forums

9 “Active” Ships

edge3241 said:
I know the bold part isn't factually true, it's my opinion. Watching Miller, his issue is his weight. Especially in the new age small ball era. Julian Gamble coudn't catch the basketball his first few years here. I think Miller has some cordination(for a big man) which in my opinion is the most important trait when it comes to potential for a big man. It's been very limited but last year I think he gave us a few solid minutes off the bench when Izundu was in foul trouble. So to me Gamble has two issues which was weight and zero cordination and some how Coach L was able to get him to be productive so my hope is that Miller can lose the weight and be a back up 5 for us the next two years.

Great point on Gamble going from Haith to Coach L as opposed to Miller who has always had Coach L. I'm sure I'm in the minority and very well may be wrong but Coach L must see something in Miller to make this redshirt move. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

I was at the game the other night and he appeared to have lost a lot of weight. It is possible that next year that he doesnt contribute, it will be his last year as he will be a senior academically.
 
Advertisement
Gamble developed that nice mid-range jump shot. Along with his motor, that made him a useful player in our rotation. Does Miller have ANY offensive moves down low, or any kind of shot? How did he score in HS/Prep School? All dunks?
 
CTCANE said:
I was at the game the other night and he appeared to have lost a lot of weight. It is possible that next year that he doesnt contribute, it will be his last year as he will be a senior academically.
Click to expand...

That is great hopefully his vertical increased to 1.5 inches.
 
Advertisement
hotshot said:
I had no idea. I thought he might have averaged 10 ppg at Oak Hill; not PLAYED 10 minutes a game. Wonder what Coach L and his staff saw back then?
Click to expand...

He played at another school before Oak Hill. I have no idea how he played there or why he transferred to Oak Hill.
 
On Miller, from the UM Athletic Dept bio:

"Consensus four-star recruit, ranked No. 90 overall by Scout.com and No. 96 by 247.com ... As a center, was ranked No. 15 by ESPN and No. 17 by Scout.com ... Has a 7-foot-1-inch wingspan ... In 2014 participated in the Nike Elite 100 ... Played AAU ball for the NY Lightning … Played freshman season at St. Benedict's (N.J.) …"

St. Benedict's in NJ, like Oak Hill, is a HS basketball power. This should be Exhibit 1 on why those "star ratings" need to be taken with a grain of salt, many grains!
 
I distinctly remember when we signed him that posters here were saying he wasn't good. Strange that L would miss so badly on a evaluation. He doesn't often.
 
Advertisement
hotshot said:
On Miller, from the UM Athletic Dept bio:

"Consensus four-star recruit, ranked No. 90 overall by Scout.com and No. 96 by 247.com ... As a center, was ranked No. 15 by ESPN and No. 17 by Scout.com ... Has a 7-foot-1-inch wingspan ... In 2014 participated in the Nike Elite 100 ... Played AAU ball for the NY Lightning … Played freshman season at St. Benedict's (N.J.) …"

St. Benedict's in NJ, like Oak Hill, is a HS basketball power. This should be Exhibit 1 on why those "star ratings" need to be taken with a grain of salt, many grains!
Click to expand...

A few things:

1. I'd rather take a chance on a kid (like Miller) then not use the scholarship (more on this in 3 below). I'd rather have something over nothing. Project or not.

2. As for big men, Coach has shown the ability to make these guys into useful players. Obviously you can't teach height, so I understand taking on the project.

3. With all that said, there is a time to cut your losses. If Coach doesn't want him to transfer, fine. But to me, having him redshirt to preserve his future is just wasting a spot for longer. Gak is greatly underweight and apparently is more useful this year than Miller. What does that say? If Gak is ahead of him next year too, what does that say? Because clearly, at least to the coaching staff, Gak is more useful today (over Miller) and you could always redshirt Miller next year.

4. I guess I am hard on Miller because it is part of a bigger problem (see the OP). With that said, Ihave yet to see anyone state that they believe Miller can provide "quality" depth. And if some one actually feels this way, I want them to state what they mean by that.
 
