Stein: Andre Miller Tops Tradeable Assets List
Marc Stein of ESPN.com lists off the biggest names that might be on the block with the December 15th trade-eligibility date approaching. Andre Miller is in the top slot...
--------------------
Miller would have occupied the No. 1 slot here even if the Blazers weren't in the market for a competent big man and/or wing player after losing Nicolas Batum (shoulder), Travis Outlaw (foot) and now Greg Oden to the second season-ending knee injury of his young career.
...
Yet the reality remains that Miller and Roy are an iffy tag team because both need to see so much of the ball to be effective, which explains why Miller has only started nine games. There's this, too: While NBA front-office sources say there is considerable outside interest in young (and mostly forgotten) Portland guard Jerryd Bayless, Miller's more substantial salary -- $6.7 million to Bayless' $2.1 million -- would probably bring a bigger talent payoff in a trade.
"They need a Mo Williams-type to play with Brandon Roy," said one rival team executive in the West. "They need a shooter to play off him."
--------------------
PS... Thanks to Nick Van Excellent in the fanshots.
-- Ben Golliver | (benjamin.golliver@gmail.com) | Twitter
about 2 years ago
Ben Golliver
148 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I'd like to see a trade
Whatever we can do to clear the decks and start again this season. – Elgin
Travis Outlaw, the Funnel Cake of the Blazers
Throw in Webster!
Throw in Outlaw!
Portland > Tacoma
by CaptainSexyJacob on Dec 11, 2009 12:59 PM PST reply actions
I don't want a trade
I still like our core and I love what Dre does to this team. Do you really want Blake and Bayless being the only PGs? I think not.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
You love what 'Dre does to this team?
That could be interpreted as masochism…
“Dre” has been brutal – failing to live up to expectations rather dramatically.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 11, 2009 1:57 PM PST up reply actions
that is an important statistic
but you can’t argue that Blake or Miller have been good – only that Miller hasn’t been overwhelmingly better than Blake.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 11, 2009 4:29 PM PST up reply actions
Brutal? I don't understand this characterization at all.
Miller got off to a slow start, that has been the pattern throughout his career and is often the case with guys moving to a new team. But his play has improved significantly in the past month. His PER has risen from 12 to 15 in the past couple of weeks he has averaged over 15 points per game over the past seven games.
He has been badly and inconsistently used by Nate and yet has still found a way to be productive. Miller hasn’t been great, but the circumstances have been horrible. Characterizing his play as “brutal” makes no sense to me. What are you talking about?
by upper left corner on Dec 11, 2009 3:02 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Maybe it's his below average PER
or the fact that his PER is as good as it is because somehow he has dropped a few threes in the last few games. But Miller has been TO prone – especially on the fast break – and he hasn’t made the team better (the team projects to a losing record with him on the court).
The salient point is that the point guard play has not been good, to date – and trading him and giving his minutes to Bayless would be a net positive.
Fact is, there isn’t a shot that Miller has in his arsenal that I wouldn’t rather have Bayless shoot, and there isn’t a pg in the league I wouldn’t rather have Bayless defending.
Blake we can only hope recovers his 3-pt shot, because that is where he expresses his value. Miller was supposed to give us stellar passing – but I haven’t seen it. Most depressing Miller stat? 23% TO rate on fast breaks. That is the very definition of BRUTAL.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 11, 2009 4:36 PM PST up reply actions
As of this morning Millers PER is 15.6 while Blake is at 9.6
Blake’s turnover % is even higher than Miller’s
by upper left corner on Dec 12, 2009 8:52 AM PST up reply actions
Man, you and I must have been watching different players. Dre has been better by leagues than any other guard we have other than Roy IMHO.
The coaching staff have handcuffed him a bit I think. Trade Blake and see what he does.
Oden fan for life
by dario argento on Dec 12, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
I completely agree!
Also it is pissing me off that this “picking up Miller just so we can have a trade” line of thought is just coming out in the past few months!!! I think that it’s a guess at best. I think KP brought Andre in to PLAY. We needed a point guard who can actually pass and read the floor and teach Bayless and help us win! Yet the Blazers have failed to let Andre do what he does…
I'm going to completely bonkers...
