Official offseason 2013-2014 thread

[mavs777]

Iguodala at 15 million per is much better than this contract, the mavs decided to pay someone who has been bad on both sides of the ball all but 1 year in his career more than the mle, that is just a dreadful deal. I'd put the odds of him being worth his contract at less than 20%.

[oilfieldtrash]

IMO Ellis is much more bang for the buck than Calderon.

[Melonhead]

Originally Posted by j0Shi

Even more guards?

Well 3 of our 6 are rookies, and Larkin who would log minutes has already broken an ankle. The other 2 its early to tell if they will even see playing time. An insurance rip Hamilton/Nate Robinson (depending on price) would help these rookies even more.

[j0Shi]

OK, panic move might be an exaggeration, but there are reasons why Monta has been out on the market that long and I suppose the Mavs weren't sold on him from the start either, otherwise they would have made him a higher priority. We missed out on anybody and settled for Monta, we did not strategically wait for the market to cool down and sign leftovers at a good value.

It's not as bad as it could have been, but 8M+ per is not a bargain. There are reasons why the range of reactions all around go from puzzled to sarcastic.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by j0Shi

We missed out on anybody and settled for Monta, we did not strategically wait for the market to cool down and sign leftovers at a good value.

It's not as bad as it could have been, but 8M+ per is not a bargain. There are reasons why the range of reactions all around go from puzzled to sarcastic.

Well said.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by j0Shi

I really can't see how the team won't end up in the bottom third of defensive efficiency. Calderon/Ellis backcourt is as bad as it gets, Dalembert doesn't have the best reputation and Wright is meh as well.

Also couldn't agree more:

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/maver...vowed-to-avoid



Looks like missing the playoffs last year unfortunately triggered that panic button.

Siding with TM on this reflects poorly on you Joshi. You're better than that. Come over to the light. Come over to team oilfieldtra...actually, nevermind. You're probably fine where you are.

More seriously, because you've been hitting this one pretty hard: you don't see how antbody who trusts the numbers could see potential for Monta to be effective for the Mavs? I don't see how anybody who's watched the last two summers play out can fail to see the logic in the Mavs' decision to go this route.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

Siding with TM on this reflects poorly on you Joshi. You're better than that. Come over to the light. Come over to team oilfieldtra...actually, nevermind. You're probably fine where you are.

More seriously, because you've been hitting this one pretty hard: you don't see how antbody who trusts the numbers could see potential for Monta to be effective for the Mavs? I don't see how anybody who's watched the last two summers play out can fail to see the logic in the Mavs' decision to go this route.

I respect you as a poster as much as anyone (even up there with BG) and I've been looking since yesterday at stats as to why Ellis is a good fit here. The best thing I can come up with is that he gets up 30% of his shots inside and defends the PG decently.

Other than that, he doesn't put up very good numbers. I'm looking to be wrong, but with him AND with Henderson I just don't see the numerical appeal and I think guys can be fearless and have top-10 plays but still be terribly inefficient and hurt the team.

I think you are mostly arguing in support of giving out longer contracts, but I'd love to see a real defense of Ellis in terms of numbers or skills he'll bring.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Let me ask a question here...

Did anyone outside of maybe Larry Sanders look good on Milwaukee last season? The team was crap with ill-fitting parts. You could see the poor body language just from the few games I watched. Ellis turned down a fairly sizable contract for a reason.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Let me ask a question here...

Did anyone outside of maybe Larry Sanders look good on Milwaukee last season? The team was crap with ill-fitting parts. You could see the poor body language just from the few games I watched. Ellis turned down a fairly sizable contract for a reason.

Could that reason be delusion and a complete lack of self awareness as to his true market value?

[jamaljasonandjimmy]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

Could that reason be delusion and a complete lack of self awareness as to his true market value?

most insane people have illusions and delusions its a common symptom

[mavs777]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Let me ask a question here...

Did anyone outside of maybe Larry Sanders look good on Milwaukee last season? The team was crap with ill-fitting parts. You could see the poor body language just from the few games I watched. Ellis turned down a fairly sizable contract for a reason.

John Henson, Marquis Daniels (had a really good year on defense), Ersan Illyasova, Mike Dunleavy.

