trade idea (BOS, MIN, WAS)

[SSFan V]

I haven't seen the MN / BOS rumor, what is it exactly and what's the source?

Foye IMHO is not a role player, he's a solid #2.

[winsomme]

Mike Miller is not a role player

How do you figure?  He has a career average of around 13 ppg, doesn't rebound or pass extraordinarily well, and doesn't play that great of defense.  

He is a good shooter and he is good at that role.  

Sounds like a role player to me.  

Ok you could say that about anybody.  Garnett is a very good rebounder and mid range shooter, as well as great on the defensive end.  that is his role and he is good at it....

See it works for anybody.  Im not buying it

That's ridiculous.  KG is a 12 time All Star, League MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, NBA Champion, and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer.  Mike Miller has never made an All Star team, probably never will, and certainly won't be going to the Hall of Fame.

Same with Ray Allen. He's a guy who has made 9 All Star teams and will surely be going to the Hall of Fame.  

Mike Miller might be a good role player, but he's a role player.  

we've had this role player debate before and it ends up going round in circles.

people have different definitions of what qualifies as a role player, so debating whether he's a role player or not doesn't really illuminate anything.

the question is whether is a capable starter and that is something he has shown when healthy that he is capable of doing.

I also agree with Chris that Foye is the big wild card. He was having a break out season last year until getting injured (don't remember what the injury was...)

[Rondo2287]

Mike Miller is not a role player

How do you figure?  He has a career average of around 13 ppg, doesn't rebound or pass extraordinarily well, and doesn't play that great of defense.  

He is a good shooter and he is good at that role.  

Sounds like a role player to me.  

Ok you could say that about anybody.  Garnett is a very good rebounder and mid range shooter, as well as great on the defensive end.  that is his role and he is good at it....

See it works for anybody.  Im not buying it

That's ridiculous.  KG is a 12 time All Star, League MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, NBA Champion, and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer.  Mike Miller has never made an All Star team, probably never will, and certainly won't be going to the Hall of Fame.

Same with Ray Allen. He's a guy who has made 9 All Star teams and will surely be going to the Hall of Fame.  

Mike Miller might be a good role player, but he's a role player.  

Im just saying your logic was flawed, you changed your logic and now site accomplishments before you just sited skills and said he was good at that role.  The only thing thats rediculous is your logic that miller is a role player

[Jon]

How does that trade help our team?  It gives us three mediocre players for an All Star.  That'd be great if the league gave us a special exception to play all 3 at once at the 2 guard position (giving us 7 on 5); however, since that's not happening, I don't see how that helps us.  

In essence we're trading our must clutch shooter and a future Hall of Famer so we can downgrade at the 2 spot, get yet another undersized PF who is too slow to effectively guard SFs, and a backup 2/3.  The only improvement to the team is the backup 2/3.  However, that could easily be solved with signing Grant Hill or Quinton Ross.  

Trading Ray Allen this year is a bad idea to begin with.  Trading him for 3 role players is downright horrific.  

Miller is one injury-affected season away from being a 16 PPG, 7 RPG, 43% 3-pt land player.

and Foye is an emerging talent that averaged 16 PPG, 85% FT line last season and can penetrate off the dribble and dish and score.

both these guys are starting caliber players IMO.

Perhaps.  But they're still both downgrades on Ray Allen right now.

Here's how I see it.  Foye is good; however, he's a downgrade from Ray Allen.  That hurts the team, particularly in the playoffs when guys like Ray and Paul are going to play 40 minutes per game.  Thus, the downgrade from Ray to Foye is even more dramatic come playoff time when things matter most.

Then there's Miller and Gomes.  Honestly, I like both players, but I how they can help us all that much.  

Gomes is nice, but is he really going to help this team?  This team clearly needs to sign someone with size to backup Perk.  Gomes doesn't help with that.  That means he'll be joining the Leon Powe (and perhaps Big Baby) in the very limited minutes of backing up KG.  So what's the point?  He's arguably a worse player than Powe, and even if you like Gomes better, he's not enough of an upgrade at the whopping 10-15 mpg available to backup Garnett to justify breaking up this team.  

As for Miller, same deal.  He'd help in the regular season, but come playoff time, he wouldn't matter in tight game since you can't play him and Foye at the same time (and have PP on the floor).  Moreover, in the short term, I'd rather just sign someone like Grant Hill.