… if ANYONE on this coaching staff says that they want to trade for a veteran.
Buck Williams for the hall of fame
I figured that was the move at the time it happened
think about it, we went for Hedo, Millsap, Lee, and (reportedly) Odom first. PG was not a priority. I don’t think that thinking of Miller as a “Plan E” placeholder is new at all. I think it made pretty good sense too. A good asset in the hand, that might add to the team, is better than “cap space” and unknown possibilities. Or so went the logic.
It cannot be denied that KP was not especially concerned with updating the PG position this off season. He went for an SF, a PF, a PF/C, a PF/SF, and then finally a PG when Lee wouldn’t commit in Vegas.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Dec 11, 2009 3:53 PM PST up reply actions
Oddly enough..
I think we should just stand pat, no trades. Use this season as a learning experience. The only guy I really think is tradable without regretting it later is Webster, and even he needs some more time to figure out what we really have. Face it, this season is doomed because of injuries, it happens all the time in pro sports. That doesn’t mean we should start bailing players overboard, as you can’t really get good value for injured guys, and we most likely wouldn’t be seeing equal or greater value for our non-injured guys. Great teams learn to play through stuff like this.
"Tradable without regretting it later" = nobody else wants them either
You don’t wait to trade a guy until what you have is painfully obvious. You trade him right at that critical point when your inside information is most valuable—that’s the point when it’s better than 50/50 that he won’t pan out for you, but the other teams still think it’s better than 50/50 that he will. If you wait until your player’s flaws are all exposed they won’t have much trade value, based on talent that is (contract status is a different deal).
Take Sergio for instance. If we had traded him at the end of his first year, or perhaps during his second year, we could have received some real value for him. Instead, we waited until every ounce of potential he had was overshadowed by the flaws we beat out of him. When we finally traded him, we had to give him away.
Not exactly
There are plenty of reasons people get traded at various times. Some teams are looking to dump salary, some are rebuilding from the ground up, some are looking to fill a particular void, some are looking for a final piece to a championship contender, etc. Things like age, contract, personality, playing style are all factors that contribute to a player’s “value,” so a given player may be more valuable to one team than another.
Take a guy like Webster. If he did what he’s capable of doing at least 3 out of 4 games, he would be a great asset, perfect for this team. Would you necessarily trade that Webster (playing good 75% of the time) for Ron Artest?
Or take Channing Frye. He’s ripping it up in Phoenix this year, but he’s really the same guy that was rotting on the bench for us last year. Same with Sergio. We just didn’t need what they had to offer.
who wants him?
we were the only one pursing him this summer, and after the start of this season I think his stock has dropped.
by Alaa Abdelnaby on Dec 11, 2009 1:25 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Philly's players wanted him back
But the owner didnt’ want to pony up.
"Good evening Blazer fans, wherever you may be!"-Bill Schonely
People couldn't afford to sign him.
But now a trade would allow teams to trade equal salaries and still get something in return.
Perhaps we can acquire an expiring contract? Then we could go after better agents this summer.
Portland > Tacoma
by CaptainSexyJacob on Dec 11, 2009 1:50 PM PST up reply actions
Portland will be 'way over the cap when Roy and LMA's extensions kick in, next July
So KP has no incentive to pursue expiring contracts at the trading deadline
He might be interested in draft choices as part of any deals, though
When reached 40 years of following Portland basketball you have, be as passionate of the Trail Blazers you will not!
Orlando would/should want him.
Jameer is out again and is injury prone. There is no way they are thinking a PG corp of Melted White Chocolate and the AARP Rep Anthony Johnson is a championship corp.
by Pooh Richardson on Dec 11, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
Well
They need a PG with a Jumpshot though, who knows if they’d want him or not.
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Dec 11, 2009 3:53 PM PST up reply actions
He wanted more than the MLE.
No one had the space.
by Nick Van Excellent on Dec 11, 2009 3:35 PM PST up reply actions
I will be really sad if Andre Miller is traded without first allowing him to start..to play like he
does…did all of you people who don’t believe Andre can play even SEE what he did to the Blazers last year???
I would agree...
If I knew more about perceptions in the league.
