MIN - CLE

[shrink]

OK, I know you guys might be exhausted with Mike Miller trades, but here's one from the Trade Boards that many posters think is a good deal for both teams. I like Mike Miller here, but he is a perfect fit in CLE, and this is an offer that's so financially lucrative, I'd grit my teeth and agree.

CLE GETS: Mike Miller + Mark Madsen + Brian Cardinal

MIN GETS: Wally Szcerbiak (exp) + Lance Allred (exp) + $3.57 mil TPE + 2009 CLE 1st


MIN OUT: Mike Miller $9,128,575 $9,880,957
MIN OUT: Mark Madsen $2,630,000 $2,840,000
MIN OUT: Brian Cardinal $6,300,000 $6,750,000

MIN IN: Wally Szczerbiak $13,775,000
MIN IN: Lance Allred $711,517

2008-09: MIN SAVES: $3,572,058
2009-10: MIN SAVES: $19,470,957
------------------------------------------------
TOTAL SAVINGS: $23,043,015

For me, the financial ramifications and the pick are too great to say ""no." This deal would complete our one year financial turn-around, removing every bad contract on the team, and leave us in 2009 with

Al Jefferson $12,000,000 $13,000,000 $14,000,000 $15,000,000
Ryan Gomes 4,017,500
Kevin Love $3,401,040
Randy Foye $3,575,761
Corey Brewer $2,916,120
Craig Smith $2,300,000
Sebastian Telfair $2,500,000 $2,700,000
Rodney Carney $2,539,936
---------------------------------------
2009: $32.3 mil

+ 2009 picks
+ Rashad McCants ($3,644,595 qualifying offer)

1. The salary cap is $58.68, and we could be $20 mil under it. People worry that losing Mike Miller means FA's won't want to come just to play with Al Jefferson? What if we made TWO offers in 2009?

Here's a great link for the 2009 and 2010 Free Agents:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/stor ... ents-09-10

At a minimum, this deal gives us the 2009 cap space to make Bynum a max deal offer next Summer, and force the Lakers to match. It may be unlikely we get him, but I'm not going to completely ignore the possibility that Kobe will alienate Bynum over the next year. He didn't endear himself last season by publicly mocking Jerry Buss for refusing to trade Bynum to get Kobe some help.

2. This deal would give us the flexibility to make offers in the less-competitive 2009 free agency. We'd have enough cap space to beat out other teams offer of the MLE, or make a trade for straight cap space to a struggling team during the season. The worst case scenario, where we get no one, would land us with the same amount of cap space in the 2010 free agency anyway.

3. I like Mike. You like Mike. We all like Mike. But its hard to honestly say that with the development of this team, he's worth $23 mil which we'd save by making this trade.

4. Sure we get potentially a FIFTH pick in the 2009 draft, but I would hope we could use some of them with a team that wants to rebuild after missing the play-offs. I'm imagining an offer for a center where MIN says, "so how many 1sts do we need to throw in here?"

5. The Wolves get a usable $3.57 mil TPE this season, and the financial flexibility under the lux to use it in trade.

6. Part of the reason MIN fans like Mike Miller is that he wants to be here, and Wally seemed to like being here as well (though he and KG sometimes didn't see eye-to-eye). Allred's a young center on a min deal.

They say everyone has his price, and this much cap savings is mine. I like having the financial power to flex out muscles in 2009 if we see a player we want, or to be able to make a trade when other teams start to fail, and want to trade a big center for cap space. I don't dislike Wally. And I don't mind the added trade power a nice TPE and a 1st can provide. Yeah, Mike Miller is such a good fit in CLE that it might make them favorites to win the East, but I don't care. I think this package is more than what Mike Miller is worth, and I'd take this deal.

[Klomp]

This is a very interesting trade. Obviously its a step down in talent, but its a major improvement financially. A chance to be 20 million dollars under the cap is huge. Maybe Kobe would opt out and we could sign him (end of wet dream).

