Stein: Rival Executives Suspicious That Miller Signing Will Lead to Trade
In his Daily Dime column, ESPN's Marc Stein starts up the Andre Miller trade talk...
------------------------
• 0: Andre Miller has zero starts in his first five games as a Blazer and is averaging just 25 minutes, only adding to the suspicion held by several rival executives that the Blazers signed Miller purely to make sure they acquired a tradable asset with their salary-cap space after failed free-agent bids for Hedo Turkoglu and Paul Millsap.
• 39: Miller becomes eligible to be traded in 39 days, on Dec. 15, along with the rest of the league's free agents who signed this past offseason.
------------------------
I've heard other writers suggest this possibility off-the-record but this is the first time, I believe, that it's in print. As you might imagine, there's been no indication from any team source that this is a serious possibility at this point.
The obvious question: Is there any demand for Andre Miller? His contract is short but he received little interest as a free agent this summer and nothing that's happened between then and now suggests his perceived value has risen. Is he even tradeable?
-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
13 days ago
Ben.
89 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Bingo
Give Bayless a bit more time to develop, then make him the starting or back up PG. Or maybe Miller will pull his head out and start playing better than average like he is now.
One thing is clear. Blake is a much better shooter than Miller. What exactly are Miller’s tangible strengths?
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -- Thomas Paine, US patriot & political philosopher (1737 - 1809)
by Love on Nov 6, 2009 3:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
If Defense is part of "everything else"...
I don’t agree… add in shot selection and play making down the stretch when we really need it…
by Ilikeemall on Nov 6, 2009 4:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Based on Miller's long history in the NBA, those aspects will come
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 6, 2009 5:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
not the defense part
bayless leaves over my dead body
START MILLER
B-Roy is selfish (that's not a joke anymore)
by thomasikehara on Nov 6, 2009 5:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Better defense than Blake?
Uhhh… yes it will. Blake fights a lot on defense, he just doesn’t have the physical tools Miller does.
by JordanLeDoux on Nov 6, 2009 5:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What is it, exactly, about his five DNP's...
…that suggest we’re getting Bayless ready to lead this team? You only gain that type of experience on the court in real game situations. Not in summer league, not in the pre-season. It’s gotta happen on the court during games that count. I don’t see this happening anytime soon.
....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"
by bforsythe on Nov 6, 2009 4:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The only reason I don't see Bayless as the backup pg right now, or this season...
Is because an injury to the starting pg could prove catastrophic if all of the sudden Bayless was your #1 option(assuming a miller or blake trade happened to give Bayless the backup spot). You could be looking at some serious problems if he had to play 30+ minutes a game. Maybe next season for Rex….
by Rudiculous on Nov 6, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not catastrophic
Assuming Miller trade and a Blake injury, you just go with a three guard rotation. Roy and Rudy start, and Bayless backs both of them up. That’s not bad.
"I'd like to see Nate McMillan stop treating fouls like they are rollover minutes." - Blazer Guy 11/4/09
by jamon51 on Nov 6, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, Jerryd played great tonight considering his role.
Not going to get too excited over one game but this is encouraging and helps me prove my point. As fans, we should give the people running this team the benefit of the doubt, especially based on the last three years and how they handled our rebuilding process. Nate will figure this out. KP is still a great GM – he got us here as much as anyone. We’ve got a great team, a different team than last year. I can’t wait to see how it all unfolds.
BTW – if we had lost I feel that people would be making a much bigger deal of LMA not being on the floor during key points during the fourth quarter. My take – a good player had a sub-par game. He’ll be fine too.
....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"
by bforsythe on Nov 6, 2009 11:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've been very happy with Miller's production, though I feel like he forces a few jump shots.
His defense has been fairly good, and he’s been anything but disruptive when it comes to team play.
I say keep him at least until the offseason, unless we get one of those no-brainer trade offers.
by JordanLeDoux on Nov 6, 2009 3:47 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'd say it's much more likely
that this would enable us to deal Blake and his expiring contract, turn the keys over to Miller, and give Bayless 10-15 minutes per night off the bench.
But maybe that’s just wishful thinking on my part.
How did you guys win that?
"We scored enough points. We scored 107, they scored 105.
-Nate McMillan Postgame, 3/4/2009
by douglast on Nov 6, 2009 3:49 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
It sounds, to me, like the smart thing to do.
"I don't always read blogs regarding the Trail Blazers
...but when I do... I read Blazers Edge."
- resurrect_ha28
by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Nov 6, 2009 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That is the smartest thing I have heard in a long time.
by trautmatizer on Nov 6, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
to that...KP, Nate and Brandon say
“Whoa! Hold on there, big fella!”