Overall, my big problem is this: people aren't looking at how this trade would actually play out in a regular rotation.  Gomes is a nice player, but he wouldn't help this team.  Moreover, why would we trade for a backup 2/3 when we can sign one on the FA market without giving up a cornerstone of our franchise?  It just doesn't make sense to me.  

[Jon]

Mike Miller is not a role player

How do you figure?  He has a career average of around 13 ppg, doesn't rebound or pass extraordinarily well, and doesn't play that great of defense.  

He is a good shooter and he is good at that role.  

Sounds like a role player to me.  

Ok you could say that about anybody.  Garnett is a very good rebounder and mid range shooter, as well as great on the defensive end.  that is his role and he is good at it....

See it works for anybody.  Im not buying it

That's ridiculous.  KG is a 12 time All Star, League MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, NBA Champion, and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer.  Mike Miller has never made an All Star team, probably never will, and certainly won't be going to the Hall of Fame.

Same with Ray Allen. He's a guy who has made 9 All Star teams and will surely be going to the Hall of Fame.  

Mike Miller might be a good role player, but he's a role player.  

Im just saying your logic was flawed, you changed your logic and now site accomplishments before you just sited skills and said he was good at that role.  The only thing thats rediculous is your logic that miller is a role player

Well, how do you define a role player then? 

[winsomme]

Mike Miller is not a role player

How do you figure?  He has a career average of around 13 ppg, doesn't rebound or pass extraordinarily well, and doesn't play that great of defense.  

He is a good shooter and he is good at that role.  

Sounds like a role player to me.  

Ok you could say that about anybody.  Garnett is a very good rebounder and mid range shooter, as well as great on the defensive end.  that is his role and he is good at it....

See it works for anybody.  Im not buying it

That's ridiculous.  KG is a 12 time All Star, League MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, NBA Champion, and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer.  Mike Miller has never made an All Star team, probably never will, and certainly won't be going to the Hall of Fame.

Same with Ray Allen. He's a guy who has made 9 All Star teams and will surely be going to the Hall of Fame.  

Mike Miller might be a good role player, but he's a role player.  

Im just saying your logic was flawed, you changed your logic and now site accomplishments before you just sited skills and said he was good at that role.  The only thing thats rediculous is your logic that miller is a role player

Well, how do you define a role player then? 

Jon, would you call Perk a role player?

[winsomme]

How does that trade help our team?  It gives us three mediocre players for an All Star.  That'd be great if the league gave us a special exception to play all 3 at once at the 2 guard position (giving us 7 on 5); however, since that's not happening, I don't see how that helps us.  

In essence we're trading our must clutch shooter and a future Hall of Famer so we can downgrade at the 2 spot, get yet another undersized PF who is too slow to effectively guard SFs, and a backup 2/3.  The only improvement to the team is the backup 2/3.  However, that could easily be solved with signing Grant Hill or Quinton Ross.  

Trading Ray Allen this year is a bad idea to begin with.  Trading him for 3 role players is downright horrific.  

Miller is one injury-affected season away from being a 16 PPG, 7 RPG, 43% 3-pt land player.

and Foye is an emerging talent that averaged 16 PPG, 85% FT line last season and can penetrate off the dribble and dish and score.

both these guys are starting caliber players IMO.

Perhaps.  But they're still both downgrades on Ray Allen right now.

Here's how I see it.  Foye is good; however, he's a downgrade from Ray Allen.  That hurts the team, particularly in the playoffs when guys like Ray and Paul are going to play 40 minutes per game.  Thus, the downgrade from Ray to Foye is even more dramatic come playoff time when things matter most.

Then there's Miller and Gomes.  Honestly, I like both players, but I how they can help us all that much.  

Gomes is nice, but is he really going to help this team?  This team clearly needs to sign someone with size to backup Perk.  Gomes doesn't help with that.  That means he'll be joining the Leon Powe (and perhaps Big Baby) in the very limited minutes of backing up KG.  So what's the point?  He's arguably a worse player than Powe, and even if you like Gomes better, he's not enough of an upgrade at the whopping 10-15 mpg available to backup Garnett to justify breaking up this team.  