[jamaljasonandjimmy]

I think we should sign metta. throw him out there to get technical fouls when needed. for years i have been hearing the mavs are weak. he would make them a little tougher. i never seen metta turn on teammates or home fans. he is a loyal dog... no doubt he will end up in a mental ward in his twilight years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu4-ceu74_I
http://fansided.com/2013/07/13/laker...ace-amnestied/

NBA teams under the cap have 48 hours to make a bid on an amnestied player, which began last night at 5PM for World Peace.

[j0Shi]

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

Siding with TM on this reflects poorly on you Joshi. You're better than that. Come over to the light. Come over to team oilfieldtra...actually, nevermind. You're probably fine where you are.

More seriously, because you've been hitting this one pretty hard: you don't see how antbody who trusts the numbers could see potential for Monta to be effective for the Mavs? I don't see how anybody who's watched the last two summers play out can fail to see the logic in the Mavs' decision to go this route.

TM is a douche, probably wont happen again as he reached his quota of quality output... haha.

Yeah it's another sort of risk and have to admit part of me likes that we are not just sitting back just another year. Of course Ellis could be as effective as he has to be to become a decent player in Dallas (and I'm absolutely sure that he'll put up better numbers than in MIL), I just think the opposite is more probable at this point. It also bugs me that people keep (sort of) pretending Ellis "is just the player the Mavs wanted/needed." It was the last chance of getting anyone of note through FA and they originally chose Devin Harris over him.

[sike]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Let me ask a question here...

Did anyone outside of maybe Larry Sanders look good on Milwaukee last season? The team was crap with ill-fitting parts. You could see the poor body language just from the few games I watched. Ellis turned down a fairly sizable contract for a reason.

This isn't a utterly convincing argument, but we can only assume that NO ONE really wants to play for the Bucks. That thing stinks....HARD.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I respect you as a poster as much as anyone (even up there with BG) and I've been looking since yesterday at stats as to why Ellis is a good fit here. The best thing I can come up with is that he gets up 30% of his shots inside and defends the PG decently.

Other than that, he doesn't put up very good numbers. I'm looking to be wrong, but with him AND with Henderson I just don't see the numerical appeal and I think guys can be fearless and have top-10 plays but still be terribly inefficient and hurt the team.

I think you are mostly arguing in support of giving out longer contracts, but I'd love to see a real defense of Ellis in terms of numbers or skills he'll bring.

It's about Monta the player as well as the contract, which, if it turns out to be 3/25, isn't at all what I would call a steal, but nonetheless strikes me as being fair and very tradable (without having to give away draft picks to get it moved).

As far as a defense of Ellis in terms of numbers and skills, it comes down to two things. One is an acknowledgement of the fact that he is an excellent passer for a shooting guard, and passes and handles well enough to get backup minutes at point guard. His scoring gets most of the attention, but there is more to his game than that, and that additional skill and versatility has value.

The second thing is really a question that hasn't yet been answered to my satisfaction, namely: Is he really a bad (which is to say, inefficient) shot-maker, or is it more that he's just too often been a bad-shot taker? I think it's probably been a bit of both. On the one hand, he does not have a reliable three-point shot, and in that sense he's limited as a shot-maker. On the other hand, we are talking about a guy who has historically gotten about 5 fgas at the rim per game - most of them unassisted - which he converts at a better than 60% rate, and who averages about the same number of ftas per game. It's not like there isn't a a basis for efficient, impactful productivity there. Away from the rim, he tends to take a high number of contested pull-up jumpers that any player in the league would shoot a low percentage on. My firm expectation is that if he would pass out/reset on even a few of those possessions per game, and get a higher percentage of spot-ups off kick-outs in his jump-shot chart, that he'd have no problem getting his ts% up above 53% without suffering any kind of significant drop in his point production (don't scoff; his efficiency in Milwaukee was below his career average of ~ 52.6%). That's not great efficiency, but for a guy who makes as many plays as he does and who is (presumably) making just over 8/year, it's perfectly acceptable, and in all likelihood pretty damn valuable given team needs.