If the league still believes that Miller is a near elite level PG and he just didn’t get a fair chance with the Blazers, then the Blazers need at other positions is much greater than their need for Miller. There’s a mutual beneficial gains available by trading. Of course, I’m a bit biased here, because I never liked the Miller signing, but the case for adding a back-up 4/5 is clearly greater today than it was in the summer. With Oden’s injury problems and Joel’s apparent decline depth at both positions is a long term and short term need. And, there must be a few teams that would make greater use of Andre’s skills than are the Blazers.
On the other hand, I’d hate to see the Blazers simply throw away Miller for a stop-gap player. I’d like to see Miller get a shot at more minutes and a bigger role before that happens. Not only has Miller gotten few chances to start, but he’s only averaging 27 minutes a game, far fewer than I had expected, even being a Miller-doubter.
Good lord!!
TRADE BLAKE!!!
"I don't always read blogs regarding the Trail Blazers
...but when I do... I read Blazers Edge."
- resurrect_ha28
by FiveOhThree-RipCity!! on Dec 11, 2009 1:47 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
To who? For what?
I am Spartacus and I approved this message
by EngineerScotty on Dec 11, 2009 1:53 PM PST up reply actions
Never heard of him.
I am Spartacus and I approved this message
by EngineerScotty on Dec 11, 2009 3:20 PM PST up reply actions
Who cares?
Get him off this team. Or at least stop playing him so much.
by thetsaiguy on Dec 11, 2009 2:30 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
WHO CARES.
Just get rid of him. The guy is the definition of a backup PG. Just about everyone in the league (save brandon and nate, of course) sees that.
How about #4 guy on that list, Brandon Bass?
Salaries match, Orlando needs a BACKUP PG. We need backup 4/5.
It makes too much sense, though. It’ll never happen.
52 + 88 = 140% better team.
Until Jameer Nelson comes back
And plus, they just got rid of Rafer Alston, why would they want another flashy point guard who can’t shoot very well?
Yes and watch how Miller does if he is traded to a team with an actual NBA coach...
Actually after seeing how he’s been treated here; I’d like Andre to move somewhere where he could use his talent. Just wish it were here. I know..trade Nate for SVG!!!! Now there is a good idea. Nate could then bring his girlfriend Blake along with him as an assistant coach. Blake could teach his special dribble out the clock and last minute FBP maneuvers!
Pheonix
They play at a fast pace and score a lot of points. That’s leads to big losses becuase of all the turnovers, lack of scrappiness, lost efficiency, and a lack of doing some things, right?
We’ll take Nash off their hands.
by Pooh Richardson on Dec 11, 2009 3:19 PM PST up reply actions
trade him for a 2020 2nd round pick
exactly, who cares.
if he goes, big fail for the coaching staff...
You sign a vet like that, you know exactly what he can do, maximize his talents on the team! Or incompetently flub the whole situation, that’s another option.
Depends
If the speculation is true—that KP signed Miller to trade him, then Nate is off this particular hook. And unless Miller is involved in the deal, I’m not sure such a signing is a very ethical thing to do… OTOH, it’s certainly not prohibited.
At any rate, nobody with the Blazers has suggested that Miller was only signed as trade bait—that seems to be the opinion of “other general managers”.
I am Spartacus and I approved this message
by EngineerScotty on Dec 11, 2009 1:57 PM PST up reply actions
If they signed him to be a trade asset...
…wouldn’t they have tried to show that he is a player that still has a ton of value in this league? The Blazers have spent zero time showcasing Andre which means whatever brilliant plan you imagined for KP was still totally screwed up by the coaching staff.
Major coach Nate fail on this one. It is so stupid.
Please no!
This would be a horrible thing to do. For goodness sakes, START MILLER AND TRADE BLAKE!
It’s not rocket science.
Start Miller. Trade Steve Blake.
by twiggs on Dec 11, 2009 1:55 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Statistics are actually an important part of rocket science
and by more than a few statistical measures, Blake has been Miller’s superior.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 11, 2009 1:58 PM PST up reply actions
You can’t just make things up … the numbers were posted on this very website — and they argue the exact opposite.
He means the 'Nate scrappiness rating' and 'Nate "does some things" rating'
Blake is off the chart on those statistic, apparently.
