Miller to the Cavs .. with TWO firsts?

[shrink]

I think the traditional Cav deal maybe carries 1/3 support among Wolves fans, though Cav fans seem to be getting less convinced about the deal with Miller's lower numbers on the Wolves. The deal is:

Mike Miller + Brian Cardinal + Mark Madsen for Wally Szcerbiak + Terrence Kinsey/Lorenzen Wright + CLE 1st + TPE.

Now people debate on whether we can use the cap space this generates in 2009 for legitimate help, whether it can be traded, or whether we should hold onto Cardinal and Madsen until next year when they become more valuable expirings. Those are all legitimate points.

--------------------------------------------------

However, as I was looking at other deals, it occured to me that while I have always been saying "valuable TPE," and most people probably ignored it, I discovered where that TPE can be extremely valuable. Denver.

Denver is clearly trying to get under the lux, and has taken great strides with the Iverson trade, and most blatantly, trading Camby straight-up for cap space. However, while they've cleared $14 mil, they are still just short .. about $3 mil over the lux. And as we all know, that means they pay the $3 mil in salary, $3 more in lux penalties, and they miss out on their lux share of about $2 mil. That $3 mil contract costs them $8 mil. Chucky Atkins costs about that, and he's scored points once since Dec 13th as their third PG. If Atkins had value on the court before, adding Billups made it vanish.

Unfortunately for DEN, aside from MEM's cap space, nobody has a TPE big enough to trade them, and the cap room to do it without going over the lux themselves. Our trade would create a TPE that could meet their needs.

DEN is 21-12, and is tied for 7th in the NBA, meaning right now, their pick would be around 23-24. Late picks generally get sold for $3 mil, so trading the pick for the TPE would be clearing $8 mil. We could expect cash to be included (let's say $2 mil). However, I would personally prefer foregoing the cash, and trading it for their 2010 1st, with protections similar to MIA's (Top 14 prot in 2010, Top 10 in 2011, Top 6 2012, etc.)

The overall trade would look like:

MIN GIVES: Mike Miller (2 yr) + Cardinal (2 yr) + Madsen (2 yr)
MIN GETS: Szcerbiak (exp) + Atkins (exp) + Kinsey/Wright (exp) +CLE 1st + DEN 2010 1st (prot)

CLE GIVES: Szcerbiak (exp) + Kinsey/Wright (exp) + CLE 1st + $3.5 mil TPE
CLE GETS: MIN GIVES: Mike Miller (2 yr) + Cardinal (2 yr) + Madsen (2 yr)

DEN GIVES: Atkins (exp) + 2010 1st (protected)
DEN GETS: $3.5 mil TPE

(I understand I'm using shorthand on the actual nature of TPE's, but I wrote it this way just to give you the idea)

* Now we could actually get some use out of Atkins and Wally this year, but there's additional benefits for many of you.

* In Kinsey/Wright, we finally get someone we can buy out cheaply, to create a roster spot to give Sims or Chris Richard that January call-up.

* We create cap space for next year, so we can go fishing for Marvin Williams.

* We create enough salary cap to go after free agents, trade the cap space, etc .. and the worst downside if we find no one is that we are still in the 2010 cap space plan.

* We save $19 mil in checks for Mr. Taylor (if you're out there reading)

* We get two 1sts for our troubles.

All for a 16 month rental of Mike Miller, who we should try to get back in 2010.

So what do you think? Did I convince anyone else? Please vote to let me know.

[invno1]

When is the trade deadline? Millers value will be higher mid-season than end of season. When does Jaun Howard come off the books is Hudson still owed?

[shrink]

When is the trade deadline? Millers value will be higher mid-season than end of season. When does Jaun Howard come off the books is Hudson still owed?

Trade Deadline is 3 PM ET on February 19th, 2009.

Mike Miller has the most value to a contender, so they'd probably want him as soon as possible. On the other hand, attaching Cardinal and Madsen to the deal might make a team want to wait until closer to the trade deadline.

Howard and Hudson's money (together, about $10 mil), also comes off the books in 2009.

[4ho5ive]

I would do it. The Cavs seem to be getting more and more reluctant about taking Cards and MadDog though. Miller needs to come back and light it up.

I think ultimately, Miller isnt doing anything major for us in the short term, or long term. Once we have an actual team in 2010 though, we should let him know that we are going to consider him heavily when that FA draft class comes along.

[the_bruce]

I waiver on the original deal quite a bit. Mike miller seems to really like this team, but who wouldn't prefer going to a contender and playing with LBJ?

But this deal is a no brainer. I'd do it in a heartbeat. The best part is Atkins isn't fully guarenteed next season. I think? This opens up enough cap space to offer Marvin Williams the contract everyone seems to want to give and see if the hawks match.

e.g:
Al\Love\Williams\Brewer\Foye
...and all these assets to boot!
Mia pick\our pick\Bos pick\Utah pick\Den Pick\Cle pick\cap space

[heathmalc]

I don't think the Cavaliers do that deal. That is a lot to give-up for Mike Miller, who will be playing off our bench.

In-theory it seems like a decent deal... although the contracts are a little rough to swallow. Cavs GM Danny Ferry has been planning on letting Wally expire. Wally is basically an older/stronger version of Miller. Their careers are very similar. I think the biggest reason the Cavs dont like it/do it, is two fold: None of the bigs you send are worth much on the court. We do need an extra big... but we need one that is a defensive presence... Madsen and Cardinal dont fit the description of what we need in the front-court rotation. They could possibly be worth something next year, when teams are trying to cut extra costs for 2010... but the Cavs are trying to win this year. Miller is a clear upgrade to Wally...due to age... but he also couldnt play the PF in small-ball line-up, which Wally does well.