Now, all that said, I have no idea whether or not it's realistic to expect that he'll be able to adapt to the maturity and flow of a well-oiled, RC-coached offense, or to playing with the kinds of highly skilled and intelligent finishers he'll be on the court with. His irrational confidence in himself perhaps argues no. But it's not necessarily an impediment if you can just get him to refine the criteria by which he affirms his confidence. In the end, all I can really say is that I hope in the conversations the Mavs had with him that they made an accurate evaluation of his ability and willingness to be coached.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by mavs777

John Henson, Marquis Daniels (had a really good year on defense), Ersan Illyasova, Mike Dunleavy.

My gosh...a bunch of all stars right there. What was I thinking? Henson and Daniels were "good" at what they do in very reserve roles. Illyasova is way overpaid, and Dunleavy was so awesome that he signed for a sweet 2/6 deal with Chicago. Please.

[sike]

Fair, Logical, Balanced.

I hate it.

Seriously though, THIS is how we need to be thinking of the Monta experiment in Dallas.

Ellis has NEVER in his career played with pros the likes of Carter, Marion, Dirk, or Calderon. He would have to be an idiot of the HIGHEST proportions to think he can walk in and own this offense. And if he does have that mindset, then trade him. BUT if he proves coachable, there is a mound of talent to be unearthed.

Originally Posted by grndmstr_c

It's about Monta the player as well as the contract, which, if it turns out to be 3/25, isn't at all what I would call a steal, but nonetheless strikes me as being fair and very tradable (without having to give away draft picks to get it moved).

As far as a defense of Ellis in terms of numbers and skills, it comes down to two things. One is an acknowledgement of the fact that he is an excellent passer for a shooting guard, and passes and handles well enough to get backup minutes at point guard. His scoring gets most of the attention, but there is more to his game than that, and that additional skill and versatility has value.

The second thing is really a question that hasn't yet been answered to my satisfaction, namely: Is he really a bad (which is to say, inefficient) shot-maker, or is it more that he's just too often been a bad-shot taker? I think it's probably been a bit of both. On the one hand, he does not have a reliable three-point shot, and in that sense he's limited as a shot-maker. On the other hand, we are talking about a guy who has historically gotten about 5 fgas at the rim per game - most of them unassisted - which he converts at a better than 60% rate, and who averages about the same number of ftas per game. It's not like there isn't a a basis for efficient, impactful productivity there. Away from the rim, he tends to take a high number of contested pull-up jumpers that any player in the league would shoot a low percentage on. My firm expectation is that if he would pass out/reset on even a few of those possessions per game, and get a higher percentage of spot-ups off kick-outs in his jump-shot chart, that he'd have no problem getting his ts% up above 53% without suffering any kind of significant drop in his point production (don't scoff; his efficiency in Milwaukee was below his career average of ~ 52.6%). That's not great efficiency, but for a guy who makes as many plays as he does and who is (presumably) making just over 8/year, it's perfectly acceptable, and in all likelihood pretty damn valuable given team needs.

Now, all that said, I have no idea whether or not it's realistic to expect that he'll be able to adapt to the maturity and flow of a well-oiled, RC-coached offense, or to playing with the kinds of highly skilled and intelligent finishers he'll be on the court with. His irrational confidence in himself perhaps argues no. But it's not necessarily an impediment if you can just get him to refine the criteria by which he affirms his confidence. In the end, all I can really say is that I hope in the conversations the Mavs had with him that they made an accurate evaluation of his ability and willingness to be coached.

[grndmstr_c]

Originally Posted by j0Shi

TM is a douche, probably wont happen again as he reached his quota of quality output... haha.

Yeah it's another sort of risk and have to admit part of me likes that we are not just sitting back just another year. Of course Ellis could be as effective as he has to be to become a decent player in Dallas (and I'm absolutely sure that he'll put up better numbers than in MIL), I just think the opposite is more probable at this point. It also bugs me that people keep (sort of) pretending Ellis "is just the player the Mavs wanted/needed." It was the last chance of getting anyone of note through FA and they originally chose Devin Harris over him.

I was all on board with Devin, too. That had underrated signing of the summer written all over it. Sometimes bad luck messes up even the best-laid plans.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by mavs777

Iguodala at 15 million per is much better than this contract, the mavs decided to pay someone who has been bad on both sides of the ball all but 1 year in his career more than the mle, that is just a dreadful deal. I'd put the odds of him being worth his contract at less than 20%.