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
I’ve been saying the same thing for months: Steve and Trout’s expiring contracts are the most valuable tradeable assets we have…. Defining tradeable assets as those players that you are WILLING to let leave, and that have some value to the acquiring team. We’re not trading BRoy, LMA, Oden… Can’t see sending Pryz away… Martell is cheap and signed long-term.. You can’t get anything big for Howard, or any of our DNP’s.
That leaves Rudy, Bayless, Blake and Trout. KP is going to hang on to a cheap young athletic Bayless (I thought one reason he got Miller was to teach JayBay how to play). I really hope we don’t trade Rudy, as he has thatt certain winning something that is rare…
So that leaves Blake with a valuable $4M salary, and Trout with $3.8… If a team needs space for their superstar, they have value beyong their playing ability. Packaged together, with $1.4M cap space could get us a player with a $9M contract…
by Visionary2 on Nov 6, 2009 4:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and Trout’s expiring contracts are the most valuable tradeable assets we have
Rudy is much more valuable, but less likely to be dealt…unless the player coming back is a real difference maker. Travis and Steve’s expiring contracts are almost as “valuable” as what they would offer to their new teams on the court…especially if they are just “rental” players for half a season.
OTOH, Miller could help a contender “immediately” (after Dec 15) if their starting PG was to go down before mid-February
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 4:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If we trade Miller we would want a point guard in return,
unless Bayless first proves himself as a backup PG. So it would have to be a 3-team deal, making it less likely. But if we start seeing Bayless get real minutes at PG, then watch out. Look for a surprise in the lineup tonight, and I don’t mean Miller starting.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 6, 2009 5:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
or perhaps...a point forward?
then your guy Rudy could get all the minutes he ever wanted, alongside Roy
Here’s hoping Jerryd seizes his next “opportunity” better than he did last spring
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 6:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What's up with Rudy's 3-pt shooting?
He’s actually played better than last year as far as defense, penetration, and knocking down a few midrange shots. But if he keeps missing 3’s he won’t be seeing any minutes soon.
And what’s with Nate starting a 3-guard lineup and using a 3-guard lineup so much when Webster and Outlaw are only playing about 25 minutes a game. I thought you said Nate only uses a 3-guard lineup when he has to, not to make the team better? I hope Brandon is bulking up now that he’s our starting SF. :)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 7, 2009 3:32 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not a fan of small lineups
If the Blazers win a playoff series with Blake-Miller-Roy starting then I might reconsider
jscot might have the right take on this…Nate is starting Miller so that he and Brandon have the opportunity to mesh, more rapidly. Blake is the still in the lineup to help ease this transition. All it will take is for Roy to get abused by a SF in the post for Nate to make a change and replace Blake with Webster. Then hopefully that will be a permanent change
Either something is wrong physically with Rudy, or he’s having a sophomore slump in his NBA career. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is physical ailments; he played Eurobasket and tweaked his hammy, and sometimes an athlete will “compensate” for one injury and it will affect another part of his anatomy (in this case, his back) It was smart to rest him during the preseason, but I’m not sure that Rudy is going to be happy with short minutes during the regular season, regardless of how he feels physically. You already know my stance re: his future with Portland. Even though Roy is currently starting at the “3” I don’t think that Fernandez will get enough PT over the course of the next few years to be content with his role as a Blazer. Before he or his agent start making trade demands, KP should look to move him.
Hopefully, Rudy’s shot will come around and he’ll get the bounce back in his step so KP will have more interest from the other GMs. Fernandez is the key for Portland making a deal for a difference-maker player to put them over the top for a finals run. i don’t think they have “enough” BBIQ on their current roster to get there, even with the “organic growth” of their young players.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 7, 2009 9:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We still disagree about Rudy.
I wouldn’t trade him now unless he’s part of a (usually mythical) blockbuster deal. I would still wait for next summer (as I’ve said all along) and see what he does in his 2nd year before deciding what to do with him.
Remember that his contract is so small ($1.2M) and our cap space is only $1.4M, that it is difficult to get anything of equivalent value for him alone. We would probably have to include someone like Outlaw or Webster with him to get someone worthwhile. So that makes trade scenarios more difficult since we would need to worry about how we were back-filling two rotation positions (backup SG and backup PF or SF).