As for Miller, same deal.  He'd help in the regular season, but come playoff time, he wouldn't matter in tight game since you can't play him and Foye at the same time (and have PP on the floor).  Moreover, in the short term, I'd rather just sign someone like Grant Hill.

Overall, my big problem is this: people aren't looking at how this trade would actually play out in a regular rotation.  Gomes is a nice player, but he wouldn't help this team.  Moreover, why would we trade for a backup 2/3 when we can sign one on the FA market without giving up a cornerstone of our franchise?  It just doesn't make sense to me.  

if they worked out, there would be minutes for all these guys.

Rondo/Foye
Miller/Eddie
Paul/Gomes
KG/Powe/Scals
Perk/Sheed, Dice?

there is valuable minutes there for all of these guys. they don't all need play at the same time for them to make an impact.

and i don't know why you would think Miller would be useless in the playoffs, he shoots the 3 at over 40% for his career. why would he be useless in the playoffs?

plus, like i noted, this deal doesn't preclude signing a back up big like Sheed or Dice. In fact it makes it easier because we would have filled more spots without using the MLE and could pffer more of it to a higher caliber player.

[Jon]

Mike Miller is not a role player

How do you figure?  He has a career average of around 13 ppg, doesn't rebound or pass extraordinarily well, and doesn't play that great of defense.  

He is a good shooter and he is good at that role.  

Sounds like a role player to me.  

Ok you could say that about anybody.  Garnett is a very good rebounder and mid range shooter, as well as great on the defensive end.  that is his role and he is good at it....

See it works for anybody.  Im not buying it

That's ridiculous.  KG is a 12 time All Star, League MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, NBA Champion, and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer.  Mike Miller has never made an All Star team, probably never will, and certainly won't be going to the Hall of Fame.

Same with Ray Allen. He's a guy who has made 9 All Star teams and will surely be going to the Hall of Fame.  

Mike Miller might be a good role player, but he's a role player.  

Im just saying your logic was flawed, you changed your logic and now site accomplishments before you just sited skills and said he was good at that role.  The only thing thats rediculous is your logic that miller is a role player

Well, how do you define a role player then? 

Jon, would you call Perk a role player?

Good question.  At this point, I'd probably say yes.  Though I think it's a whole different ball game in terms of worth when we're talking about a strong defensive center compared to a smooth shooting 2/3.

Regardless of whether he's a role player or not, I think a cardinal rule of basketball is that you don't trade quality for quantity.  

That's NOT true in football or baseball where you have to round out rosters of 53 and 25 respectively; however, when you only have a roster of 12 and a rotation of 8-9 come playoff time, quality if absolutely paramount.  Part of the reason I don't like this trade is because in a tight playoff game (which are really the only games that are going to matter next year, since it's a given that a roster of Rondo, Pierce, KG, and Perk is going to be a top seed in the playoffs), is because our starting rotations goes down a notch.  

In my book, Gomes isn't seeing the floor in a close playoff game.  If the C's sign someone like McDyess, he'll get the backup minutes at the 4/5 in a playoff game.  Anything left Powe will get.  So take him out.

As for Miller and Foye, it's nice to have both, but you can only play one a time next to Pierce.  So in the stretch of a game where you used to have Rondo/Allen/Pierce/KG/Perk you now have Rondo/Miller or Foye/Pierce/KG/Perk.  Whichever player Doc chooses is a downgrade over Allen, so it really hurts our ability to close out games.

I really think we should extend Allen one year, see what happens this year, and if it becomes apparent things aren't working out, we'll then in the exact same situation next summer as we're in this summer with Ray's contract.  In fact, we'll have even more flexibility as PP will be going into his final year as well.  

[Chris]

Mike Miller is not a role player

It depends what you consider a role player.  If you mean he is one-dimensional, you are wrong.  He is in fact a very versatile offensive player, and a passable defender.

However, he is not a star.  He is, and has always been best cast as the 3rd or 4th option on a good team.  If he is being asked to be any more than that, then you are probably in trouble.

He can absolutely explode for bit games, but really, he is not going to be a go-to guy the way Ray has been in his career.

However, he would fill the role the C's had Ray playing pretty well.  And when you then add in Foye (who would be great coming off the bench), and Gomes (who I am not sold on as an NBA defender, but could still pick up some minutes), it could be a net gain for the C's.  

[SSFan V]

rumor?

where did this rumor originate?