I'm a huge iggy fan but seriously? Monta can be an absolute scoring monster. He obviously has defensive problems, but I expect everyone to be surprised at how good he is here. He obviously has nothing similar in his game but I'm hoping that he develops a repore with Carlisle similar to the one that billups did(carlisle still gets too much credit for developing him though). I would be fairly surprised if he doesn't put up 18+ on 45+ shooting. This is the first scoring 2 guard with great handles we've had since... Ever?

[marc9211]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

I'm a huge iggy fan but seriously? Monta can be an absolute scoring monster. He obviously has defensive problems, but I expect everyone to be surprised at how good he is here. He obviously has nothing similar in his game but I'm hoping that he develops a repore with Carlisle similar to the one that billups did(carlisle still gets too much credit for developing him though). I would be fairly surprised if he doesn't put up 18+ on 45+ shooting. This is the first scoring 2 guard with great handles we've had since... Ever?

I fully expect monta to thrive here as well. With Calderon and Dirk pick and rolling while monta can penetrate and have an much more open lane than he's ever had... We shall see

[MavsFTR]

From the Morning Tip:

NOBODY ASKED ME, BUT ...

What do the Mavericks do now?

Dallas' second summer as a cap room player, looking to add that superstar or collection of stars around Dirk Nowitzki in the sunset of his career, has gone only slightly better than last year -- when the Mavs whiffed on Deron Williams, Dwight Howard, Steve Nash and just about everyone else.

At least this time, Dallas was able to stabilize itself at the point with a four-year, $29 million deal for Jose Calderon. And for a team that failed completely in that endeavor last season, with Darren Collison, Roddy Beaubois and Fisher all found wanting -- the Mavs finished the year with then 37-year-old Mike James starting -- that's something. But it's hard to call this offseason a success.

The big plan this summer was, again, to get Howard, and hopefully draw a second difference maker like Josh Smith. But Howard did not appear to seriously consider Dallas, opting to sign with the Rockets.

The Mavs had to give $30 million over three years to get Monta Ellis, whose high-volume past as a shooter does not seem at first glance to blend in with Rick Carlisle's flow offense. They never got a shot at Chris Paul and decided to pass on making an offer for free agent Andrew Bynum. But their desperate need for a big man has them trying to reach a deal with Samuel Dalembert.

Once can be dismissed as bad luck, coincidence, cicada infestation. Twice is a trend.

Cuban is now talking about a two-year plan to return the Mavs to elite status. I love Cubes, but any time an owner or exec starts talking about two- or three- or four-year plans, fans usually get queasy.

"We can not listen to the media or tweets and do what we need to do," Cuban e-mailed Sunday. "It's about winning games not winning the summer."

After Dallas struck out last summer, GM Donnie Nelson spoke bravely of "keeping our powder dry" until the Mavs could hit on the Big One, the free agent that would be worth waiting for, or until Dallas put enough assets together to trade for a superstar.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that strategy. The Hawks are doing much the same thing, putting modest money into the likes of Paul Millsap (two years, $19 million) and Kyle Korver (re-signed for four years and $24 million) rather than overspending for middling talent and pushing their cap room down the road. But Atlanta didn't bust up a championship team on the road to fiscal frugality.

After eight years and $150 million in luxury taxes, and with higher taxes looming beginning next summer, Cuban has had enough -- for now, at least -- of subsidizing the rest of the league. For the first time, Dallas did not pay luxury tax for this past season, and is likely to not pay them next season.

Again, it makes sense for Cuban, like most non-Prokhorovian owners, to avoid writing those kinds of checks. But that doesn't stop Nowitzki's athletic clock from ticking.

Nowtizki will make $22.7 million next season, the second-highest in the league; only Kobe Bryant ($30.4 million) makes more. But after coming back from arthroscopic knee surgery that kept him out much of the first two months of the season, Nowitzki resembled his old self and almost willed Dallas to the postseason.

After the All-Star break, Nowitzki shot 50.5 percent from the floor and 43.3 percent from 3-point range, averaging 18.9 ppg and 7.7 rpg. He was just as lethal from his favorite spots -- the right elbow and wing -- as he's ever been, making 56 and 58.9 percent of his shots from those spots last season, according to NBA.com's shot charts. No question, he can still play, and at a high level.