52 + 88 = 140% better team.
by xedubx on Dec 11, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
individually - Miller has been better than Blake (except for defense, apparently)
but Blake makes the team better better than Miller does. Don’t ask me how.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 11, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions
What?
Blake has been worse than Miller by almost any standard other than 3pt%
by upper left corner on Dec 11, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
I know it's hard to believe, but the stats don't lie:
Player Min +/- Off Def Net48 W L Win%
Miller 55% +97 1.11 1.02 +7.8 12 10 54.5
Blake 60% +94 1.11 1.03 +7.0 15 6 71.4
Somehow, even though Blake is inferior in individual stats – the team is better with him on the court vs. Miller. It’s the truth. The Blazers get outscored more often with Miller on the floor than with Blake on the floor. That’s the ultimate bottom line.
It very well could be that Miller has been horribly used. Or, it could be that Miller has not been as good a teammate as he should be.
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 11, 2009 4:44 PM PST up reply actions
That statistic doesn't tell the whole story
The team is better around Blake because better players play around Blake on a consistent measure. This is what STARTING EVERY GAME will do to you. Come on. The statistic you cited was bollocks for the situation.
are they (multiple statitistics)?
Miller gets most of his run with the starters, and his +/- is still better than Blake’s. Ultimately, Miller is a better player and I won’t argue that he isn’t. But there is certainly an argument that his impact on his teammates hasn’t been all that it was projected to be.
82games.com
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 12, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions
I think waaaay too much of the Miller debacle
is being laid at Nate’s feet. I think much of Miller vs. Blake’s minutes/usage has been to allow Roy to feel comfortable and to get into his groove, which you have to admint has been slow coming. Not to mention, in the early part of the season, Blake was outperforming Miller by most advanced metrics, particularly defense and shooting, which is what the starting unit needed from the PG.
Roy was quoted the other day as saying folks had read too much into his early statment about feeling comfortqble with Blake.
He said he didn’t want to play small forward but he was fine starting Miller or Blake.
I think too much blame is being shifted to Roy based an very little substantive evidence.
by upper left corner on Dec 11, 2009 3:10 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I want to believe this...
… But I get the feeling in the game that they don’t exactly support each other on the floor. Maybe it’s Roy and his refusal to play off ball and I just notice it more w/ Miller than other players.
Buck Williams for the hall of fame
Perhaps some of it should be laid at Miller's feet too...
It is not like he has ripped it up when he is out there….
RoadBlazer
the miller signing is clearly not working out. i dont know what its so hard to see that.
Just cause the blazers signed him doesn’t mean its an impeccable signing and only needs to to mature into a wonderful partnership. sometimes things dont work out, they made a gamble and it lost.
thank god, it wasn’t a huge contract otherwise it could have been the kind of singing that kills a team. The Blazers should actually be COMMENDED for keeping the contract low so they could have the insurance of trading him.
its pretty frustrating watching 300 guys collapse on either roy or miller when they drive. im sure they know it, (roy clearly does) and im sure the front office knows it.
What?
clearly not working out
What are you talking about? Nate has never even tried starting Miller with Roy. Miller has outplayed Blake in almost every way possible: TS%, Assist%, Assist/TO ratio, point per minute etc, etc, etc.
If you are going to make a claim like that, I am going to ask you to back it up.
by upper left corner on Dec 11, 2009 3:15 PM PST up reply actions
Stats-wise Bayless should be starting
plus Blake plays better team defense, doubles down well, gets in passing lanes, and switches well, even if it’s on a bigger guy who easily takes him, Miller has a lower defense IQ
Try looking around this site and the web in general
You are apparently among a tiny minority who believes Blake’s should continue to start.
You are right that Bayless has the best per minute stats, but Miller is the guy with the experience and the savvy. I would love to see Bayless getting more time, but he is not ready to run the team full time.
Miller is the guy who was quarterbacking the team defensively during the stretch when they were playing the best team defense. Saying Miller has a “lower defense IQ” strikes me as a baseless claim.
by upper left corner on Dec 11, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
blake4bass plz
Show your support for Greg Oden: Join the get well soon Facebook fan page.
by Starvin' Marvin on Dec 11, 2009 2:18 PM PST reply actions
"Tradeable Asset Theory" makes sense
That’s the only explanation that I can come up with for why Miller hasn’t been starting alongside Roy: KP is planning to move him at the deadline.
