Mike Miller? No thanks

Mike Miller

According to the Bleacher Report, the Minnesota Timberwolves — who have three first round picks in this year’s draft — might want to package a pick and Mike Miller for either Ben Gordon (in a sign-and-trade) or Kirk Hinrich. It seems unlikely that the Bulls would do a sign-and-trade for BG, because that would mean they’d have to take a salary hit that would likely push them into [insert dramatic music here] luxury tax territory. A deal for Hinrich seems more likely, since everybody knows that John Paxson would love to dump Hinrich’s contract onto anybody who will take it. (No, really. Do you know anybody who will take it? If so, call J-Pax at 1-800-BUY-KIRK.)

But seriously, I hope this deal is just standard offseason speculation that won’t amount to anything. I’m not impressed enough with the prospects in this year’s draft to get overly excited about an additional pick. As for Miller, well, I really don’t want to see another defenseless shooter in a Bulls uniform. The upside of a deal for Miller is that his contract expires after next season, which means that his salary ($9,750,000 for 2009-10) would come off the books next summer. But at this point, I’m not really interested in salary dumps unless it makes the team better…and I can’t see Miller doing that.

, , ,

8 Responses to Mike Miller? No thanks

  1. bscholtens@hotmail.com'
    Brad May 11, 2009 at 5:19 pm #

    What’s wrong with you Matt? Let me say this slowly just to be clear: YOU …ARE …A …BLOGGER.

    Seriously, how much good material has John Salmons and Kirk Hinrich given you this year? The answer is almost none. You see, their problem is they simply play basketball too well. You can’t knock their shooting, defense, ball control or decision making with any regularity. You don’t even get very may goofy pictures (ala Mr. Noah) since they even have a decent sense of style. As a reporter/blogger, you need morons to make a story. Sure we’ll lose games, but what is that in comparison to the mileage you get out of Tyrus or Ben or …Mike Miller? Just looking at that picture gives me ideas for at least two or three good jokes!

  2. jeff.anderson@black-river.com'
    jeff May 11, 2009 at 8:07 pm #

    Another trade that would be bad for both teams. The only thing the Wolves need less than another undersized, shoot-first, non-PG would be another undersized, no-defense PF.

  3. Colin May 12, 2009 at 3:22 am #

    I would’ve been all for Mike Miller until we acquired Salmons. He would’ve been a good backup big SG…. If we are planning on resigning BG, then I would rather trade him for Miller then keep him. I don’t want to give Kirk for him though.

  4. usmcroc22@msn.com'
    rocky May 13, 2009 at 5:58 am #

    I’d do a sign and trade w/ Ben Gordon. So what we get hit on the cap for a year, then Mike Millers contract of 9.75 comes off the books in 2010 anyways and if they add the #18 pick then we get something in return for Ben Gordon versus losing him for nothing.

  5. Anonymous May 13, 2009 at 5:49 pm #

    there is no chance of a sign and trade unless its somewhere gordon wants to go…and im pretty sure he wants to win. i say do the deal with the wolves for miller and a pick for kirk and then try to get someone who can score inside. nobody is untouchable but rose and noah.

  6. merissapoindexter@gmail.com'
    ?? ????? ?? January 2, 2014 at 8:39 pm #

    Hi there everybody, here every one is sharing these
    knowledge, so it’s good to read this weblog, and I used to pay
    a visit this webpage everyday.


  1. Not Qualified To Comment » Qualified Links - May 13, 2009

    […] Is there really Mike Miller to the Bulls talk?  For Gordon or Hinrich?  How could adding a 3rd small forward be the answer? No thanks Minnesota. [By The Horns] […]

  2. Marcus Camby? Again, no thanks » By The Horns - May 20, 2009

    […] the offseason speculation continue! Now that the woeful Clippers have won the right to destroy yet another promising NBA […]

Designed by Anthony Bain