Could Mike Miller be the key?

[Eddie20]

On a further note I would like to contend that Mike Miller would be the second coming of Marquis Daniels. 

Miller
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3404

Daniels
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3764/career;_ylt=AjCl5BR04zJEdk9Z7UoOo27qPKB4

Looking at their stats from this past year for Miller and the year before Daniels signed with the C's I would like to point out that they are very similar production wise, albeit with different play styles.

Both averaged a little over 10ppg with over 30 mpg of play time.  Miller is a little more efficient in terms of shooting percentages and he is a legitimate threat from 3pt land however over 2 to per game makes me hesitate.  We're already poor in that regard and he certainly won't help.  I don't know.  I'm not sold on this guy.

  The three point shooting is pretty key, though. And our turnover problem isn't that bad in the playoffs.

Yep. It's his shooting and the spacing that we lack off the bench that sets him apart.

Mike Miller...

"I'm looking for a winner," confirms the 6-foot-8 swingman, who averaged 10.9 points and 6.2 rebounds in 54 games last season. "The last couple of years have taken a toll on me, as far as not being in the playoffs and not playing this time of year. So I'm looking to change that. This time, if it doesn't work out, there's no one to blame but myself."

[the_Bird]

Forty-eight percent shooting on threes last year.  Forty-eight percent!  Daniels couldn't shoot 48% by himself in the gym!  Rondo couldn't shoot 48% from the free throw line!

Not like it's a tiny sample size, either.  Dude played 33 minutes a game, played 54 games.  Kyle Korver was a little better (54%), otherwise that's best in the league.  Can't expect 48% every season, but he's still likely to hit at a much higher rate than anyone else on the roster.

You look at the other guys who shoot the lights out of the long ball, there isn't really anyone close to him in terms of rebounding.  Looking at guys who shot 39% or better on 3's, the only other players who have even 5 boards/game are Channing Frye and Jason Kidd.  Not many players in the league who both can shoot the ball like that AND grab a good number of rebounds.  Hell, Pierce hasn't grabbed six a game since '05 - '06, and he's always been a pretty good rebounder for a small forward.

The two turnovers a game don't bother me too much.  Assist-to-turnover ratio is still almost 2:1.  One of his five-turnover games was his first game back after being out a month and a half, he had another bad game against Toronto (8 TOs) and another 5-TO effort near the end of the season against NJ.  He's certainly not egregious on this front.  

So, exceptional long-distance shooting, very good rebounding from the 2/3 spot, seems to be healthy again (although he does seem to miss a dozen or so games most years).  

Just a solid player that I think would be a great fit behind and alongside Pierce/Ray Allen.  Don't see what's not to like, assuming the price isn't much more than three years of the MLE.

[vinnie]

I highly support the Mike Miller idea

[EmilioBonilla]

i like miller, but i think that rudy gay is the key and should be the one we make a run for. He could take ray's place, i don't really know how the trade should go down, but I deff think we could get him with Danny's magic 

[Spicoli]

I love the idea of bringing Miller on board.

[Jon]

I don't know if Mike Miller himself is the answer; however, I do think any shot we have at contending next year involves getting more capable backups at the wing.  Tony Allen made huge strides; however, it was clear that there were times when Doc wasn't comfortable having him on the floor.  That led to Paul and especially Ray being overplayed, and I think that had a lot to do with Ray's poor shooting performance and Paul's inability to take-over in the last 6 minutes of the season.  I think if we can get a high quality player at the 2/3 and go to a rotation closer to what we saw at the 4/5 this year with the 2/3 (say Ray and Paul 30 mpg each, TA 12 mpg, and Miller 24 mpg), we'll see much bigger dividends in the playoffs. 

As for Miller, I like him.  He would give us the range that we lacked with only TA.  I also wouldn't mind McGrady.  Off the bench he'd be a bonafide playmaker, taking pressure of Nate Robinson or whatever backup PG we get.  Also, at this point, he'd probably be happy and would benefit from not playing big minutes. 

[the_Bird]

Worry with McGrady is, of course, whether he can stay healthy for a full season.  He misses any significant amount of time, we're back to seeing Paul and Ray playing 35MPG and burning out in the playoffs. 

That's perhaps my one concern with Mike Miller as well, I know he missed a fair amount of time last season (not sure why), and he's generally only been good for about 70 games a season.  Still, I feel more comfortable with his health situation than counting on McGrady.

[Jon]

Worry with McGrady is, of course, whether he can stay healthy for a full season.  He misses any significant amount of time, we're back to seeing Paul and Ray playing 35MPG and burning out in the playoffs. 

That's perhaps my one concern with Mike Miller as well, I know he missed a fair amount of time last season (not sure why), and he's generally only been good for about 70 games a season.  Still, I feel more comfortable with his health situation than counting on McGrady.

True.  However, I think a commitment needs to be made that Paul and Ray won't play those minutes.  Thus, if McGrady goes out, I think Paul and Ray still play 30 mpg and either TA plays big minutes or someone else plays.  This team won't miss the playoffs doing that. 

[the_Bird]

Forgetting salaries for the time being, would you take McGrady over Mike Miller at this point?  McGrady's obviously been the better playmaker over the course of his career, but hard to know how much of that he'll ever get back.  Not much of a shooter when he returned to the Knicks (<25% from downtown), and for his career he's a fairly pedestrian 33% - 34% long-range shooter.  Not in the class of Mike Miller, to be sure.  Doesn't have the rebounding.

I guess I'd look at McGrady as a Plan B or Plan C, if the cost was right he might be OK to take a flier on but I'd hate to count on him when we really are now talking about a one-year window.  If they decide to spend the MLE on someone for the frontcourt (Ty Thomas, Amir Johnson, whoever), and you could get T-Mac on the cheap, I suppose there would be worse things than that.

[Silas]

I like the idea of the Cs going after Miller.  However, he made close to $10M last year and may not want to settle for the MLE next year. If he signed on to the Cs, I would start him at SG and use Ray as the 6th man to save him for the playoffs. At 6'8", he can easily play SG or SF.  

[slamtheking]

before the finals, I thought Miller was a really good option B after my preferred option A -- Travis Outlaw -- since Miller was more of a scorer than Outlaw who is more of a defender.

now that Perk is injured and Sheed possibly retiring, I really think the MLE may need to go towards a center like Haywood.  If Perk can come back around the end of the year and Sheed sticks around (still need a back up center to limit Sheed's minutes--possibly a vet min like Battie or possibly Brad MIller if he can be had for that little and doesn't decide to kill Rondo), Miller would do fine as the MLE selection.

[JSD]

With Wallace calling it quits we need more length. The MLE has got to be geared towards a C/PF if we plan on beating the Lakers next year in the Finals.

[Lucky17]

There are few free agent PF/C players that are hands-down worth the full MLE, I think:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=37866.0

Udonis Haslem, Ty Thomas, and Brendan Haywood might be the list.

I think there are plenty of journeyman backup bigs out there that we could land with a minimum-level contract.

[snively]

The Wizards guys at Bullets forever broke down his game in some detail at bulletsforever: http://www.bulletsforever.com/2010/6/2/1497797/2010-wizards-player-evaluation

Apparently he was the 7th best spot-up shooter in the league last year and the 15th best shooter coming off screens, and he scored roughly as much as he gave up on defense.

[BballTim]

  I heard the Mavs were planning on keeping Haywood.