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 7, 2009 1:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
of course it would take "more" than Rudy
And I’m not concerned about the backup SG position, not with the way that Nate “colors outside the lines” with his wing player rotations. Right now he has Blake starting at the 2, and Bayless is a backup 2, and when Nic is healthy he can play backup 2…the Blazer’s roster is lousy with backup 2s and none of them will get more than 10-12 mpg as long as Roy is healthy and not playing out of position at the 3. Rudy’s role may be the easiest to replace of all of Portland’s reserve players
Meanwhile, backup PF is still a need, even with Travis on the roster. KP can’t wait until the offseason to deal with Outlaw, he either has to deal #25 in February, or hold onto him until he has little value on draft day (why would another team offer much for a guy they can just wait and sign, a few weeks later?)
So the capspace endgame comes down to this: will KP have a deal that he can live with at the deadline for Travis alone plus the capspace, or is there a better deal he can make for a difference-making player that will cost him Rudy, as well? There’s no way to tell, at this point. But the signs of the times are not favorable for Fernandez. That could change in a week or a month, but I’m not bullish on Rudy’s future in red/black, as you know.
You were 50/50 on #5 improving his ballhandling and playing some PG at Blake’s expense back in September…how’s that working out? I see a Euro who’s minutes are heading in the wrong direction and I’m thinking back to 1990 and Drazen Petrovic…the chances of a happy ending for Fernandez in Portland are fading. And don’t forget, he was already complaining about his role last year, when he was geting 25 mpg.
Waiting until “next summer” to make a decision on Rudy’s fate might result in a “weaker” transaction than what could be available in February…as KP learned last year with Sergio, Frye and the RLEC. Sometimes patience isn’t a virtue, and “calm waters” really means “no wind in the team’s sails”
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 7, 2009 9:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
KP won't trade Travis or Rudy before the deadline.
Everything changed with respect to Travis when Nic was hurt. Losing Batum “saved” Travis and KP certainly isn’t going to trade Rudy until they see what he does this year, even though he is off to slow 3-pt shooting start. There’s no backup PF/C coming this year because of Nic’s injury, so you can give that up. It’s a waste of time to continue talking about it.
Still 50-50 on Rudy. Notice that when he plays with Bayless Rudy takes the point in about half of the possessions and has been quite effective. He had 6 assists tonight and a couple were spectacular. He also had 4 steals and played excellent defense (beyond the steals). Throw in 5 rebounds too. Rudy is playing well except for his 3-pt shooting, but we are only 7 games into the season so that means nothing yet. Like I’ve said before, he will have this entire year to grow and show, and then KP will decide his future here.
Also, I expect Nate to make a big push to re-sign Travis this summer to something like $5M-$6M a year. That should be enough for little buddy to stay with Brandon, and he would still have a very tradable contract if things change in the future.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 9, 2009 12:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry but Bayless is just a strong, as athletic but someone who has better work ethic James Robinson. Bayless will never ever be our PG. He’s a back-up SG. Nothin wrong with that tbh.
by superset5 on Nov 6, 2009 3:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I was encouraged to see the first Andre-to-Greg alley-oop, the other night
And I’m hoping to see many more…but, if another NBA contender loses their PG for the a large piece of the season and their GM wants to overpay for Miller, I could see KP cashing in his off-season “asset”
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 3:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We'd need another PG
I agree that this would only make sense if someone wanted to overpay for a starter. However, we’d need a backup PG, and that isn’t something that a contender, that just lost its starter, is likely to part with.
All that glitters isn't chrome
by hoopla-pdx on Nov 6, 2009 5:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's possible
Remember that Miller was asking a lot more than what he got from Portland before he was essentially backed into a corner by us being the only team with cap space and any willingness to sign someone (OKC seemed to be always planning on letting it ride). It’s also a deal that a team with only the MLE couldn’t have offered him, while still being extremely reasonable and short-term.
That being said, I think the team sees this as an ancillary option, and not what they set out to do. I can’t really imagine a trade which makes sense as a trading partner for Miller, but you never know. I fully expect him to play out the year, and I think this is what the team expects, too. Still, this gives them a decent potential out if something comes up somehow.
by Royster on Nov 6, 2009 3:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
This Miller thing is getting way out of control.
If he starts, he starts. If we trade him, we trade him. We all need to relax. Miller is not a core piece to this team, he is just another intangible that we add in. No matter how people spin it, things are going to work out.
"I don't always read blogs regarding the Trail Blazers
...but when I do... I read Blazers Edge."
- resurrect_ha28
by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Nov 6, 2009 3:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
"Intangible"
I have to take issue with the cliched overuse of the term, “intangible.” Sports analysts lean on this phrase to the point where I don’t think people even know what it means anymore. (How many times do we hear someone say, “he brings a lot of intangibles to the game, with his 7” wingspan and 2.5 blocks per game)… What is INTANGIBLE about that?
