potential update clev miller trade

[revprodeji]

I am watching the cle/chi game and delonte west broke his wrist. this could move cle to make a deal for miller.

not sure if this deserves its own thread but I am more on board with a miller+cardinal+smith for wally+exp deal.

[the_bruce]

ack, he's probably the 2nd most critical player on that team.

[4ho5ive]

Thats a big big time loss for them, i switched to Por/NJ at half. I already thought they were going to make a move. Ferry will very likely do something now, and Minnesota needs to take advantage.

See shrink, more and more people are starting to come around to the Miller/Wally deal.

Only issue is will the FO want to bring Wally back? Seems to me he would obviously have to see some sort of PT. Make it happen Stack

[shrink]

I am watching the cle/chi game and delonte west broke his wrist. this could move cle to make a deal for miller.

not sure if this deserves its own thread but I am more on board with a miller+cardinal+smith for wally+exp deal.

I vote, "Yes it does!"

[Devilzsidewalk]

now we're throwing in Craig Smith too? I think I'd need Hickson then. In fact, I might hold out for Hickson regardless. Give the Cavs a token 1st rounder.

[4ho5ive]

Havent you heard, JJ Hickson is Jesus Christ himself, go ahead and ask Cavs fans.

[TheFranchise21]

Psh, Cleveland doesn't need Miller to replace West. They already have Wally Pipp, I mean Wally Szczerbiak.

[B Calrissian]

Havent you heard, JJ Hickson is Jesus Christ himself, go ahead and ask Cavs fans.

Yes they overvalue him but, wasn't it in the press awhile back that the Cavs turned down a deal (I imagine it was Hickson+exp) for Gerald Wallace because Hickson was involved?

not sure if this deserves its own thread but I am more on board with a miller+cardinal+smith for wally+exp deal.

I always thought it was Wally/exp/1st for Miller/Cardinal, or am I mistaken?

[karch34]

I could easily see McCants being part of the deal. Just for a scoring option off the bench.

[shrink]

not sure if this deserves its own thread but I am more on board with a miller+cardinal+smith for wally+exp deal.

I always thought it was Wally/exp/1st for Miller/Cardinal, or am I mistaken?

That's right, though the additional EXP isn't needed .. MIN gets a useful $1.6 mil TPE. A few Cavs fans think that Miller's value has gone down, but that's not a viewed shared from posters outside of CLE. The 1st isn't worth much.

If we were going to include Smith in the deal (who I think would work well with Zyd, and maybe Ben Wallace), I'd want to add Madsen and include Sasha Pavlovic (exp). If they want to keep Pav, it might work to take Madsen and include a tiny expiring, like Lorenzen Wright or Tarence Kinsey. I held out for:

Wally + Kinsey + 1st + $3.7 mil TPE for Miller + Cardinal + Madsen

but these may be more reasonable, if we just want to get something done:

Last deal .. no 1st.

Wally + 1st + $1.5 mil TPE for Miller + Cardinal

or using Craig Smith, McCants, or late pick in some combination.


The truth is, the Wolves don't have many things of alue to a rebuilding team if they don't want to part with Hickson. The one thing they do have is expirings, and we could use the cap space. We have a lot of tiny pieces to make a deal go through.

[revprodeji]

I included smith. before the z and wallace injury cle still needed front court scoring. now that they are injuried smith is more attractive.

for mn I think we need to create roster spots. we could argue that even if we love smith and I do, he does not fit well with al or love.

my frontcourt vision is al and love as starters. pek off the bench, gomes as a 3 but a small ball 4 and then add a 10-15min athletic hustle 4-5 ala jerome jordan.

just my view.

[collin_k41]

Ya that's pretty much how I want our frontcourt to pan out too rev. We really need to make a deal to be contenders in the 09 free agency because as everyone knows, pretty much the whole league is trying to cut salary for 2010. Our only chance to pry away a decent player is this coming offseason. Miller hasn't had much effect on our recent emergence anyways. I say we might as well trade him. I don't know if we'd take Wally back but I'm sure most of the fans wouldn't mind.

[B Calrissian]

for mn I think we need to create roster spots. we could argue that even if we love smith and I do, he does not fit well with al or love.

