Jeff: It's Not Miller Time

Let me just get this out: Reggie Miller is one of the most clutch shooters of all time. One of the best three point shooters ever (I would take only Larry Bird over Reggie if I needed a game-winning 3). Classic Reggie was running through a playoff gauntlet of screens and elbows and forearms, like some kind of Fear Factor event, and burying a 3 from an impossible angle. All of this I admit. But since Reggie hung 'em up Thursday after his Pacers were eliminated by the Pistons I've been hearing some crazy things from some very respectable NBA people. People who (I thought) know infinitely more about basketball than I do. Reggie Miller a Hall-of-Famer? Debatable to me. But not only were these experts saying Reggie was a FIRST BALLOT Hall of Famer, they were suddenly saying he was one of the great players of the last two decades? HUH?

Tell me what I'm missing here. Please. Because, at least to me, here's what Reggie COULD do:

• hit 3's, especially in clutch situations
• flop and draw fouls on his shots that didn't go in
• Bow to the opposing crowd after hitting a big shot
• Infuriate Spike Lee
• give thought-provoking interviews after games

Here's what Reggie COULDN'T do:

• create his own shot
• pass
• rebound
• play any real semblance of defense
• win a championship
  

And this is a 1st ballot hall of famer? Are you sure? I heard nationally renowned writers and experts saying he was right up there with Barkley and Ewing and Clyde Freaking Drexler?!?!? I thought they were kidding, but they were not. The argument was, knowing how their entire careers played out, who would you rather have: and Reggie Miller was getting taken ahead of or right with the Ewings and Clyde Drexlers. Am I the only one who has a problem with this? Reggie was NOT on the original Dream Team, Reggie has NEVER made 1st team all-NBA or even 2nd, and has played in 5 all-star games in 18 years.

Think about that: he's never been considered one of the two best players at his position in any of 18 seasons, and has only been considered one of the 24 best 5 times. I'm not sure Reggie should be getting into the Hall of Fame, let alone on the first ballot. Before my computer crashed and died, I made a chart of the players who I thought compared favorably with Reggie during his prime years- the late '80's-late '90's. I had the following criteria a player had to have in that time frame:

• make at least 3 all-star games
• be named 1st, 2nd, or 3rd team All-NBA at least 3 times
• NOT win a regular season MVP award

I came up with 17 guys along with Reggie who met this criteria, and you know what? I'd take almost all of them over him. When it comes down to it, knowing now what you know about their whole careers, Reggie had a nice run and some longevity to it, as well as some clutch moments. But as clutch as he was, he never won a title, and was never more than a glorified sharpshooter. Oh, and the argument about how many career points Reg scored and all the three's? He played his entire career with a three point line. Jerry West, a guy people commonly mention as a great player Miller has passed on the all-time scoring list. How many more points would West have scored always having the three? Or Pistol Pete Maravich? I'm not saying REggie wasn't good, because he definitely was. But great? At times maybe, but I'd rather have a Joe Dumars or Clyde Drexler anytime.