There is nothing INTANGIBLE about a 6’ tall human being (or however tall Andre is). Nor is the role he plays as a point guard any more INTANGIBLE.
Rant over. Just wanted to point that out. Nothing person to you, FiveOhThree!
"whoever scores the most points is probably gonna win the game"
by kobestopper on Nov 7, 2009 10:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right. I didn't use the word in the proper context.
It just seemed to flow through my fingers, probably due to, like you said, it being used all too often in the wrong way.
"I don't always read blogs regarding the Trail Blazers
...but when I do... I read Blazers Edge."
- resurrect_ha28
by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Nov 9, 2009 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If any one of our PGs should be traded, it is painfully obvious that it should be BLAKE.
Blake is the guy with the expiring contract who isn’t good enough to be a playoff starter, and is in the way of developing the guy who might be. His game is solid but very limited.
Let Andre start and give Bayless the back-up minutes next to Rudy. Rudy can share the distribution responsibilities and Bayless can focus on penetrating and scoring as well as learning to play defense.
This seems astonishingly obvious to me. Our biggest weakness is perimeter defense in general and PG defense in particular. Bayless is the one guy on the roster who may be able to help.
by upper left corner on Nov 6, 2009 3:54 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Blake's style of play is clearly what fit nexts to Roy best...
I am curious to see how Roy and Miller’s chemistry develops over the next month or two, but right not Miller is not a fit at pg on this team. With Nate’s offensive sets, point guards next to roy must be able to hit jumpshots. That said, I wouldn’t mind seeing Nate get a little more creative offensively…
As far as pg defense goes, you are spot on in my opinion, I am just skeptical that Bayless will be the answer any time soon…
by Rudiculous on Nov 6, 2009 4:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t mind seeing Nate get a little more creative offensively…
I thought that was the whole point of bringing Andre on board. Roy and LMA need to “buy in” to this concept and their “more touches…option 1 and option 2” comments during the preseason suggest that “change” is hard for just about everyone to accept
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 4:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That might be the point but...
I will believe it when I see it, color me skeptical…
by Rudiculous on Nov 6, 2009 5:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I also addressed this...
…in my latest fanpost earlier today.
....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"
by bforsythe on Nov 6, 2009 4:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Andre's trade value
Although there wasn’t much interest in him as a FA, that doesn’t mean that a team who had no cap space might not be interested in a trade.
Obviously, if there was serious interest, you would expect that we would have heard about possible sign and trades. But as mentioned above, the possibility of in-season injuries or changes in teams’ fortunes could generate or amplify interest that wasn’t as high during the summer.
That said, I can’t quite imagine what trades we would make. I can’t really envision a PG swap that makes sense. And we’re pretty loaded up at other positions, which means we’d be talking about trading multiple guys or making multiple trades, which makes this all a bit far fetched, I suspect.
Also, if Nate starts Miller tonight, or in the future, it would certainly seem to indicate that the team doesn’t plan to trade him.
by DC Blazer on Nov 6, 2009 4:05 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I begrudgingly agree...
That Miller + Outlaw, Webster, Bayless, Blake, Rudy…(depending on who we are trading for) is much more attractive than just Andre the FA by himself. Especially with a two-year guaranteed deal already in place. If it helps the team, I’m all for it. But, as I’ve already said a few times, it’s way too early to give a point guard of Miller’s caliber the heave-ho. Sometimes you don’t know what you’ve got ‘till it’s gone.
....formerly GonzoFan. Now, this has been a message from "The People's Alliance to Continue to Encourage Greg Oden on his Path to Dominance"
by bforsythe on Nov 6, 2009 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not too mention that
a lot of teams that had cap space earlier might not have wanted Dre at 9 per for 4 years or whatever he was initially asking before settling here, but might now want him at 7 per for 2 years.
I don’t expect him to be moved, but judging his desirability as an asset based on how the offseason went seems like a mistake.
by Royster on Nov 6, 2009 4:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
what it would take, after Dec 15th
would be for a contending team to lose their starting PG to injury and suddenly need a proven starter like Miller to come to their rescue. Then KP could swing an unbalanced, lopsided, blockbuster deal that could also include Outlaw (etc) to make the salaries match up
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 4:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But unless Bayless is proven ready, we need a PG back.
So then it would have to be a 3 team deal, which is much harder during the season.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 6, 2009 5:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I could see it happening,
but I can’t believe that was the plan. There’s just no way a GM like KP and a coach like Nate would be doing that kind of stuff to a team that won 54 games last season, and has aspirations of greatness.