[winsomme]

Mike Miller is not a role player

How do you figure?  He has a career average of around 13 ppg, doesn't rebound or pass extraordinarily well, and doesn't play that great of defense.  

He is a good shooter and he is good at that role.  

Sounds like a role player to me.  

Ok you could say that about anybody.  Garnett is a very good rebounder and mid range shooter, as well as great on the defensive end.  that is his role and he is good at it....

See it works for anybody.  Im not buying it

That's ridiculous.  KG is a 12 time All Star, League MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, NBA Champion, and will be a first ballot Hall of Famer.  Mike Miller has never made an All Star team, probably never will, and certainly won't be going to the Hall of Fame.

Same with Ray Allen. He's a guy who has made 9 All Star teams and will surely be going to the Hall of Fame.  

Mike Miller might be a good role player, but he's a role player.  

Im just saying your logic was flawed, you changed your logic and now site accomplishments before you just sited skills and said he was good at that role.  The only thing thats rediculous is your logic that miller is a role player

Well, how do you define a role player then? 

Jon, would you call Perk a role player?

Good question.  At this point, I'd probably say yes.  Though I think it's a whole different ball game in terms of worth when we're talking about a strong defensive center compared to a smooth shooting 2/3.

Regardless of whether he's a role player or not, I think a cardinal rule of basketball is that you don't trade quality for quantity.  

That's NOT true in football or baseball where you have to round out rosters of 53 and 25 respectively; however, when you only have a roster of 12 and a rotation of 8-9 come playoff time, quality if absolutely paramount.  Part of the reason I don't like this trade is because in a tight playoff game (which are really the only games that are going to matter next year, since it's a given that a roster of Rondo, Pierce, KG, and Perk is going to be a top seed in the playoffs), is because our starting rotations goes down a notch.  

In my book, Gomes isn't seeing the floor in a close playoff game.  If the C's sign someone like McDyess, he'll get the backup minutes at the 4/5 in a playoff game.  Anything left Powe will get.  So take him out.

As for Miller and Foye, it's nice to have both, but you can only play one a time next to Pierce.  So in the stretch of a game where you used to have Rondo/Allen/Pierce/KG/Perk you now have Rondo/Miller or Foye/Pierce/KG/Perk.  Whichever player Doc chooses is a downgrade over Allen, so it really hurts our ability to close out games.

I really think we should extend Allen one year, see what happens this year, and if it becomes apparent things aren't working out, we'll then in the exact same situation next summer as we're in this summer with Ray's contract.  In fact, we'll have even more flexibility as PP will be going into his final year as well.  

i hear you on the quality v quantity angle and i am not saying i would 100% do this deal, but another thing to think about, is if we have an extra scorer off the bench like Foye (or Miller), maybe those close games you talking about aren't close.

look at who were hitting the biggest shot for the Lakers....Ariza, Fisher, Odom...

anyway, mostly just put this up for debate like this so...TP.
I'm a huge Ray Allen fan and would not be excited to see him leave.

[nebist]

It's definitely not the worst of the ideas that have been tossed around.  It fills a lot of the Celts needs (leaving only a backup C), adds some youth (Foye), and doesn't cripple us financially long-term (since Miller and Gomes are expiring).

Foye could fill the backup pg role as well as bring scoring punch off the bench.  Gomes fills the big backup 3 role to Pierce and can also score off the bench.  Miller is a poor man's Ray Allen (same skill-set in terms of outside shooting and some ball-handling/passing) and could hopefully hold down the fort for a year at SG.

Definitely adds some punch to the bench.  It doesn't set my world on fire, but better than a lot of the Allen deals I've seen.

[winsomme]

rumor?

where did this rumor originate?

this isn't the rumor. the rumor (Ray to MIN, Foye, etc to BOS) is linked on the home page from a Minny paper I believe and was shot down immediately by MINs GM.

I just added the WAS part as another idea....

[Jon]

How does that trade help our team?  It gives us three mediocre players for an All Star.  That'd be great if the league gave us a special exception to play all 3 at once at the 2 guard position (giving us 7 on 5); however, since that's not happening, I don't see how that helps us.  