Ha that is not the case with me at all. So your addition of Smith looked great to me.

my frontcourt vision is al and love as starters. pek off the bench, gomes as a 3 but a small ball 4 and then add a 10-15min athletic hustle 4-5 ala jerome jordan.

just my view.

That very well could be how the front court will look. I am still hoping for a G.Wallace/AK type player to start at sf and back up pf though.

[Wingman]

Smith gone just means more minutes for Love, so I have no problem with throwing him into deals.

[dunkonu21]

I agree that losing Smith is not a huge deal and that 2009 is the best time to spend on a free agent.

[shrink]

I agree that Craig Smith is the guy that I think is the most tradable from the Wolves. However, he's a decent role player on a fantastic contract, and so we should get compensated for him.

[WallyWorld]

This makes things really interesting for the Wolves. I love the '09 vs. '10 debate.

Part of me wishes we could trade for an expiring WITHOUT giving up on Mike Miller. I just see him and Cardinal as a pretty valuable trade package next season. There are other smaller deals we can make to accumulate more assets and get some more cap space. Should getting 14 million in extra space be a top priority? Or would a smaller deal, which would allow us to amortize our cap space over two seasons, be both more efficient and exciting for us fans? As I have said in other threads, Craig Smith/Mark Madsen for a smaller expiring come to mind immediately.

[PeeDee]

If we're going to trade Smith for an expiring, what was the point of resigning him in the first place?
No one is going to trade anything for Madsen, let alone an expiring.

I know people will say "well if you want to put it that way, what was the point of trading for MIller and Cardinal?" To get rid of Jaric. If we still had Jaric, we wouldn't even be in the position of having the option of trying to trade for more capspace.

[karch34]

This makes things really interesting for the Wolves. I love the '09 vs. '10 debate.

Part of me wishes we could trade for an expiring WITHOUT giving up on Mike Miller. I just see him and Cardinal as a pretty valuable trade package next season. There are other smaller deals we can make to accumulate more assets and get some more cap space. Should getting 14 million in extra space be a top priority? Or would a smaller deal, which would allow us to amortize our cap space over two seasons, be both more efficient and exciting for us fans? As I have said in other threads, Craig Smith/Mark Madsen for a smaller expiring come to mind immediately.

Here's my thoughts on the subject:
-Miller is going to be a tradeable asset this season or next. The difference is his value as a piece who can help a contender this year and next vs. his value as an expiring next year.

-While I like Miller, it's become clear that he's not part of the long term and his minutes might be better used helping develop a younger player. More importantly the contract doesn't make sense for us.

-I think the key issue is do you think you'll get a better offer next year vs this year? If you think there's a legitimate chance you get a young player that would be a key addition to our core in a trade next year, than you probably lean towards waiting. If that's not the case, then you trade this year for the expirings.

-I also think that moving Miller this year doesn't hurt our ability to make a trade next year. Being under the cap we wouldn't have to match salary so a team trying to get under the cap for 2010's FA run would still be able to get out of a long term deal by trading with us.

-There's also the slight possibility that getting a player that works well for us in the 2009 FA (most think Marvin Williams) could make us appealing as a an up and coming team. That might give us a better advantage in 2010 FA than just being farther under the cap than anyone else.

[shrink]

If we're going to trade Smith for an expiring, what was the point of resigning him in the first place?
No one is going to trade anything for Madsen, let alone an expiring.

Smith was a bargain at that price. Even if we don't have longterm use for him, he has positive trade value, and we had the money.

Smith an Madsen together would be about $5.1 mil in both 2009 and 2010. Craig Smith is worth more than his contract, but assuming Madsen produces nothing, is Smith's value as high as $5.1 mil? Even though he'd be an expiring next year, I'd probably say "no" unless a team had no use for 2009 money vs 2010. However, its close .. he's probably worth $4. Perhaps adding McCants would make the whole package worth an expiring, like Snow?

I know people will say "well if you want to put it that way, what was the point of trading for MIller and Cardinal?" To get rid of Jaric. If we still had Jaric, we wouldn't even be in the position of having the option of trying to trade for more capspace.

Great point. In the deal we paid about the same amount of money overall, but moving that 2010 payment to 2009 was a huge gain.