Bayless will get traded before he ever sees any significant minutes in a Blazer uniform. I doubt he will ever be a starter in the NBA at any position.
by superfly05 on Nov 6, 2009 4:06 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Possible trade salaries
Miller and Outlaw = around 10 million
Blake and Outlaw = around 7.5 million
Depends on what player, we are going after.
NOTE: I AM NOT ADVOCATING A TRADE
Enjoy the Ride
by DigitalDaggers on Nov 6, 2009 4:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
add a little extra
Portland is under the cap, so you can add 125% + 100k to those player salaries in a lopsided deal = over 11 mil for Andre + Travis…it’s not quite like last year with RLEC, but KP could still go “shopping” at the trading deadline if things aren’t working out as planned with his roster
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
KP has been known to use his assets to the fullest
Enjoy the Ride
by DigitalDaggers on Nov 6, 2009 4:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
on and around draft day, I agree
but his next big trade during the season will be his first. I’m hoping he breaks through this “barrier” this year, or next.
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 4:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrichhinrich
by Rudiculous on Nov 6, 2009 4:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
what does Portland have that Chicago might want, for Kirk?
other than Rudy, I mean
Maybe…if Rose were to get hurt they might be interested in Miller…but if that happened they’d need Hinrich more than ever…so, no Andre deal
they might be interested in Joel, but I like tough big guys and Portland only has two of them
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 4:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Blake and Outlaw would probably do it
If Chicago thinks they have a shot at D-Wade (and they do), they need to move either Hinrich or Deng, and they ain’t moving Deng.
by dprodigy19 on Nov 6, 2009 5:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you are in dreamland
if you think the Bulls would deal Hinrich for Outlaw+Blake
throw Rudy into that deal and you’ll get their attention
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 6:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A guy can dream can't he?
They would definitely want Rudy, but eventhough I am a HInrich.fanboy, Rudy is probably more than I would want to give up considering you would need another blazer involved to fill the salary gap.
Essentially
My Rudy.fanboyness > My Hinrich.fanboyness
by Rudiculous on Nov 6, 2009 5:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
I was driving the Hinrich bandwagon last February (or at least, riding shotgun…) but as much as I think Cap’n Kirk would help Portland’s perimeter defense, I still wouldn’t put Rudy in a deal for him…and much more importantly, I don’t think KP would, either. If KP really wanted Hinrich, he had a golden opportunity at the last deadline to aquire KH (using RLEC+Outlaw+?) and let it slip by…and most Blazer fans are only now starting to realize what a missed opportunity that was
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 6:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If they're looking to trade Miller
they better start him soon. Hard to get a decent value on an asset you’re underutilizing.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
by Arby on Nov 6, 2009 4:14 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
why would they do that??
they don’t play him much to get any value and no one else wanted him in the offseason…. I just don’t think so…..
by jenstcy on Nov 6, 2009 4:15 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
because otherwise their cap space is gone.
It helps explain why Portland was going after the best player available on the market.
"Ain't nothin' in this world for free."
by Arby on Nov 6, 2009 4:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Portland was going after the best player available on the market.
that player was David Lee…but he wasn’t as desperate to sign a LTC as Miller was
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 5:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No, this doesn't sound too plausible
Can you imagine Nate’s reaction if he’d wasted the preseason trying to integrate a player who the team planned to trade a couple months later?
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 6, 2009 4:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He'd want out of here faster than the "Fire Nate" BE contingent wants him gone
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Nov 6, 2009 5:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This story is just plain crazy...
Why didn’t he just headline it with “BLAZERS SIGN SOMEONE THEY DON’T WANT FOR $7M”
They could have offered the same or more money to David Lee…Or they could have kept the cash until the trade deadline…
This story is nothing but a snipe job against the Blazers and Andre Miller.
by Jimbob91577 on Nov 6, 2009 4:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
LOL you think that the Blazers are this crazy? What FA would want to sign with us if they're worried that they'll just be used as a trade asset?
Love.
by L-TrainFTW! on Nov 6, 2009 5:11 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
one that was having trouble getting a decent contract?
Just thinking out load, I have no clue what the blazers intentions are with Miller…
by Rudiculous on Nov 6, 2009 5:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The Blazers didn't plan to trade MIller, but they had to spend their cap space.
It was the last chance to get an asset (to play or later trade) with their cap space without giving up a player in return, which they didn’t want to do. Hence the offer to Millsap, and then a try to get David Lee (both younger and more valuable as playable/future tradable assets) before settling on Miller. There was no one else left except Sessions by the time they got to Miller.