If Miller was expected to be here for the duration of his contract, it would behoove Nate to start playing them together from the start, in order to maximize Miller’s impact on the team and best use his talents. But if it’s only a six-month rental, there’s no incentive to seriously incorporate him into the offense.
I believe that the plan for this season was to hammer it inside to Oden and get him comfortable carrying more responsibilities for this team. Obviously his patella didn’t take too well to that plan, so we’re back at square one. But if KP was basically writing off the first half of this season anyway (in preparation for a deadline deal) then this doesn’t change much.
I hope that KP is able to use Andre to help make the pieces fit together better for this team. I don’t have a problem with a poor showing from the team this season, especially after all the injuries, if KP is able to improve this team through a trade.
Interesting theory.
Personally, I don’t put a whole lot of stock in Stein’s report. So far we have heard rumors from Jaynes that Bayless was being shopped. Wojnowski (sp?) was reporting that Miller was out, but he hates KP, so what do you believe? I think the answer is nothing until it is locally sourced by a credible guy like Quick.
Planning to trade Miller would be an explanation for Nate’s inexplicable behavior concerning Blake. But if you were trying to trade Miller, wouldn’t Blake’s terrible play cause you to rethink your plan? If you were planning to trade Miller, why would you undercut his value by using him in such an inconsistent way?
To me, it makes sense to trade the guy who is not now and never will be again a starting quality PG, Steve Blake. He is in the way of the guy who may be our long term answer. We would be crazy to resign him next summer. We should get value for Blake’s expiring contract.
by upper left corner on Dec 11, 2009 4:28 PM PST up reply actions
If this is the running theory...
They have completely botched it by making Andre look like an incompetent when he has played consistently at his last few stops. Giving him consistent minutes and making him look like a guy who could play along side other great players would be better for the Blazers to get trade value.
If this is the way the Blazers management postures it, that’s complete spin.
Get Mills in playing shape...
and trade Blake & Miller!!
If he is such a tradeable asset, why did no other team besides us and NY and Philly (with a low-ball offer) even try to get him?
P.S.: Raptors fans are looking to trade Hedo for a net of used balls, too. So that probably wouldn’t have worked much better either, especially on such a big deal that becomes very hard to move the older the player gets.
by Norsktroll on Dec 11, 2009 2:24 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
and next season Andre is an expiring contract. nice chip.
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Dec 11, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
a fair point
Though there also weren’t a lot of teams with the money to sign Miller.
Off the top of my head, I cannot think of a team that is dying for Miller. The Nets certainly could have used him while Harris was injured. Philly could have used him after Williams got hurt but before the Iverson signing. I think he’d actually work pretty well in Charlotte, but I don’t see what they have to offer the Blazers. Maybe the Pacers? They have a small glut of marginal PFs and Cs.
Not with cap space, but a few teams still had their MLE left. That would have been enough to get him when moving first.
Or Sessions, who is a very similar player and younger, but nobody tried until the Wolves moved forward and snagged him for so little that it’s almost insulting the Bucks didn’t match. But they just are in severe cost cutting.
Yet the reality reamins that we haven't even given Miller and Roy to properly play together
Trade Blake or stay put, period.
Completely agree! I think KP is too ethical to sign a player just to trade him in December.
I think if Nate wasn’t such a control monger he would have started Miller and allowed Miller to run the floor. I just want Nate to go away somewhere. Maybe he and Blake could take their families off to some nice island and relax….leave us alone! Actually, I like Blake..am not fond of Nate. It’s not Blake’s fault Nate is starting him. Blake would be fine on the bench.bring him in when we need 3pt plays…
I'm sorry, could you explain this version of "ethics"
that KP would be violating by trading Miller?
Come on you gotta listen unto me,
lay off that whiskey and let that cocaine be. ~Johnny Cash
by HurraKane212 on Dec 11, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions
but who wants him?
and who has something decent they’re willing to part with in return?
I can’t see Andre getting traded until next season.
I'm just not crazy about player nick names...
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Dec 11, 2009 2:30 PM PST reply actions
You all are saying trade this trade that!
