1/27/09 - 2/3/09 Trade Thread

[seren]

A contender would probably offer a better package for Miller. You need to either add a pick or take on another bad contract, such as KT.

I would do such a deal only if there is a belief that we can package Miller to get something valuable, i.e. a pick, from a contender. Otherwise, we don't need him short term or long term.

[ctorres]

What contender is going to offer a draft pick for Miller, let alone take Kenny Thomas' contract?

Anyways, I wrote this under the Trade Thread about Miller, it may have gone unnoticed:

"He is a great passing big men and his shooting range goes beyond the 3-point line. Miller would also improve the team defensively. Taking Kenny Thomas would be a heavy price to pay, but at least both Miller and Thomas expire by 2010. I think getting a center like Miller is well worth taking Thomas' contract as well. Like the Bulls, the Kings would do this deal if they cannot get a better offer."

Also, with Miller I'd like to add that we would not have to play small anymore. Everyone can play at their natural positions and we could still run D'Antoni's system with ease. I am sure that some of the reservations that people have about Miller are because he is wearing another team's jersey.

If he had a Knicks jersey on producing the way he is for the Kings, then most of us would praise him like the homers that we are.

[drj]

I'd rather just buyout Marbury or let him expire.
By my lights, if we're going to trade Marbs for some contracts expiring one year later, then either (i) we should get picks for taking on extra salary, or (ii) we should be able to move Jeffries in the deal.

[NoLayupRule]

how is Brad Miller any kind of upgrade for us?

Size and can hit the midrange jumper up to 20feet with no problem. He'd be a great big off the bench, or next to Lee when we start facing teams with size. If we were to get hit with any injury issue to Jeffries or Lee, he'd be great to have.

You are never allowed to complain about interior defense again after suggesting Brad miller starts at center for us.

Not to mention that Jeffries usually guards the opposing point guard to deny penetration and shooting and pressure passes, not playing centers on D.

Not to mention that Miller cant run so our advantage over opposing big men on the break will be nullified.

Not to mention that its crazy to mess with the lineup at this point when we are actually seeing success

I do like that Miller can shoot and hes an excellent big man passer but his D, speed chemistry are all major downgrades

[Deeeez Knicks]

I am against trading Marbury unless we are getting back pick(s)/youth or can get rid of Curry or Jeffries (as well as getting back contracts that expire in 2010).

Another thing about getting Miller, I would still like to clear some minutes for Eddy once (or if) he comes back. I don;t think we should give up on Eddy so quickly as a guy who can work up his trade value. Maybe not this year, but theres always next year. Players values fall fast, but they can also rise pretty quickly. But just need to get him on the court and find a few minutes for him...

[ctorres]

How is Miller's D such a downgrade? As far as I know, when he's had a good team around him, he's been good at defense. Him coming to the Knicks would automatically make him our best shot blocker.

It is easy to say we are seeing success right now, but we can quickly go back to a 3 to 5 game skid where we all start to panic.

[StutterStep]

how is Brad Miller any kind of upgrade for us?

Size and can hit the midrange jumper up to 20feet with no problem. He'd be a great big off the bench, or next to Lee when we start facing teams with size. If we were to get hit with any injury issue to Jeffries or Lee, he'd be great to have.

You are never allowed to complain about interior defense again after suggesting Brad miller starts at center for us.

Sure. Whatever. Whenever.

But first show me where I wrote Brad Miller = Interior defense?

Exactly. Thank you. Bye bye.....

[StutterStep]

how is Brad Miller any kind of upgrade for us?

Size and can hit the midrange jumper up to 20feet with no problem. He'd be a great big off the bench, or next to Lee when we start facing teams with size. If we were to get hit with any injury issue to Jeffries or Lee, he'd be great to have.

Not to mention that Jeffries usually guards the opposing point guard to deny penetration and shooting and pressure passes, not playing centers on D.

Oh, there is more: When did I say Jeffries guarded Centers....

[nykfan]

I don't think this is a bad idea if you can send Jeffries or even Curry along with Marbury.

Marbury and Jeffries
FOR
Miller, Jackson, and Thomas

That gives the Knicks more cap room for the Lebron James offseason and saves the Kings a good amount of money overall. Then all the Knicks would need to do is find a way to get rid of Curry and it's not unrealistic to think they could resign Lee and Nate and still sign Lebron and either 1 big star or a few smaller ones.

The Kings might even include a pick in that trade because they'd really be saving a lot of cash.

[omerome]

Wouldn't we need an extra roster spot to make that trade? I'm sure any 2 for 1 trade for us would put us at 16 players right?

[knicks742]

Wouldn't we need an extra roster spot to make that trade? I'm sure any 2 for 1 trade for us would put us at 16 players right?

You can add Roberson or cut him at that point. I think the Kings are good partners, IF, they are looking to cut costs or be players in the 2009 offseason.

[duetta]

Wouldn't we need an extra roster spot to make that trade? I'm sure any 2 for 1 trade for us would put us at 16 players right?

Malik is not long for this team. If he's not traded at the deadline, he'll be waived.

[ctorres]

Marbury and Jeffries
FOR
Miller, Jackson, and Thomas

I think the Kings would rather not deal with us at all than to have to take either Jeffries or Curry, even if we take back Thomas.

[cgf]

I doubt the kings can't find a better deal than just dumping kenny thomas alongside miller. If they move miller they'll probably be looking for a young guy in return and not just a total salary dump.

Bulls might, especially if they think they'll be able to make a play for Marion or Lee to give them a scoring forward who can play alongside deng in an up tempo scheme.

[nykfan]

Marbury and Jeffries for Miller, Moore, and Thomas would give the Kings about $20 million in cap room for this offseason but clear Jeffries off of the Knicks pay roll for the 2010 offseason. I think it's a move that could work out well for both teams.

[nykfan]

Marbury and Jeffries for Miller, Moore, and Kenny Thomas makes more sense for the Knicks. The Kings get $20 million or so in cap space for this offseason, but the Knicks clear Jeffries for the 2010 offseason. I think the Kings would do it to get all that cap relief.

I can't see anyone taking Curry, though. He is such a waste.

[ctorres]

Jeffries makes little sense for the Kings.

The Kings would be dumb to take Jeffries' contract in any way.

[nykfan]

That trade would give the Kings more than $26 million in cap room for this offseason and save them around $13.5 million in player salaries. Jeffries would take up $6 million in their 2010 cap space, but they'd still be saving money and have the chance to pick up some top free agents in 2009 and in 2010.

Maybe it's not something the Kings would do, but it seems like Walsh is looking for a deal like this rather than just dumping Marbury without getting anything out of it.