So the story is partially true. Trading him was one of their options, but not likely their first option.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 6, 2009 5:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
without giving up a player in return, which they didn’t want to do
I don’t know why KP would’ve hesitated doing a (hypothetical) “lopsided” deal with Travis and the capspace, the Blazer’s GM certainly pursued enough forwards in July that would’ve made Outlaw very “expendable” if he had consummated any of those FA big man deals
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 6:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nate is really sold on Travis as a clutch scorer in the last 3-5 minutes of games.
I think he is Nate’s #2 late 4th quarter option behind Roy. Tonight he had Travis replace LMA at the end of the game and predictably Travis hit a big shot.
I’ll bet it was a tough sell to go after Turk if Nate believed he would lose Travis. I don’t think we would have traded Travis if we got Millsap. I think Nate would have played Travis at SF and lobbied to trade Martell. Obviously I don’t agree, but that’s how I read Nate.
I doubt there is any chance we will trade Travis now (other than a blockbuster deal). I don’t think Nate and KP see eye to eye on some personnel issues, and my new theory about why Nate will only sign one year contracts is because it gives him leverage to threaten to walk away if he feels KP doesn’t listen to him enough. I thought Travis would just walk away this summer, but now I wonder if Nate will use whatever leverage he accumulates this year to try to convince the organization to re-sign him.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 7, 2009 3:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree that there is some disconnect between Nate and KP re: the roster
I think we saw that in the past, with Jarrett Jack and Sergio, for opposite reasons. Nate liked Jack, KP and the scouts liked Sergio. Eventually both players were both dealt when their 3 year rookie contracts ran out.
Travis is another story. He’s a leftover from the Nash/Patterson regime. As far as we know, KP hasn’t offered him an extension. You’re right about Nate using Outlaw as a late-game scoring option, he’s certainly done well in that role. It would be interesting to know how much the pursuit of Hedo was driven by Paul Allen and KP, and how much Nate was “on board” with the decision. If Turk had signed I think KP had “changes” in store for the roster, and one of those was an Outlaw deal.
I don’t think we would have traded Travis if we got Millsap
We saw a tweet from Jon Givony that indicated the opposite, back in July. If Utah hadn’t matched Millsap’s toxic offer, there was a deal already in place with Memphis for Outlaw. The Griz were unhapy that it didn’t go down. There’s no reason to question Givony’s version on this story, he certainly didn’t have anything to gain by “making it up”
As I wrote earlier this week, it’s going to be up to KP to “rescue Nate” from this dependence on Outlaw, just like he did with Jack. I’m just as happy as any Blazer fan when Trout’s jumper hits twine at the end of games, but I have to keep my eye on the bigger picture, and that’s what will it take to win playoff series. Based on what we saw last April against Houston, and looking critically at Travis’ career as a Blazer, it doesn’t appear that he will be an effective “all-around” role player on a finals team. KP should realize this, and it’s his job to make roster adjustments. Nate’s job is to win the next ballgame, and if Travis is still on the roster then he’ll continue to use him to take jumpers at the end of the game. Short term, this makes sense…long term, it doesn’t—Outlaw can “walk away” on July 1st! KP needs to deal with the long term… unless Nate wants to take over as Portland’s GM and start hammering out a LTC with Outlaw’s agent
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 7, 2009 9:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Although we are in agreement about Outlaw, I think Nate may have other ideas.
As far as we know, KP hasn’t offered him an extension.
He can’t. Just like Blake, Outlaw is on a 3 year contract and can’t be extended. They have to wait until next summer if they want to re-sign either of them.
I expect Blake to be re-signed for about his existing salary, probably 2 years with a team option for a 3rd. Blake doesn’t have much trade value except as an expiring contract, and at $4M there isn’t a lot demand for that unless it’s part of a multi-player (from PDX) deal. So I don’t think Blake goes unless it’s part of a pretty big deal. Again, Nate really likes Blake, Roy’s happy with Blake, and Blake is cheap, reliable insurance no matter what else happens at PG.
I still don’t believe the Outlaw to Memphis rumor for an unrestricted 1st round pick story. Outlaw isn’t worth that, and I don’t do the deal for a restricted 1st round pick, especially considering Nate’s feelings about Outlaw.
I still believe Outlaw would have been traded if we got Turk, who would have played SF and backup PF, but not traded right away if we got Millsap. I think they would have waited to get a good look at Webster first to make sure his foot had really healed this time, and then Nate and KP may have struggled over Webster vs Outlaw at backup SF (remember Batum was still expected to be healthy and starting at SF).