First off we think we have way more value than we do… Dont get me wrong I love our players, but we think to highly of most of them. Just because we like them and their game does not mean any other GM does. Who could we even get? I saw something about Butler, but could we trade with maybe the Knicks get Nate Robinson and maybe Eddy Curry? Even though he is a fatty he can fill the middle.
Too soon to throw in the towel on Miller....
He and Roy will co-exist. It’s just taking LONGER than expected. You can’t place the blame at one persons feet, they are all grown men, and supposed to be
" professionals " .
I’m with superfly, if any one goes , it should be Webster.
He has his chance and isn’t producing those 3’s as needed.
Webster for Bass and let Dante hold down the 3 until Nic is back.
If lebron tries to show his dance moves tonight, I hope Howard puts him on his back hard. His show is getting old fast.
Go Blazers !!!!
"That's just how I get down"........ Andre Miller
For what?
I’m willing to move any player to get value, but I don’t see what anyone would trade us that would help us. The only unsettled position is PG, SF is Batum’s job, Oden is our C, Aldridge and Roy hold their spots. PG is the only position that isn’t settled.
Really, and I hate to say it, I think Rudy and Miller should be packaged together, neither will succeed alongside Roy at this time. Hopefully with this we could pry away a stud PG to complement Roy.
A stud PG isn't going to compliment Roy
On the contrary, a stud PG is going to demand the ball and expect to play… I don’t know… like a point guard and expect that the SG is going to play off the ball more often than not.
As it says in that post...
Brandon Roy needs a Mo Williams type PG
Someone who can shoot the ball consistently and is a legit second (or third) option.
He doesn’t need another floor-leader who needs the ball the do anything, just a shooter who makes it so nobody else draws double teams (which Andre Miller is failing at and Steve Blake isn’t exactly living up to at the moment)
Not saying we SHOULD trade Miller, but if we could do a deal...
in which we trade ‘Dre for Speedy Claxton’s expiring deal + Anthony Morrow (the deal would work as of Dec. 15), should we do it? Should/would GS?
Miller: a legit PG, something the Warriors have lacked for a while, who’d probably do a great job getting the ball to their shooters and athletes.
Morrow: a great 3-point shooter, but also a good mid-range shooter (something Rudy rarely utilizes). Not a great ballhandler or defender, though. Far more of a dependable shot than Marty or Steve at this point. I think BRoy’s slashing would give Morrow a ton of open looks. The drafting of Stephen Curry may render Morrow superfluous in GS.
Claxton: Purely a cap thing. GS may want to hold on to him for that reason.
Let’s be honest: We’re not going to get a great player for Miller. We also aren’t going to get much of ANYTHING for Blake or Outlaw right now. This is the kind of deal that I think might be realistic.
Hit it. Yes he did. Ohhhh yeah.
by Badalona Baddie on Dec 11, 2009 3:05 PM PST reply actions
This would require letting Patty Mills go BTW.
Hit it. Yes he did. Ohhhh yeah.
by Badalona Baddie on Dec 11, 2009 3:06 PM PST up reply actions
what could we get for Nate?
that way we can keep Miller, start him, dump Blake and bring Bayless off the bench.
Nate's injured right now. That makes him pretty hard to move.
Hit it. Yes he did. Ohhhh yeah.
by Badalona Baddie on Dec 11, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions
do you think we could get
Stan VG for him? Maybe if we packed him with Bayno.
can anyone tell me what Monty's philosophy would be as a head coach?
I don’t really know anything about him. Defensive minded? Run and gunner?? Nate disciple??
by blacknoiseNW on Dec 11, 2009 4:47 PM PST up reply actions
For What? Response...
I agree with you that if we trade Miller and Rudy we could get something of good value in return. I would say go for it as long as who we get in return can shoot the long ball, cause since sergio’s departure that is all Rudy is good for is the long ball… I would like to trade with a team that has talent but is under achieving this year. Would Caron Butler work and maybe Nick Young? Maybe Nate Robinson and Eddy Curry? Maybe with the Chris Paul rumors we could pry him away from the Hornets… Bayless, Miller, Rudy? I just want something to happen. Pritchard is the king of the draft, but has done nothing to improve our team when we need it most during the season. DO NOT GO AFTER SHANE BATTIER.
what about going after Rudy Gay & Conely
their salaries are at 7 mill
Honestly
I think we need a few more 20 year old point guards. Perhaps we could pick up some injured forwards to stash until next season too.
