Quote Originally Posted by MHettel View Post
Not sure I agree entirely. We might be able to point to Miller teams 3 pt shooting percentages being higher than Steele's teams, but I think the reason WHY is a little different than what you suggest.

If I read this correctly, you are suggesting that any given player will just "shoot better" with Miller on the sidelines. And I cannot get behind that theory. I think Miller just runs a good system that results in 3 point attempts from the good shooters, while Steele's system seemed to result in 3 point attempts from the bad shooters. It's not the quality of the shot that the system generates, it's the quality of the shooter that is taking the quality shot.

We had way too many 3 point attempts from Goodin, Naji, Carter, Freemantle, and Hunter over the last 4 years. Those guys would not be any better as shooters if it were Miller on the sidelines.

Welage and Johnson were the only real "shooters" to get any minutes on the Steele led teams. We never got to see Wilcher, or ridder or Kennedy or Harden, or Bishop develop as players and each of these guys had at least some reputation as a shooter.

Scruggs was a capable shooter that took the right amount of shots.

We need shooters, first and foremost. THEN we need a system that creates open shots for the shooters. If you dont have the shooters, then having the system wont matter.

Freemantle took 1.5 3pt attempts per game last year and shot 26%. Down from 3.7 the year prior while he shot 32%. I'd like to see him stay in that 1.5 per game range, and get the % back up over 30%.

Also, as an aside, having you big man either taking 3's or otherwise hanging out on the perimeter really reduces your offensive rebounding chances.
Having a capable point guard that gets the ball to a successful shooter is the part of Miller's system that will produce results. We had Goodin, Naji, and Skruggs as PG the last 4 years. No one in the bunch was a good point guard, hence the poor shot selections and resulting poor results.