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 7, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
if Millsap had been signed
there would’ve been no backup PF minutes for Travis, and Batum-Webster (plus the inevitable 3 guard lineups…) would’ve made Outlaw an “appendix” at SF
(And you notice I didn’t even mention the “big” lineup with LMA playing SF…and he’s playing more and more “like a SF” as time goes by, eh?)
Like I said earlier, Nate had “feelings” about Jack as well, but they didn’t “bind” Jarrett to the Blazers roster. All I can say is, if Nate and KP saw Travis play the same playoff series against the Rockets that the rest of us watched, they couldn’t have come away thinking “yessir, that Outlaw is just the kind of player we need to keep around for the championship run…he’s bound to find the desire to play defense and rebound one of these years!” KP had “plans” on draft day and in early July that didn’t pan out. Batum got hurt, and that bought Travis some extra time on the court and in PDX.
But the NBA isn’t personal (Nate) it’s a business (KP) and Outlaw has a skill that the team only needs occasionally, nowadays. Travis has loftier plans than to be a 10-15 mpg role player on a contending team—which is exactly what he was looking at becoming, before Nic went in for shoulder surgery. If Nate and Monty haven’t “coached Trout up” to the point where he can box-out and be effective as a team defender after 4+ years, then it’s time for them to move on to Cunningham. I like Dante’s chances a lot better, in the long run
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 7, 2009 10:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can only
hope this is true even a month with miller is too long. They should have seen this coming now its going to be hard to get rid of this guy
by BBG on Nov 6, 2009 5:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Get ride of him? I personally don't want my two PGs to be Bayless and Blake.
Love.
by L-TrainFTW! on Nov 6, 2009 5:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that would be admitting playoff defeat
but if the Blazers continue to struggle through the month of December, the front office may decide to back up and “punt” this season…frankly, there’s not much difference between losing in round 1 of the playoffs if you’re the #8 seed or the #4. If Miller and Roy aren’t going to gel, they might as well develop Bayless and make a decision on the future backcourt
I think losing Batum for 5 months is a much bigger blow to the team’s success than anyone is reckoning—as “the scout” said on Wheels at Work this afternoon (check the fanshots for the podcast link)
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 6, 2009 6:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I can only think of 3 teams that would want him
Phili, NY, and Miami – None of which seem like viable trade partners.
Trade players for picks and draft Cole Aldrich 2010
by jlarose78 on Nov 6, 2009 5:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't buy it...
I’m sure tradeability is factored into any move for an outside player the Blazers aquire but I don’t think at 33 years old, and for the money The Blazers spent, that was the plan. Who knows what the future might hold, but at this point, Trade Andre, just seems like the type of chemistry destroying rumor this team doesn’t need.
Right, Wrong or Indifferent this team needs to gel and come together. I don’t like this rumor, especially at this time.
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
by Krang on Nov 6, 2009 6:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
"Rival Executives"
Obviously you have to judge the source. Who is served by this rumor?
by Jacksonville on Nov 6, 2009 6:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I bet it's that evil Denver(?) GM
Blazers win!
by The X-man on Nov 7, 2009 11:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This would be the move to make.
Miller is a bad fit, but a good player with a reasonable contract. Trading him would be the best move KP could make to get this team back on track, and make the cap space count. I just wish they had gone after David Lee after Milsap’s offer was matched. I was just watching him bang his way through a couple defenders for a layup in the Knicks/Cavs game. We need a big who can do that, not a guard, since we already have Roy.
Miller was obviously not the first choice, but was the best player available. It seems he’s not really going to be happy here now that his pride has been hurt, so ship him out and get a PF for him. People keep talking about Blake and Outlaw’s expiring contracts, but Miller’s is about the same as their combined contracts, and he is a more desirable player for other teams, and the contract is really a two year deal, with an attractive third year team option, which makes him an expiring contract after next year, if the team doesn’t pick up the option.
I started thinking Miller would be gone by next year, but this article points to sooner than later. Though it may run contrary to popular ideas around here, I think the team would start firing on all cylinders once we get back to what we were doing right before the playoffs, namely blowing out most of the best teams in the West, including the Lakers, Spurs, Nuggets and Suns with the Roy/Blake back court. The team looked great then, but just didn’t match-up well with the Rockets. Get over it. We had a great team and did the same thing the Suns did when they picked up Shaq. Ruined it. We got a guy who changes the style of play that won games for us last year, and now we need addition by subtraction, and a post playing big.
by wingzeta on Nov 6, 2009 7:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
CAP'N JACK!
Miller makes slightly less and the Warriors will be interested in trading him come Dec. 15th. They could use a playmaking PG to fill the void that has been there since Baron left.