With Calderon, the Mavs should be better next season, but they aren't anywhere near good enough to be a contender. Nor will Cuban ever cotton to a full rebuild, which would involve trading Nowitzki.

It has been anathema in the 214 to even talk about pulling the trigger on a Nowitzki deal -- both to the 35-year-old, whose Hall of Fame plaque is just waiting for its inscription date, and to the team that traded for the then-almost unknown kid from Wurzburg, Germany, on Draft night in 1998. Nowitzki became the greatest player in franchise history, with more than 25,000 points, a 2011 championship and Finals MVP award and an MVP in 2007.

But the Mavericks are stuck in the NBA middle. They have too much pride and remaining talent and coaching to go all the way to the bottom, where the difference-making Lottery picks often reside. But they're no longer good enough to be a contender, even with Nowitzki still playing at a high level.

If -- if -- they looked at a deal, could they get something good for him?

"It is possible," one general manager texted Sunday. "It is a tough set of circumstances to get value...1 year deal, 35/36 year old, big dollar contract, trade rules. The team receiving Dirk would have to be close to the title; does Dirk stay in a year. Mark and [Mavs GM] Donnie [Nelson] are good at what they do, but they have always been loyal to keeping Dirk."

The problem, even if Dallas were so inclined, is that the line of demarcation between being all in for 2013-14 and sitting things out until help arrives, one way or another, a year from now has already been drawn -- a gaping maw between the haves and have-nots. There just aren't that many contending teams who haven't already made their moves, or who already have who they want in place.

"He would have to go to a contender," another GM texted. "With $20 million (going out), I don't think they can get all that much."

Of course, Dallas doesn't want to deal Nowitzki, even if it runs the risk of losing him for nothing as a free agent next summer. The chance of getting fair value for him is small, and the chance that he wants to retire as a one-team superstar is great. But the Mavericks are reaching the point of no return. You think it was easy for Danny Ainge to trade Paul Pierce, who is dangerously close to getting etched onto the Celtics' Mount Rushmore? (Bill Russell. Larry Bird. John Havlicek. And ... you tell me who else. Bob Cousy? Sam Jones? K.C. Jones? Dave Cowens? Or Pierce?)

The Mavericks, going back to the first coach that believed in Nowitzki -- Don Nelson, Donnie's father -- have never wavered in their faith. Nowitzki has never wavered in his public support of the team's moves -- even when it meant they let Nash go as a free agent in 2004, only to see him put up back-to-back MVP seasons in Phoenix in 2005 and '06.

But Nowitzki said often last season that he wouldn't be happy waiting around forever for the franchise to fix the roster.

"You have either two options," Nowitzki said in January. "We went for Deron Williams, he didn't come. I thought other than that, you either sign a bunch of one-year deals and go again for the next summer, or you break the whole thing up, and then trade me, and start over. So we decided to go for the one option and go for a bunch of one-year deals and keep the cap space for next summer. We'll see what happens."

What happened was a slight upgrade in terms of commit for next season. The Mavs won't have eight players with a foot out the door as they did last season. The 31-year-old Calderon is a top-15 point guard who should thrive both playing in Carlisle's system and with Nowitzki.

So, why did Calderon pick the Mavericks?

"The truth is that I don't know if there was exactly that many options there," he told local reporters last week. "Sometimes the offers come and go two hours later. It's kind of a weird thing."

Well, with ringing endorsements like that, how can the Mavs lose?

Maybe the Mavericks keep their powder dry until next summer, when they can get down to next to nothing in salary commitments, and take a run at the LeBrons of the loaded 2014 free agent world. They could certainly still land Moby Dick and then re-sign Nowitzki to a new, short, Kevin Garnett-ish deal. Or, if Nowitzki did decide to walk next summer, the Mavs could work out the best sign-and-trade deal they can.

Either would require still more faith in Cuban from Nowitzki. He's loyal. But he's also a champion. And champions, once slaked, never lose the thirst for winning big. The Big German is still thirsty. Real thirsty. So, how do they keep him satisfied?

