Michael Miller

I know that overall ratings pretty much mean nothing.  Some of the time, they are simply misleading.  But I thought it was a general rule of thumb that a 700 rated player was going to be an asset for any D3 team.  Not sure that's true when I think about how Miller plays on the court

I should clarify that I recruited, developed, and have played Miller to be a small forward.  So as a small forward:

Ath/Spd is above average in general compared to the better D3 teams probably scores around average.  I don't think I'm being hurt with these ratings but against the good opponents, I'm not benefiting either.

Rebound rate is outstanding.  For those flagged as SF's in Allen D3, one player has a rating of 77 and the next highest is 70.  But I'm not sure how important it really is to have a good rebounding small forward.  Miller does average 6 rebounds a game, which is terrific for a SF.  But I'm not sure the extra 2-3 rebounds he gets compared to your average SF is all that valuable.  Helpful, yes?  Valuable, maybe not so much?

Defense is terrible.  That's really why I'm making this post.  I would have a hard time taking a 700 rated player out of my lineup and right now I really don't have the personal to do so.  But my team defense is distinctly below average and of all the players in my rotation, Miller has the worst defensive rating and it is not like he has the athleticism and speed to make up for such a poor rating.

Shot blocking is almost as outstanding as the rebounding.  He's tied for the top mark for D3 SF's in Allen.  But just like rebounding, I'm not sure how important this skill is since he's farther away from the basket.  He averages just under a block a game.  Again, helpful but perhaps not all that valuable.

Low Post / Perimeter are both terrible as well.  Miller can't score.  This is a real problem along with the defense.  Because he can't score, I don't give him the ball and that means he can't utilize his guard skills.

Ball handling is quite good for a small forward.

Passing is a bit above average for a small forward.


My tone is negative but I just am not sure that this player is at all helpful to have.  I think in real life basketball, a player like this would be a tremendous glue guy.  I'm not sure those players exist as much in the sim.  Because he can't score, I have to crank the distribution down.  But that also means he isn't touching the ball and therefore can't utilize his ball handling or passing nearly as much as I would prefer.  On the defensive end, by playing small forward, he's too far away from the basket to take advantage of his best skills.  And since he is away from the basket, his defense would seems to make him a liability more than anything.

Maybe I'm overthinking this but I'd appreciate any thoughts.   I really always thought that 700 D3 player = good.  But this guy has me rethinking (and overthinking) that simple theory.

i'll take him off your hands.

It wouldn't bother me to have that guy on a D2 team and you're worried that he's not an asset for a D3 team?  Don't get too greedy, just enjoy him while you can! 

He's not your best C or PF, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he's not helpful to your team. He would be grabbing 8-10 boards at the sf spot if your C/PF aren't so dominant.

He is a great rebounding SF and that's about it.  He isn't a great offensive player and he isn't a great defender, but he sure can rebound as an SF.  In your 2-3 zone, I do think he is a good asset, but in the other two defense I would say he is not a big help.  

You are assuming he can't score.  I recall we have seen some players on the forums (mostly guards) that have little or no PER/LP but do fine.  He is shooting 52.8% on 3 shots a game.  Why don't you get that up to 6 shots a game and see if he stays above 50%?

a few thoughts:

1) You've started him for 3 years, so clearly he's been an asset of some sort.
2) He's still a decent option around the basket, even with a 39 LP.  A 51 ATH isn't bad, and his IQs are great as well.  You could probably afford to have him shoot a bit more, just to keep defenses honest.  Right now he's mostly scoring on put backs and FTs (i'm guessing this based on the amount of offensive rebounds vs. total shots), so he's a good target for your opponents to leave open and double team someone else.
3) Since you run a 2-3 zone, he's definitely in the right type of defense for his skill set.

I think nearly everyone would want that guy on their DIII team.

I'd take him, especially in the 2-3 zone...decent spd/ath should make him a decent (not great) zone defender. Plus, with that BH, I might consider giving him a little more distro...even with the low LP...he should be able to put up some decent numbers. 

Posted by _hannibal_ on 5/23/2011 3:23:00 PM (view original):
You are assuming he can't score.  I recall we have seen some players on the forums (mostly guards) that have little or no PER/LP but do fine.  He is shooting 52.8% on 3 shots a game.  Why don't you get that up to 6 shots a game and see if he stays above 50%?

+1

you made him a non-factor on the offensive end, because you "think" he cant score.  PER and LP are indeed low, but BH, ATH, and SPD counteract that.  

Up the distro and the guy will be a stud.  You're not allowing him to be

I would definitely take this guy. I don't know if I would be ecstatic about having him like I would most 700 rated D3 players but he's a very versatile player that can play 3 positions and he can actually be 3rd or 4th on your depth chart at both guard positions in case you have major foul trouble at those spots.

Thanks for the input guys.  This helps.

To be honest, I hadn't really thought of him as a scoring weapon.  While I'm aware that some folks have posted in this forum some examples of guys excelling with terrible lp/per numbers, I thought those examples were of players that had ath/spd and ball handling better than my guy.  So while I thought it was interesting, it didn't apply to me.  But I will have to give it a whirl and see how it goes.

Basically my mind has been going crazy trying to figure out how to fix my poor defense and I am having trouble not thinking that Miller is a big part of the problem.  This sort of sent me on this path, where I questioned him altogether.  Like I said, I assume a 700 player is an asset but he's not helping much on the defensive end and not much on the offensive end either.  Of course, it didn't help me in that I haven't thought of him as a scorer so I really was questioning his value to the team.

Essentially you want four things out of your SF (not necessarily in this order):
1. Score
2. Defend
3. Rebound
4. Distribute / Avoid Turnovers

I thought Miller only brought 3 & 4 to the table, which really had me questioning how valuable he is.  Like I said in the first post, the way he's being currently used by me as a SF doesn't really take full advantage of his skills.  Although if I do crank up the distribution, it might lead to him being able to add scoring to the mix and with the ball in his hand should also take advantage of his ball handling and distribution.  I might just have to accept that he is a liability on the defensive end.

For what it's worth, I was pretty excited to sign him and really liked the idea of having triple towers for rebounding/blocks.  But when my defense went into the pits, I started looking for scapegoats and Miller seemed to fit.

though he's your worst defender, he IS contributing in blocks and altered shots.  Having a SF who is a good shot blocker in a 2-3 zone is a very underrated attribute.  my zone teams have performed better when i've had a SF with SB in the 40s and 50s.

yes, what dIII would not take him?     

I would not increase his distro. He's shooting well because of the 2.3 oreb/game, which gives him 1 to 2 putbacks/tip ins game. Increasing his distro will negatively affect his offensive efficiency.