As the NBA dog days wind down, and with training camp opening in a few days, I thought it'd be interesting to discuss who was the better player, Reggie Miller or Mitch Richmond.

I think based on notoriety Miller gets the edge. Laissez-faire hoops fans will probably all think it's Miller.  Yes his teams played in more NBA playoffs, and his teams went further.  He did light the Knicks up for years which as someone who loathed those teams (Starks, Mason, Oakley, etc) was really a wonderful sight to behold.  His team made one NBA Finals in 2000, was upset vs the Pistons in 2004 in a series they probably should've won, and then completely collapsed in the Malice at the Palace in November 2004.

Richmond was originally 1/3rd of the dynamic RUN TMC in Golden State, proceeded to get traded to Sacramento for the corpse of Billy Owens and was mired in obscurity for years to come.  Constantly averaging over 20 ppg in a time when hand-checking, grabbing, and endless fouling was constant (thanks Pat Riley and Jeff Van Gundy) Richmond was still able to get his points and truly was a scorer.  He then was traded to Washington for Chris Webber, a move that officially helped put Sacramento on the basketball map in the late 90s and early 2000's.  He then jumped on the Lakers and won a championship with them in 2002, his final season.

Their stats?  5 All Star appearances 18 ppg, 3 rebounds, 3 assists, and 3 All NBA Teams for Miller.  6 All Star appearances, 21 career ppg, about 4 rebounds, 4 assists and 5 All NBA Teams for Richmond.

So who's the better player?  Watching them throughout their career I always thought it was Richmond.  But Miller's teams were always more competitive.  And he did light up the Knicks.  And Richmond did win a ring with the detested Lakers.

Also, are both of these guys HOF'ers??

It's tough  for me to say- what do you think?

Lastly one thing's for sure: had Reggie Lewis lived, he'd be in this discussion

tb727 9/26/2009 11:40:00 AM Edit
« Prev Post Next Post »

Recent Posts

comments powered by Disqus

4 Responses so far.

  1. Reggie Miller is definetly a better player. Mitch Richmond might have had a chance to be better if his circumstances were more favorable but the fact remains he was a 20 point scorer on bottom dwelling teams. There is very little chance he will make the Hall of Fame. Reggie Miller is widely considered the best three point shooter and top 5 clutch players ever. Personally I think he is overrated, but still is miles ahead of Richmond. Good post.

  2. JR says:

    I'm going to go with Reggie Miller over Mitch...and I'm not "Laissez-faire" lol. Maybe things would be different if Mitch had been traded to Indiana insead of Sacto and he had comparable reults to Miller, but you can't predict that. Richmond's years in Washington didn't help his case either. Ritchmond was awesome on the Fakers though. ;) What happened to the Greg Minor versus Jimmy Oliver article? I want some Greg Minor love on here!

  3. Different players, different styles, both very good scorers. Reggie was better

  4. Anonymous says:

    This Dillinger guy knows what he's talking about!

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.