Could Mike Miller be the key?

[birdwatcher]

Mike Miller is not the key for pretty much anybody to win anything. I guess my glass is half empty with him 

[Jon]

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.

The thing is, Allen and Pierce, even at reduced minutes, are still going to play 32+ mpg.  The real key is stopping this 40+ mpg stuff, particularly with Ray (who Doc often did that to).  So, even going conservative and saying that Doc is only going to play them 32 mpg (which is unlikely in my opinion), that only leaves 36 mpg at the 2/3 spots of backup.  I don't see any reason why McGrady (or Miller) can't play 20+ and TA play the rest. 

The nice thing about McGrady is that for 20 mpg, he probably could be close to his old self.  Maybe not as dominant, but he could enough of a scoring force for Doc to keep Paul and Ray on the bench. 

While Miller is the better "fit" with his shooting, I wonder if the same problem occurs: no one to create offense when the Big Three are out.

With McGrady, the C's could literally run isos for 10 mpg and do OK. 

[FallGuy]

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.

The thing is, Allen and Pierce, even at reduced minutes, are still going to play 32+ mpg.  The real key is stopping this 40+ mpg stuff, particularly with Ray (who Doc often did that to).  So, even going conservative and saying that Doc is only going to play them 32 mpg (which is unlikely in my opinion), that only leaves 36 mpg at the 2/3 spots of backup.  I don't see any reason why McGrady (or Miller) can't play 20+ and TA play the rest. 

The nice thing about McGrady is that for 20 mpg, he probably could be close to his old self.  Maybe not as dominant, but he could enough of a scoring force for Doc to keep Paul and Ray on the bench. 

While Miller is the better "fit" with his shooting, I wonder if the same problem occurs: no one to create offense when the Big Three are out.

With McGrady, the C's could literally run isos for 10 mpg and do OK. 

The McGrady stuff makes no sense. A chronically injured underachiever who's not only aging but couldn't stay on the floor in New York. He is the exact opposite of the kind of player we're looking for.