[Blue Wolf]

Shrink, I like this deal a lot for all the reasons you laid out and for the fact that not having Mike Miller on the squad means we're a worse team and we'll be less likely to have to give up our 1st to the Clippers this year.

The flip side of course is that having a guy like Miller around will be better for our young guys in the long term -- as opposed to having a fairly one-dimensional, on-his-last-legs type guy like Szczerbiak as the "veteran mentor."

The reality here, however, is that no matter how good this deal is for us -- I think McHale likes Miller too much and that Miller is too big a part of his rebuild plan (ala Terry Porter and Sam Mitchell).

Again, really like it a lot but doubt it would happen.

[shrink]

I believe that a successful trade is not one where one team rips the other, and perhaps ruins future trade negotiations, but one where both teams benefit from the exchange. All teams have different needs, regarding position and the make-up of their team, finance, and how quickly their time frame is for success.

This is just economics, but in common terms, these different levels of need adjust the relative value a player will have on each team. While a player may be a good fit on a team, there are 29 other teams out there where he might be a little better fit. Both teams benefit if they can trade assets that are more helpful on another team for ones that are a better fit on their own.

Let me say flat out that Mike Miller is a good fit on our team. I like his age (27), where he's young enough to connect with our youth, but old enough to provide some veteran leadership. I like his position flexibility, and even a willingness to play sixth man, because the wolves don't know which of their youth will succeed, and which will falter, and Miller can be moved to accomodate this. I like that Miller wants to be here. And I agree with other posters that Mike Miller makes the team better now, and he may make the Wolves more attractive to free agency by adding wins.

However, with all that being said, Mike Miller has even other qualities that a team like CLE would compensate us for. His style of game is a perfect fit for the Cavs. His salary is OK, but not great, but for CLE, it's not as expensive. They've sunk a lot of salary into the team already, and a trade for Miller makes all of the money they've already paid in salaries more effective, because the other players are more effective. And of course, Mike Miller produces wins and has the potential to put them in the Finals. The extra wins he generate for us are far less valuable.

I know its hard to get excited about trading a good player money, but this is a huge amount of money, and I don't think we could get a better offer than this. It gives us financial flexibility to sign two big free agents, or make trades with the cap space, youth and picks. In my mind, this would put us in 2009 in a similar situation to Boston last year.

Al Jefferson .. Paul Pierce (One star in place)
2009 MIN #5 .. 2007 BOS #5 (Ray Allen)
Gobs of cap space + youth + 4 1st rd picks ... Ratlif's expiring + youth + 2 1st rd picks (KG)

I'd have a hard time saying goodbye to Mike Miller, and I'd probably ask him to keep in mind the possibility of coming back here as a FA in two years. In the meantime, we could make a splash like the the team that had the NBA's biggest one-season turn-around ever.

[john2jer]

I hate Wally and I love Mike Miller, but I like the trade in itself, but I fear the losing it would bring would sour the players we have.

Losing breeds losing.

Even still, we'd have to convince people to come to Minnesota to take our cap space, who's going to want to come here?

[Devilzsidewalk]

I don't like the trade, basically sets us up to overpay for someone in free agency on the level of Mike Miller

[C.lupus]

I don't like the trade, basically sets us up to overpay for someone in free agency on the level of Mike Miller

+1

If we could turn Miller into Bynum, that would be sweet. But, really, what are the odds of that actually happening?

[deeney0]

I agree with Devilz and C.lupus - Wolves need to hold on to what they have. There's little difference between having MM and $10 million in cap space in 2010 vs. No MM and $20 million in 2010.

[shrink]

Cap space is more valuable than just a chance to sign free agents. In trade, its like a super-expiring .. instant cap space where you don't have to wait a year for the financial benefit. In recent years, cap space has been traded for:

Cap space + pick = Jason Richardson
Cap Space + 2nd = Marcus Camby
Cap Space = Kurt Thomas (expiring) + two late 1sts

Heck, he got Carney + protected first for just a tiny amount of cap space!