We needed a 4/5 this summer.
Short and long term. That need is even greater now. Orlando has two unused big men. And they need a point guard. C’mon.
by Pooh Richardson on Dec 11, 2009 3:09 PM PST reply actions
Utah aint trading him
to a division rival. Plus, he’d want to start, so he’d push LA to the bench. That’s an expensive backup right there.
by Pooh Richardson on Dec 11, 2009 3:11 PM PST up reply actions
Or start him and LMA
Move Pryz to the bench and play Boozer at the 5
Boozer is a turrrrrible shot blocker
and defender. That’s why Millsap helps them so much. LMA is a better 5, but that’s not saying much.
by Pooh Richardson on Dec 11, 2009 3:16 PM PST up reply actions
true, but we only need him for a while
Oden comes back and we have our 5 back, plus Bayless develops because he gets some minutes
Blake's a duecher
Why would we ever trade Miller when we have Blake on the team? And why the hell is Bayless not playing more? Grrrrrr.
Start Miller
learn what you have
this is the year when the team should find out what the young players, Bayless, Cunningham, Pendergraph, can do
It should be noted that
Pendergraph was picked in almost the exact same draft slot as Brandon Bass (very early second round). I seriously doubt that the Blazers are going to trade for a far more expensive player of the same skill set when they might have something good (and cheaper) in Pendergraph. He will get his shot, and soon.
Hit it. Yes he did. Ohhhh yeah.
by Badalona Baddie on Dec 11, 2009 3:18 PM PST up reply actions
I'd argue that Bass is much more of a proven commodity with more solid skill set
Also, I’m not Pendy would hold up in backup 4/5 position. He seems a bit undersized even versus 4s, let alone 5s in the league. Plus, second round is much more of a crap shoot for draft position argument. More often, they do not make the team or disappear after couple years. A solid contributor like Bass in the second round is more of an anomaly than pattern.
Nothing wrong with getting Pendy some burn, but we haven’t really gave up on the season just yet. Bass for Blake would be good for this team.
52 + 88 = 140% better team.
Perfect!
Then we can trade for Nate Robinson, draft Tajuan Porter, and change the name to the Portland Oompa Loompas! Steve Blake will be our new center.
Just made my day!
I am all for it, perhaps we can get Nellie up here to run them.
Hmmm.
Oompa Loompa Loompa-de-doo
I’ve got a perfect puzzle for you
Oompa Loompa Loompa-de-dee
If you are wise you’ll listen to meee
What do you do with a guard who can scrap
And hit open threes, but elsewhere he’s… crud
How many minutes, what should be his role?
When he can’t drive to the hole?
(Or pass well or play de-ee-fe-ense)
Oompa Loompa Loompa-de-dah
If you chase loose balls you will go far
And you’ll live in happiness to
Just like the Oompa Loompas Loompa-de-do!
Or something like that.
I am Spartacus and I approved this message
by EngineerScotty on Dec 11, 2009 3:34 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Here's a trade
that would work under the cap, and I’m sure the coach would like. Click here for the details… :)
I am Spartacus and I approved this message
We are going to have to move a PG
By the end of the month we will have 4 pg’s. I say move miller and rudy (cause you know he’s going to go sooner or later).
I say that they have to start Miller before they can trade him
Its one thing to say he cant play with Roy, its another to say it after we see it happen. They have to start Miller and see how that works, if it doesnt, sure trade him. At this point, I dont think a trade is gonna “save” our season. It might even make things worse.
But who knows, a couple months ago I thought we had what it took to contend for a champioship. Goes to show what I know.
The Dude: Hey, careful, man, there's a beverage here!
by cavejunctionblazer on Dec 11, 2009 3:33 PM PST reply actions
It's clear that Miller isn't right for this town.
We’re the microbrew capital of the US. We don’t need that Milwaukee swill.
I am Spartacus and I approved this message
How about Beno Udrih?
