Getting rid of Miller will be hard

If, as I remember seeing somewhere, opposing GMs are right to think that the Blazers never intended to keep Miller but signed him just to have a chip to trade, and also if, he's not going to be happy here, we're going to want to trade him. But to whom? The trouble is that most of the league either has a young PG who they'll want to see more of or is wanting to dump salary, or both. The team most in need of a PG is probably the Sixers, and they let Miller go in the first place.

There's a reason he was available to be signed in the first place.

Does this mean he's a bad player? No, he's still a very good player - no Iverson/Marbury/Steve Francis he. But there just might not be a place for him in this bad economy. Let's hope he can realize that and throw himself into being the best bench player he can be.

 

Miller is extemely overpaid and has no track record of success in terms of winning in the playoffs. He is on his 5th team in 11 seasons, yet he's one of the top ten PGs during that time frame statistically. That's a red flag. He wears out his welcome, or so it appears on a cursory look.

He's here for the next year and a half, IMO. What is the upside for any team taking him on at this point, considering he is 33 years-old and has been benched in Portland while getting $7 million/per?

 

Hard to move? I doubt it. Hard to move and actually get a really nice player in return? Yeah that might be tough.

He has a couple of positives going for him, he's probably got the potential to once again by a pretty highly efficient player in an uptempo team (the Knicks were reportedly interested in him, but not his ten million dollar per year contract demands). He'd probably be a good fit for a team that doesn't feature a ball dominant wing player, but instead features guards and wings that like to score and shoot.

I won't pretend to know which GMs might have an interest in him, but his contract isn't horrible (thank God KP kept it down to two guaranteed years and only about 7 million per.) and he's shown himself to be a highly productive player in the right system. But if we're talking trade don't get too carried away thinking all-stars or former all-stars, it would probably be for nothing more than a role player if it was a straight swap. If you are thinking bigger, then KP is going to have to package Miller along with at least one or two intriguing prospects to get real value back.

 

Some potential playoff team is 1 injury away from making Miller very valuable. Miller's contract also allows us to combine him with another small contract/very talented player (Rudy , Bayless) to get something damn good in return. Again I'm disappointed it hasn't worked with Roy and Miller but it does nothing to our championship hopes.

 

One wonders if the Magic would be interested. Who do they have that we would want (Micheal Pietrus)? I have no idea. But I think you could add them to that list, the way Nelson seems to go down all the time.

 

Bass+Barnes for Miller/Mills

Though I doubt they do it.

 

I was thinking the same thing. But what if Blake goes down? Then you are stuck with JB and . . . ??

 

I'd do that in a heartbeat -- which helps explain why they wouldn't

 

Roy?

 

No we have Patty "Chris Paul" Mills.

 

IMO- teams that are struggling like Washington (Butler), Charlotte (G.Wallace), and Memphis (Gay) might consider dumping a good player if they can get a player with a shorter contract and some high potential players back in return.

 

wizards have arenas i doubt that happens least with miller, memphis has conley which they seem to like somewhat, i could see charoltte but im not really sure if they would give up Gwallace for Miller and (insert rookie/sophmore)

 

In other words, Miller can't be traded for equal value.

A bad signing by KP, IMO, and benching him even though he ate up cap space seeemingly validates my POV.

 

Give me a f-ing brake. I have yet to see a quote that said Roy refused to play with Miller. As far as I can tell Roy wanted to go back to playing SG which left Nate with a choice of PG's. He chose Blake big surprise........!

 

Not sure what you mean. My assumption is, I should assume because Miller is no longer starting that it Roy's fault? I don't buy it, in my opinion it was more about going back to his natural position (SG) and Nate chose his PG to team with Roy. Something else to consider is Nates love affair with making sure that the two units are balanced instead of playing the best 5 players together.

 

What about trading Blake and Webster for Hinrich? Gives Chicago an expiring contract and good young player. Gives us an upgrade at PG that fits better with Roy. Hinrich is a tenacious defender who can help keep perimeter guys from getting our bigs in foul trouble. Then we use Miller to get a SF?

 

And then ... We have Hinrich and Miller and no small forward at all? Yikes.

 

Hey, I didn't say it was flawless, lol. I think we then complete another trade Miller and? for a SF.