Its hard to predict what we could get with that much cap space. It has a lot of uses, but maybe the best for us would be to get a well-paid big from a team that bombs out, and wants to go in another direction. Its hard to predict which teams will fail this season for trades in the summer of 2009, or fail in the beginning of 2009 before the Trade Deadline, since teams fortunes turn on a dime in the NBA, but maybe ..

Okafor for cap space and picks?
Baron + Kaman for cap space
Hmm, BOS is my favorite to win a ring next year, but an injury would crush them, and there is a decent chance they'll be too old in 2009-10 .. maybe we bring KG back?

Anyway, I'm sure there will be other opportunities, but we just don't know where they are. As the team with $20 mil more cap space than any other team, it'd have lots of value, especially before the 2010 Free Agency. It doesn't just have to be for free agents.

[jack612]

Let me say flat out that Mike Miller is a good fit on our team. I like his age (27), where he's young enough to connect with our youth, but old enough to provide some veteran leadership.

He was born 2/19/80 (one day younger than me ), so he's 28 and closing in on 29. Not a huge difference, but I definitely wouldn't call him a young player.

[deeney0]

I'm not trying to play down cap space, but the quality of the players you listed is Mike Miller - why make a trade when we already HAVE Mike Miller. At least give them a shot at the court.

[Devilzsidewalk]

plus the Wolves want a 3 point shooter to spread the court, and Mike Miller may be the best in that area and he fits a positional need and seems like he'll be a good chemistry match. I don't really see the Wolves getting better value for the money, its hard to upgrade. Have to see the oncourt product first, but in theory he's a perfect fit for Al Jefferson. Maybe he'll struggle on defense, but I think he'll win his matchups more often than not. He may not be a top 5 SF, but he could be top 12 with Minnesota, we have to give this a chance, there's a lot to be said about pairing a deadly 3 point shooter with a deadly low post scorer, thats the ideal combination.

[Basti]

I'd say we better wait for such deal to happen until at least one or two months into the season. if MM doesn't work out with our squad (which is relatively unlikely) I'd say we propose this deal to Cleveland unless they got a better deal before we offer it.

[shrink]

plus the Wolves want a 3 point shooter to spread the court, and Mike Miller may be the best in that area and he fits a positional need and seems like he'll be a good chemistry match. I don't really see the Wolves getting better value for the money, its hard to upgrade.

Remember, its not better value for Mike Miller's $9.8 mil (and only for 2009-10). It's better value for $19.47 mil, since we'd move Cardinal and Madsen, who will produce virtually nothing on this club.

I think that we can do better than Miller for $19.47 mil.

[IcemanMN]

Mike Miller is too important to this team's development to trade him now. First of all, he is one of the best outside shooters in the league. Why would you trade that for a better chance at a future free agent? Second, trading for Miller is a slap in the face to Rashad "I really don't have to try hard in order to get minutes" McCants. The Wolves need McCants to put up or shut up, and competition for minutes might actually work. And third, Miller really wants to play here. We need our best players to be playing for this team, not playing for their next contract at a different location.

[deeney0]

plus the Wolves want a 3 point shooter to spread the court, and Mike Miller may be the best in that area and he fits a positional need and seems like he'll be a good chemistry match. I don't really see the Wolves getting better value for the money, its hard to upgrade.

Remember, its not better value for Mike Miller's $9.8 mil (and only for 2009-10). It's better value for $19.47 mil, since we'd move Cardinal and Madsen, who will produce virtually nothing on this club.

I think that we can do better than Miller for $19.47 mil.

Or they can just wait until they each expire, not resign Cardinal but resign Mike Miller and.... voila.

[shrink]

plus the Wolves want a 3 point shooter to spread the court, and Mike Miller may be the best in that area and he fits a positional need and seems like he'll be a good chemistry match. I don't really see the Wolves getting better value for the money, its hard to upgrade.

Remember, its not better value for Mike Miller's $9.8 mil (and only for 2009-10). It's better value for $19.47 mil, since we'd move Cardinal and Madsen, who will produce virtually nothing on this club.