"By winning games," Cuban said.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by MavsFTR

From the Morning Tip:

NOBODY ASKED ME, BUT ...

1) Wasn't Steve Nash traded to the Lakers?
2) Was there real interest in pursuing him, or just unsourced texts and blurbs and tweets?
3) Dirk isn't going anywhere.
4) You never answered your own question as to what they do now. You just offered up conjecture as to Dirk's desire to stay, or Calderon's supposed apathy based upon a few sentences.
5) Determining their contender status in the offseason when more moves may be coming is kind of like criticizing a cake after you've mixed the eggs, sugar, and butter together, but have yet to add the flour. If we go into this coming season as-is, I would agree with your take, but I'd rather wait and see what comes out of the oven.

[MavsFTR]

It's not my take, dude. I told you it's from the Morning Tip. I was on my phone and David Aldridge tweeted it. I simply copy/pasted it.

[BGMaverick9]

Score one for chum here.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by MavsFTR

It's not my take, dude. I told you it's from the Morning Tip. I was on my phone and David Aldridge tweeted it. I simply copy/pasted it.

That's cool, man. But BG definitely has a point. If you could actually credit the author or link to the article, that would probably help. The way your post reads, it looks like you are posting your content. And I usually like Aldridge, but this article is just awful. And I am glad you didn't write it.

[ribosoma]

Originally Posted by BGMaverick9

Score one for chum here.

Where was he when we needed him?

[MavsFTR]

Understandable. Like I said, I was on my phone and wanted to quickly share. I'll be more conscious of making clear the author next time.

[Underdog]

@AlexKennedyNBA: The Dallas Mavericks ... have expressed interest in Jamaal Tinsley.

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

[aexchange]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I think you are mostly arguing in support of giving out longer contracts, but I'd love to see a real defense of Ellis in terms of numbers or skills he'll bring.

If the Mavs plan on using Ellis in a similar fashion to how they used to use Barea, Mayo and Terry in PNR situations, then you should expect to see fairly sizable improvements in shooting percentage just based on the quality of the looks that they get. Factor that in with Carlisle's ability to coach up people it's no wonder why some of us (me included) are very optimistic about Ellis signing here.

Barea
09-10 DAL True Shooting .526
10-11 DAL True Shooting .535
11-12 MIN True Shooting .502
12-13 MIN True Shooting .510

Mayo
10-11 MEM True Shooting .499
11-12 MEM True Shooting .513
12-13 DAL True Shooting .556

The Dirk effect clearly causes teammates to get better looks than they've historically gotten and for what it's worth, Carter put up a career high in TS% at .571 last year even with Dirk hobbled for over a quarter of the season.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Maybe as a patch job until Harris gets healthy? Or Maybe we're just going to go with all guards and Dirk this season.

[yahyes]

Anyone interested in Mike Miller?

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by yahyes

Anyone interested in Mike Miller?

Absolutely not... especially with 13 guys already on the roster and only one center.

[Budapest Maverick]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I just threw up in my mouth a little.

That would make literally zero sense.

Originally Posted by yahyes

Anyone interested in Mike Miller?

Yep. We need to make a bid, he played great last season at the end of the regular season when Wade was injured, and Spoelstra rested James. Miller is a very good player, and only 33. He could have a healthy season or 2, and in that case, he would be a bargain for that 3 or 4 million we could bid. Now of course, has no idea if that would mess up our capspace. The center position needs to be taken care of.

[MavsFanTillDeath]

Originally Posted by yahyes

Anyone interested in Mike Miller?

very interested. he's still one of the best 3-point shooters in the game.

[Melonhead]

Dont care for Miller

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by yahyes

Anyone interested in Mike Miller?

If we trade Marion or Carter, then why not -- if the price is right.

[MavsFanTillDeath]

Originally Posted by Underdog

If we trade Marion or Carter, then why not -- if the price is right.

marion - No
carter - Yes

[yahyes]

Lets say if they pull some strings together and trade to get like Gortat or Mcgee(lucky). Miller would be great to add with Carter.

[jasonic]

Miller no, we have a lot of offense in 2-3 we need defense.

[nowhereman]

Miller nearly cost the heat the damn championship this year. Gave up way more points than he got, and took crucial time away from Battier and Allen. No thanks.