Another player the Cavs probably wont trade is Lorenzen Wright. He is a big-part of our locker-room, and works with our two young bigs everyday. I think the Cavs like him better than any of your older bigs (Collins/Madsen/Cardinal...only Collins is actually a big..the other two are tweeners).


Maybe the same deal, minus Madsen and Lorenzen... that may do it.... although the Cavs may want to give you Chicago's 2nd-round pick as-opposed to their first. Which may be better for you guys too... because Chicago's 2nd will be a high 2nd...and the Cavs 1st will be very low (#30/#29).... also...first round picks are guaranteed, while 2nd round picks aren't...and with all of your picks, you guys probably wont want to guarantee money to that many rookies in a weak draft-class.

One other thing... Denver may give-up a second round pick (Like they did to dump Camby)... but they won't give-up a first. There is some that are interested in Atkins... so it is possible they may get to trade him for an even bigger loser, and pick-up a pick and Cash themselves.

So... I would think the most you'd get from Denver is a 2nd, and some cash... IF they even move him... they may want the depth for the playoffs.

[the_bruce]

but we need one that is a defensive presence... Madsen and Cardinal dont fit the description of what we need in the front-court rotation.

So... I would think the most you'd get from Denver is a 2nd, and some cash... IF they even move him... they may want the depth for the playoffs.

All Madsen can do is play defense. Although, he isn't a huge body. Opposing post player absolutely hate Madsen. I remember a game last year where Duncan flipped out and got a T because of it. Madsens problem is he has no offense in game whatsoever. He's a total spaz once the game starts, but you should see the guy knock down jumper after jumper before the game and in practice. It's actually kinda funny if you ever see him warming up then get to see him in game.I agree he isn't a good player, but he certainly can play D.

Also, the denver portion is a no brainer 1st rnd pick. Teams have saved much less than 8m and given much more. PHX gave 2 1sts to kick Thomas off their books to the sonics. Clippers getting Camby for that price was entirely driven by the fact that Brand left, and the fact cambys contract is reasonable. Denver selling him for almost nothing is due to the fact that it saved them what 25m+? Camby has actual on court value and was DPOY 2 years ago and went to a team that needed him. Taking a useless guy like atkins off the books is definately going to cost something.... a 1st plus some cash is reasonable. This situation isn't compareable to to Camby deal in the slightest. Also note that DEN is at ~65m next year without atkins on their books which basicly lets them have the MLE to play with without going over the lux. Adding guarenteed 1st rnd pick salary would push them over if they use up their entire MLE.

For CLE's side I think it is far to costly! This deal adds what 15m salary next year? All doubled for the lux. That's 30m + 3m(value of the pick). 33m! The team is already playing fine and adding miller certainly doesn't guarentee a championship. It's a bold move to keep LBJ happy with the improvements in the team, and I'm not sure it produces 33m+ in value over 2 years. This isn't really a measureable thing, but MM certainly doesn't make the team 33m better.

[big3_8_19_21]

Wally is basically an older/stronger version of Miller. Their careers are very similar...Miller is a clear upgrade to Wally...due to age... but he also couldnt play the PF in small-ball line-up, which Wally does well.

Yes, Miller is a clear upgrade, but have you seen the two play? It's not similar at all. They're both about the same height, they're both white, and they both hit 3's...but past that they're games aren't very similar at all and never really have been, even if you compare them at similar ages. Miller is and always has been quicker/faster/more agile/more athletic than Wally. Miller is much better at taking the ball to the rack and is a much better passer. Miller is much more dangerous coming off a screen. Wally is much stronger and does better than Miller in the post. Their only similarity on offense is their accuracy if you leave them open.

[deeney0]

Wally is basically an older/stronger version of Miller. Their careers are very similar...Miller is a clear upgrade to Wally...due to age... but he also couldnt play the PF in small-ball line-up, which Wally does well.

Yes, Miller is a clear upgrade, but have you seen the two play? It's not similar at all. They're both about the same height, they're both white, and they both hit 3's...but past that they're games aren't very similar at all and never really have been, even if you compare them at similar ages. Miller is and always has been quicker/faster/more agile/more athletic than Wally. Miller is much better at taking the ball to the rack and is a much better passer. Miller is much more dangerous coming off a screen. Wally is much stronger and does better than Miller in the post. Their only similarity on offense is their accuracy if you leave them open.

They're both also sub-par defenders.

[deeney0]

I'm warming to a Miller trade as this team seems to be playing better without him. This is the absolute minimum value I'd accept from Cleveland, but I'd really rather turn Miller into a young player already somewhat established than more draft picks.

[shrink]

I have no doubt whatsoever that DEN would make that trade. Keeping Chucky Atkins at $8 mil for depth? If that was so, why not keep Camby "for depth?"

As for CLE, as most people know, the lux tax is a huge deal with me, and most owners in the NBA have historically treated it very seriously. However, CLE is in a bit of a different boat.

First, their owner has already decided to go over the cap, and this trade only means they stay there for an additional year (or pick up those expirings to trade next year).

Second, CLE not only made money last year with its current salary, but the franchise actually increased 5% in value in one year, and us now the fifth most valuable franchise in the NBA. In other words, the lux money they've been paying hasn't hurt them.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/nba ... _Rank.html

Third, Miller gives CLE two better shots at a ring. Not only is that lucrative, but for CLE, if they can win a ring, they probably get the biggest prize in the NBA -- retaining LeBron James .. their golden goose.

Now, if CLE fans want to say, "Mike Miller isn't going to help us because he's not that good," then I don't have a response -- that's a personal opinion. Same with, "We can find some other team to trade us someone better." However, the chance to improve their team on the floor and their odds of winning a championship + LeBron, and it only costing them a very late pick and adding a couple players that will be tradable expirings next year .. the price is a good deal for both teams. Mike Miller's game is a perfect fit.