Mklein13 said:
Now a days 7-8 men rotations are the norm. Would have been nice to have Wilson for extra depth. I’m looking at a team like UCLA and even tho they have 3 guys out they still could roll 10 deep. Wish Miami had the luxury of having that type of depth. Obviously the difference is UCLA gets multiple top 100 guys a year, Miami is lucky to get 2.
Click to expand...
They do but somehow do nothing with that talent
 
Mklein13 said:
Agreed that team with Lonzo should have gotten to the final four easily
Click to expand...
Yeah it also doesn’t help when you give heavy pt to your own son as pg and I also think Kentucky is a joke for the talent they bring in, they should be sweeping the tourney every year .. I think coach l is a good coach but I feel like he recruits like he’s at George Mason trying to find these gem prospects
 
Advertisement
Rodney Miller shouldn't be recruited by a team on this level. One look at him and it's obvious he's an overmatched athlete with a clod body.
 
Consigliere said:
A few things:

1. I'd rather take a chance on a kid (like Miller) then not use the scholarship (more on this in 3 below). I'd rather have something over nothing. Project or not.

2. As for big men, Coach has shown the ability to make these guys into useful players. Obviously you can't teach height, so I understand taking on the project.

3. With all that said, there is a time to cut your losses. If Coach doesn't want him to transfer, fine. But to me, having him redshirt to preserve his future is just wasting a spot for longer. Gak is greatly underweight and apparently is more useful this year than Miller. What does that say? If Gak is ahead of him next year too, what does that say? Because clearly, at least to the coaching staff, Gak is more useful today (over Miller) and you could always redshirt Miller next year.

4. I guess I am hard on Miller because it is part of a bigger problem (see the OP). With that said, Ihave yet to see anyone state that they believe Miller can provide "quality" depth. And if some one actually feels this way, I want them to state what they mean by that.
Click to expand...

If we're not using our full compliment of scholarships anyway, I don't see how keeping Miller on the roster is a detriment to the team.
 
tcgrad1014 said:
If we're not using our full compliment of scholarships anyway, I don't see how keeping Miller on the roster is a detriment to the team.
Click to expand...

It is just further proof of waste and how we need to use more scholarships. It is laid out in my OP.
 
Advertisement
Consigliere said:
1. The issue is the lack of players who are active. We haven’t played one game and we’re down to nine.

2. So Miller is going to be more productive (next season) because he redshirts his third season? That doesn’t make sense.
Click to expand...
Miller is going to be more productive next season because he won't be on the bench sitting behind Huellnandez and Buka. Not shirting him this year would just be a wasted year of eligibility.
 
I think we're going to probably disagree.

RiDLer80 said:
Miller is going to be more productive next season because he won't be on the bench sitting behind Huellnandez and Buka. Not shirting him this year would just be a wasted year of eligibility.
Click to expand...

That argument would fit if...

1. Miller had NO more eligibility after this year. He still has 2 years. I think keeping him on scholarship rather then giving it to someone else would be "wasted". Are we really concerned about Miller being eligible in 2 years from now?

2. Gak is very underweight and raw and he is deemed more serviceable NOW (over Miller). Why would this be different next year?

3. Finally, why is Miller suddenly going to become "productive" next season when he has shown NO signs of such in his first two years?
 
Consigliere said:
I think we're going to probably disagree.



That argument would fit if...

1. Miller had NO more eligibility after this year. He still has 2 years. I think keeping him on scholarship rather then giving it to someone else would be "wasted". Are we really concerned about Miller being eligible in 2 years from now?

2. Gak is very underweight and raw and he is deemed more serviceable NOW (over Miller). Why would this be different next year?

3. Finally, why is Miller suddenly going to become "productive" next season when he has shown NO signs of such in his first two years?
Click to expand...
When's the last time we used all of our scholarships. Having Miller on scholly is not gonna keep us from offering anybody.

Gak is deemed more serviceable because he already redshirted and he has to play this year. And honestly we don't know how serviceable he'll be yet. He's skinny as ****. He may not be useful but he has to be active because he took a redshirt last year. This isn't a Dak > Miller call.

Another year of Miller focusing solely on reshaping his body could make him more useful next year. Because he's probably close to useless right now.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top