6 years in the league – good pct. 3-point shooter. Might be movable with Kevin Martin coming back. Makes about $6 mill /year
McMillan would like that.
He’d have two Blakes. Udrih would excel in Nate’s offensive system (drive to the stantion and drive back out until the shot clock is under 5). I don’t see how that helps us.
by Pooh Richardson on Dec 11, 2009 3:42 PM PST up reply actions
Me neither. If we want to go for players from that region, I would rather do a trade with the Bucks.
Blake, Mills, Travis, cash/second round pick for Ukic, Ilyasova (maybe Alexander or another of their flood of forwards, but Ilyasova would be worth a lot more), Thomas. Fixes our big men situation for this year, gives us a player who can play 3/4 and grabs rebounds and shoots threes, and a backup PG with some potential albeit not so big that he wouldn’t accept being a backup PG (once had 22 and 10 for Toronto though).
Roko Ukic makes Goran Dragic look good, while Ersan Ilyasova moves slower than molasses ...
in January. Perhaps I’m being too hard on those two guys, but I’ve got no use for either one of them.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
Udrih (at this year level) is far better than Blake IMO
He will fit perfectly with Roy, but Portland don’t need Martin.
Rudy minutes FTW
Beno Udrih is way, way too expensive for his average production.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
Euro's
When can we bring in Freeland & Kop?
Not before next season. Likely longer.
And all of them, especially Claver but also Freeland, would want some kind of guarantee to get minutes on about Rudy’s level. I could see that happening if e.g. Joel and Travis would leave to other teams in the offseason.
appreciate the clarification
not the answer i was hoping for, still appreciated non the less.
Stein.
Do you have any proof, or is this your gut feeling like normal?
*Unless KP has a secret plan that makes this statement incorrect.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
To anyone that blames Miller for our poor play...
You need to look at the facts. He never got a shot starting, outside of the dumb 3 guard line-up that pushed Roy to play out of position and still kept the horrible Blake on the court. Even with those 2 huge things working against him, he still managed us to a record of 6-1. Miller was never given a chance to succeed and I wish we could see what he would do as a starter in a normal 2 guard line-up. His resume clearly says good things would happen. Most of all, I don’t know how much more I can take watching Blake start and we all know if Miller goes, there is no way Nate will take Blake out of the starting line-up for Bayless.
If want to trade Miller...
Call Orlando, add Joel and get Marcin Gortat and Brandon Bass.
But I will say, keep MIller, pack Bayless, Joel & (add an injured forward here) and get Gortat & Bass.
Rudy minutes FTW
Why do people keep thinking Andre Miller would fit on the Orlando Magic?
http://www.coachesclipboard.net/4Out1InMotionOffense.html
http://www.coachesclipboard.net/41ZoneOffense.html
A 4-outside/1-inside spread offense would be one of the worst schemes for a pure point with a mediocre jump shot like Miller.
Dear Paul Allen:
Fire Nate McMillan & hire Jeff Van Gundy.
Sincerely,
AK1984
Yeah but he would get Dwight some niiiiiiice buckets.
Oden fan for life
by dario argento on Dec 12, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
I almost want him to be traded there cuz I like the guy and I think he will never flourish on a Nate team.
Steve Blake will never not play huge minutes here. We could get Chris Paul, and he would post 18 points, 8 assists, and 2 steals in 20 minutes off the bench, while Steve posts crap numbers, and when asked why he comes off the bench, Nate would say “Well Steve does some good things for us, he scraps, sets the tone. We really like Chris coming off the bench and giving a spark to that second unit.”
Oden fan for life
by dario argento on Dec 12, 2009 9:59 AM PST up reply actions
What would be pathetic...
is if this organzation allows a “top 50” point guard (i.e., a scrub) like Steve Blake to remain with the Blazers, while dealing an 11-year solid, experienced, proven point guard…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
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
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Video: JaVale McGee displays his peerless court awareness
- Dirk Nowitzki doesn’t think he should be an All-Star
- Mikhail Prokhorov promises to sell the Nets if he runs Russia
- Tony Parker handles the Spurs’ rodeo road trip with food and booze
- Kobe Bryant on someone eclipsing his 81-point game: ‘One day it will happen’
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
