Draco

I'd do that trade, not that I think Miller is terribly great its just I don't think very highly of Jones, Jack or Frye.

darkhelmit54

So now that a respected journalist conjects on Andre Miller fitting with the blazers it's worth discussing, but when I write some of the same things it's only worth making fun of?

Reasons why Miller would fit us well

1. 1-year low risk tryout to gjuide our team, and it's a contract year for him
2. he works well with youth being patient and steady (evidence in Philly)
3. he does well in the transition game (we are worst in the league now)
4. he does well giving the ball up (Iggy had it half the time this year in half court) (ROY)

It basically gives us a year to evaluate multiple things...at the conclusion we can decide better

1. If brandon is a PG
2. if Rudy is a viable starting SG
3. Sergio's future
4. How close we are to contention
5. if we should keep Miller

I would trade Blake, Jack, and Outlaw to get him, call me crazy if you want.

moldorf

Miller and Brandon Roy would be like oil and water as a backcourt pair. Miller needs the ball to be effective and his inability to shoot from distance means he couldn't play off the ball well when Roy was initiating the offense. If Roy was doing that, the opponents defense could sag off miller to help on Roy and prevent penetration.

With Roy, Oden, and LMA all having the need to work in the paint, Miller won't be able to stretch the defense and space the offense.

He'll turn 33 next season, and it's almost certain KP wouldn't be willing to give him the size of contract he'd want. Portland would be giving up assets for a 1 year rental of a player who'd be a bad match for the starting unit. That's a dumb move and KP doesn't seem dumb.

moldorf

I'd call you worse then that, but I'd get banned.

alext42083

Well to be fair, if the Blazers brought in any upgrade at point guard, they'd need the ball in their hands to be effective.
Calderon would need the ball, the big dream of Chris Paul would need the ball.
If we didn't want a PG that needed the ball, sign up Steve Kerr out of retirement to just spot up and knock down shots.

But yeah, I understand how there'd be hesitation to bring Miller in because he can't shoot consistently from 3, or even the outside.

He's made 19 three-pointers in the last five seasons COMBINED. He went 3 for 34 this past season, and is a career 20 percent 3-point shooter.

There's a lot of pros and cons to this deal now that I think about it.

__________________

darkhelmit54

Miller and Roy would mix fine. Miller isn't a great outside shooter, but he does well in the mid-range game, and moves w/o the ball well cutting backdoor. Roy is a better shooter than we give him credit for too. Iggy initiated the half-court offense a lot of the time this year in Philly (not always successfully) and Miller gladly gave it up and played off the ball. Besides, it hasn't stopped Nate from playing Jack with Roy.

Roy and LMA both have very good jumpshots, Martell too, there'd be enough shooting on the floor.

darkhelmit54

needing the ball is the most overused phrase on the boards the past year, it's completely annoying, Brandon is a smart enough and good enough player that he can shoot well and move w/o the ball well. A lot of the reason we play with him initiating the offense so much is because it's such a lack of motion offense (almost only pick n roll) that other than the iso'd player (a lot of teams it would be the PG) no one else does much. In a smarter and more active system (which we should employ with Oden and Lamarcus' size and mobility) Roy would be fine at SG.

LameR

You let Blake and Roy handle the load along with a PG through the draft.

__________________
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <)

The LameR has spoken. C^2

Nightfly

Well, I wouldn't be sick, but I agree with you.

I think the Sixers would want more.

__________________
Radio is my life.

Once known as HearToTemptYou.

rocketeer

if i'm portland, i'm looking at finding out a way to move up in the draft to get bayless. and i'd be willing to part with jack, outlaw, and this year's pick to do it.

that would give:
pg - blake/bayless
sg - roy/rudy
sf - webster/jones
pf - aldridge/frye
c - oden/joel

and obviously the goal would be to have bayless starting next to roy but it would be realistic to expect blake to begin the season as the starter.

__________________
Rodney Rogers!!!!!

He will never die!!!!!

Click here to join me in playing the Rodney Rogers game!!!!!

Balian

In all likelihood, we are not going to win a championship with Miller. So why bother? I rather stand pat than trade/sign Miller. He will be 33 next year and won't be cheap. We are better off saving that cap room for 2009.

Balian

A 33 year old point guard who is slow and can't play a lick of defense for Blake, Jack, and Outlaw? Crazy is putting it very mildly. We can decide all those things without trading for Miller. IF Miller is not part of the championship picture, why the hell get him?

darkhelmit54

players develop better in a more competitive environment. That's simply a fact, don't you think the Philly guys are better for being in the playoffs and having a steady ball-handler in Miller to guide them? He got easy buckets for them and helped carry the load when things got rocky. Miller would make Lamarcus and Oden's life a lot easier, giving them the ball in the right spots. He would accelerate our players understanding of the break, rewarding them for doing the right thing, do you remember all his alley-oops in Denver?.

Steve Blake isn't probably a championship caliber PG so why not cut him? James Jones knee won't hold out for our championship runs we should cut him too. Joel will probably be older and slower by then also, F him.

(I hope you understand the sarcasm)

Here's the other thing: Getting Miller is almost better for our 2009 cap space plan. We don't have the pressure of renouncing the rights (and getting nothing) to Blake and Outlaw in hopes of chasing a big FA, and then not having it pan out. And to get a big FA, the extra 8 mill of their salaries off the books would be a must. It basically puts more pressure/trust/development on the backs of Webster and Frye this year, gives Jones a role for another year (I'd like to have him around for sure), and allows more future flexibility.

darkhelmit54