I think that we can do better than Miller for $19.47 mil.

Or they can just wait until they each expire, not resign Cardinal but resign Mike Miller and.... voila.

At a minimum, it makes us worse this year, and gives us the financial freedom to be better next year -- not two years from now. I like Mike Miller, but he is no NBA superstar. He's a great shooting glue-man who can do a little of everything, but he is not a franchise changing player for Timberwolves. For $19.5 mil, we can do better. Why close the door to that flexibility, especially when we get two other trade pieces (TPE and a 1st), while we save $20 million dollars?

He might get us 5-6 more wins this year. Is that worth it?

[deeney0]

We haven't even seen these guys take the court yet. There's something to be said for keeping players together. The Wolves have played the roster-shuffle game for a couple of season now, and they've finally got something viable. The key is knowing when to stop - which is now. Let the players grow together, and the cap space comes at the perfect time.

[LBusiness]

I really like the positive feed back from most of you guys regarding this trade offer.

I would of never thought Elton Brand would end up in Philly,and right now I veiw you guys the same way
yeah it's easy for me to sweet talk you guys due to are interest in Miller,but that aside, with out him you guys have a nice young core.

Al , K love and Gomes are more than enough to get guys to want to play for Sota, witch is similar to Cle, in terms of weather being the only hindrance why players wouldn't come.

Like I stated in a previous post on your forum," you guys are deep as Portland" before Miller..

Wally is a great asset for a young rebuilding team,even better he is already well known by the fans, he understands the culture,the finacial benefit goes without saying and you guys know better than us that Wally can shoot the ball.

I love this trade for both teams and I would offer Pavlovic as well, who is still developing at age 24 and has all the tools to be a Mike Miller with more athleticism, thing is we don't have the time to wait for him.

Sasha brings NBA Finals experience to a young wolves team,and he is not guaranteed for the 2009 season, so he is in a contract year.

The last time he was in a contract year, he cracked the line up as our starting 2 guard and the Cavs went to the Championship.


These are his stats.


Year Team GMs MPG FG% FT% 3PT% RPG APG SPG BPG PPG
03-04 UTA 79 14.4 39.6 77.4 27.1 2.0 0.8 0.5 0.2 4.8
04-05 CLE 65 13.3 43.5 68.8 38.5 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.1 4.8
05-06 CLE 53 15.3 41.0 65.3 36.5 1.5 0.5 0.4 0.1 4.5
06-07 CLE 67 22.9 45.3 78.7 40.5 2.4 1.6 0.8 0.3 9.0

[skorff26]

I like this deal, since we move cardinal and madsen as well and like others have been saying, we save 19 million for next year without miller, madsen, and cardinal. Madsen and Cardinal are maybe worth the minimum, and miller is not worth 19 million a year; thus we come out ahead. Also, we get a 1st round pick which in years past has been worth 3 million dollars. So, we save 22 million dollars for next year.

Also, with this trade, we can commit a year to developing players. We could play Love and Jefferson significantly more minutes together and see if they would gel. We could give Brewer lots of minutes to see if he is a quality player or not. We also could give Foye a whole year to become our team's leader at PG and to run the offense and to learn from the mistakes that he would make.

Next year, we could make a play for Danny Granger, Andrew Bynum , Carlos Boozer, or some other free agent. If we would offer the max to Bynum, it would force the Lakers to either a) go into the luxury tax which they don't want to do or b) let us sign Bynum

Or we could do as someone else stated as and use our cap space to gain future assets. Lots of teams would want to make a player for Boozer, and we could absorb a contract that would expire in 2010 and pick up draft picks or something else... examples Maybe taking mobley, thomas, gordon, our 1st back from the clippers for cap space so they could sign boozer; or taking a player from some team so they avoid the luxury tax threshold.

There is some many things that we could do if we had an extra 19 million dollars next year and an extra 1st round pick. Minnesota would probably still miss the playoffs with Miller; thus I'd rather trade him and get some extra cap room to be creative.