Jack is a risk Pritchard likely would not take. But he should. He’s a champion. He can knock down the 3 ball and relieve pressure off Roy with his perimeter ballhandling skills. He can defend the other team’s best player which Batum used to do. He’s the type veteran we need. Unlike Miller, Hedo, or Millsap, Jax commands respect. There are a number of red flags: his attack of fans at the Palace, his latest trade demands and giving up his captaincy. Still, he has played relatively well given the situation thus far.
My mom babysat Paul Allen
by shwa on Nov 6, 2009 11:49 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don't see it at all
The contract was structured with a possible trade in view, but not during the season.
Next summer, because of the team option on year three, Andre becomes an expiring contract.
If we keep him through next year, and exercise the option to keep him, he is an expiring contract again. That means we have two years of Andre as an expiring contract on a player who can still play. That is attractive in a trade.
So I do think Andre was signed with a view to the possibility of trading him sometime, depending on what happens. But I don’t see them signing him with a view to trading him this year. Too disruptive. If he gets traded, it is because a deal came along that they think strengthens the team, but not because that was the plan all along.
"Woulda, Coulda, Mighta and Shoulda – the Four Horsemen of the Procrastocalypse" - Red-5
by jscot on Nov 7, 2009 1:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Right, he wasn't signed to be traded, he was simply signed as an asset
with playable value, but also tradable value as future circumstances dictate. But there was no way they were going to let the cap space expire without converting it into a playable/potential future tradable asset. Not while Paul Allen was willing to spend money to build a contending team.
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 7, 2009 3:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
miller
Trade Miller? Seems doubtful to me, he is the Blazers only true point guard. His play so far hasn’t been stellar but it has been decent.
And frankly, I feel a lot more comfortable with him bringing the ball up the court than anyone else on the team.
The only way I can see them trading Miller is if they trade him for another point guard.
by lsjogren on Nov 7, 2009 11:29 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
bayless
Folks, I thought we had a consensus that it’s time to give up on trying to shoehorn Bayless into being a point guard when that’s not where his natural ability lies.
by lsjogren on Nov 7, 2009 11:32 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
A market today?
No. If KP pulls this move it’ll be an ultra-smooth move. A lot of teams don’t want to put their hopes on an aging, score-first point guard. but when mid december rolls around, and they realize they are getting killed at PG, or their rookie PG isn’t really getting it done, the market for Miller goes up. “Hey, you’re a 38-win team today, but with Miller, you’ll get 41 or 42 and make the playoffs” type of situation. so teams make that move. I suspect KP will want to grab a euro or some 2nd-round draft picks. If he can get a serviceable big, that would be awesome, because Oden and Przybilla are collecting fouls like they’re about to raise to the limit.
M, period. Fresh, comma.
by manzell on Nov 7, 2009 12:42 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
If he can get a serviceable big, that would be awesome, because Oden and Przybilla are collecting fouls like they’re about to raise to the limit
I couldn’t agree more, another quality big man is what the roster needs, the foul trouble to Greg/Joel will only be magnified in the post season
However, the Miller “experiment” will have to really “go south” for KP to deal him in the near future. It sounds like Nate is finally letting Andre run the show and Miller is saying all the right things about winning, not whining. (Marc Spears is nowhere to be seen, at least we hope)
But the more Miller and Blake play = the less PT for Rudy. So the focus should shift to “what’s the future hold for Fernandez in PDX” if he can’t get his old “job” back? Is Rudy really going to get that expanded play-making role, or will his back even hold up for the long haul? There may not be a national writer tweeting these questions right now, but give it time. The first “salvo” may be fired from overseas, but it only takes one Spanish website to light a spark and then the talk radio magpies will start making a ruckuss. I hope KP has a handle on this
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
by two4larue on Nov 7, 2009 10:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ok, i'll bite...but,
there is only 1 player in the league i would want: CP3. He now has a 13mm contract, but is designated at base year compensation. I think this means he can only be traded for 1/2 of his current salary, but the obtaining team must be able to take on all the salary. Since Ptld has only 50k of cap room, there is no way to make a trade. so, we are stuck with what we have for this year. Blake and Outlaw will be gone next year. Either Bayless or Mills will have to be our defensive point, who can guard someone, Claver and maybe Freeman will be over to add frontcourt depth. Maybe even cunningham or Pendergraph will be useful, though i doubt it.
Since we’ll never again have cap space during the Roy-LA-Oden era, we are now looking for vets who want a last chance at a ring and drafting well from the back end of the draft (and buying picks from phoenix??).
by shallwemaui on Nov 7, 2009 2:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
