasn’t specifically referring to you as I didn’t know it at the time. I’m actually even talking about myself. I was old enough to have a somewhat informed opinion at the time but nobody honest can say they remember February 1990 nba details as well as the people coaching it in 1990. It’s just a weird thing to take so serious when every one of us are on the short end of the stick knowledge wise.

I know 1992 nba ball. Do I know it as well today as Don Nelson knew it in 1992?

Of course not.

So why am I supposed to call him out on his take?

I can disagree. I don’t have to act like I know better.

[dankok8]

For the record I didn’t mean you. I have no idea of your history. I’m talking about who I was talking to. Now…you being 4-7 when he was “snubbed” many times would apply but I wasn’t specifically referring to you as I didn’t know it at the time. I’m actually even talking about myself. I was old enough to have a somewhat informed opinion at the time but nobody honest can say they remember February 1990 nba details as well as the people coaching it in 1990. It’s just a weird thing to take so serious when every one of us are on the short end of the stick knowledge wise.

I know 1992 nba ball. Do I know it as well today as Don Nelson knew it in 1992?

Of course not.

So why am I supposed to call him out on his take?

I can disagree. I don’t have to act like I know better.

Well sometimes people have a "good" take at the time but with hindsight it turns out to be a bad take. But we don't have to go back in time and pretend that the take was good. It being justifiable doesn't mean it was good.

[Kblaze8855]

Facts don’t change in retrospect. Feelings do. Often feelings mixed with irrelevant future info. He became a bigger name. Doesn’t change the validity of any opinion from before it. 1992 didn’t change because of 1999.