In essence we're trading our must clutch shooter and a future Hall of Famer so we can downgrade at the 2 spot, get yet another undersized PF who is too slow to effectively guard SFs, and a backup 2/3.  The only improvement to the team is the backup 2/3.  However, that could easily be solved with signing Grant Hill or Quinton Ross.  

Trading Ray Allen this year is a bad idea to begin with.  Trading him for 3 role players is downright horrific.  

Miller is one injury-affected season away from being a 16 PPG, 7 RPG, 43% 3-pt land player.

and Foye is an emerging talent that averaged 16 PPG, 85% FT line last season and can penetrate off the dribble and dish and score.

both these guys are starting caliber players IMO.

Perhaps.  But they're still both downgrades on Ray Allen right now.

Here's how I see it.  Foye is good; however, he's a downgrade from Ray Allen.  That hurts the team, particularly in the playoffs when guys like Ray and Paul are going to play 40 minutes per game.  Thus, the downgrade from Ray to Foye is even more dramatic come playoff time when things matter most.

Then there's Miller and Gomes.  Honestly, I like both players, but I how they can help us all that much.  

Gomes is nice, but is he really going to help this team?  This team clearly needs to sign someone with size to backup Perk.  Gomes doesn't help with that.  That means he'll be joining the Leon Powe (and perhaps Big Baby) in the very limited minutes of backing up KG.  So what's the point?  He's arguably a worse player than Powe, and even if you like Gomes better, he's not enough of an upgrade at the whopping 10-15 mpg available to backup Garnett to justify breaking up this team.  

As for Miller, same deal.  He'd help in the regular season, but come playoff time, he wouldn't matter in tight game since you can't play him and Foye at the same time (and have PP on the floor).  Moreover, in the short term, I'd rather just sign someone like Grant Hill.

Overall, my big problem is this: people aren't looking at how this trade would actually play out in a regular rotation.  Gomes is a nice player, but he wouldn't help this team.  Moreover, why would we trade for a backup 2/3 when we can sign one on the FA market without giving up a cornerstone of our franchise?  It just doesn't make sense to me.  

if they worked out, there would be minutes for all these guys.

Rondo/Foye
Miller/Eddie
Paul/Gomes
KG/Powe/Scals
Perk/Sheed, Dice?

there is valuable minutes there for all of these guys. they don't all need play at the same time for them to make an impact.

and i don't know why you would think Miller would be useless in the playoffs, he shoots the 3 at over 40% for his career. why would he be useless in the playoffs?

plus, like i noted, this deal doesn't preclude signing a back up big like Sheed or Dice. In fact it makes it easier because we would have filled more spots without using the MLE and could pffer more of it to a higher caliber player.

Well, in that scenario of minutes, I'd change my comments to say that Foye would be useless.  Rondo clearly proved this playoffs he can play 40+ mpg.  What the heck use is Foye going to be in 5-8 mpg?  

Also, Gomes at the 3 is a horrible idea.  He's too slow to guard anyone effectively and would kill our defense.  

What it comes down to for me is this: come playoff times, the starters can play 40 mpg, so the value of depth is somewhat overrated.  In the closing minutes of a close playoff game, it really comes down to who can put the best 5 players out on the court.  Trading Ray Allen in this deal hurts our ability to do that.  No matter how you twist it, Mike Miller and Randy Foye are downgrades individually compared to Ray and only one of them can be on the court at the same time with Rondo, Pierce, KG, and Perk.  

Moreover, I think the deal becomes worse when we consider that two of the needs this deal arguably satisfies (backup 2/3 and backup 4) could be solved (and arguably solved better) on the FA market.  

[winsomme]

Mike Miller is not a role player

It depends what you consider a role player.  If you mean he is one-dimensional, you are wrong.  He is in fact a very versatile offensive player, and a passable defender.

However, he is not a star.  He is, and has always been best cast as the 3rd or 4th option on a good team.  If he is being asked to be any more than that, then you are probably in trouble.

He can absolutely explode for bit games, but really, he is not going to be a go-to guy the way Ray has been in his career.

However, he would fill the role the C's had Ray playing pretty well.  And when you then add in Foye (who would be great coming off the bench), and Gomes (who I am not sold on as an NBA defender, but could still pick up some minutes), it could be a net gain for the C's.  

yeah, some people see "role player" as not a "star." others see it as significantly limited and talented as a player...

no right answer really. but also becomes a stumbling block in a debate.