Celtics targeting free agent Brad Miller?

http://www.nesn.com/2010/06/report-celtics-have-eyes-on-brad-miller-in-free-agency.html

Sounds like a good start IF it happens. They'd still be a big man short, but maybe this means they could afford the luxury of signing a project like Parakhouski—especially if they also sign Scal as a fourth big man. We have no idea what the division will look like or how realistic the possibility of a top seed will be for this team; and last season and other memorable seasons) proved to me that being at or near your peak for the playoffs is more important than being at the top of the division at the trade deadline.

If there's a silver lining to the Perk absence (although there's never really a silver lining when friend or foe is injured) I think it might be the opportunity to see a more fluid Celtics offense. In addition to representing a more diverse scoring option than Perk, I think Miller would move the ball better. For his career, he has double the assists of Perk per 36 minutes.

I don't know a lot about Miller's defense, but I also don't know what the Celtics' defensive needs or strengths will be next year with Thibs gone. And I maintain that defense is more a matter of brains and effort while offense is more a matter of brains and skill. I believe Miller has the brains and the effort will be encouraged by the work ethic of the team as a whole.

Sam

FWIW, Miller does have a positive assist-to-turnover ratio. That's good in a big man.

Now I wish I'd paid more attention to him during that Detroit series instead of just detesting him. I'm guessing he has better hands than Perk. Pretty good bet.

Whoever the Celtics get to fill in for Perk, I assume a lot of people will be worrying about what he doesn't provide that Perk does provide. I don't buy that train of thought. The question is what the new guy DOES provide, period...and how the Celtics' system can be adapted to take advantage of those strengths and to minimize any weaknesses.

Sam

I never thought I would say that I think this is a good idea, but, you are right, we are still going to be one big man short if he does sign. I personally do not like the thought that they would even consider Shaq. All he would do is get in the way of Rondo! I know he probably makes too much money but what about Brendon Haywood, isn't he a free agent. I am sure that he would be asking for big money. It is funny, the shortage of good big men in the league is glaring.

He is also an 80 % free throw shooter for his career!

beat

Brad Miller wouldn't have been my first choice to surpass Kendrick Perkins at the starting 5 spot, but I like his game and hes going to be able to provide more offense than Perkins.

Completely different strengths,but he does have good hands and can drain wide open mid range shots all day and in our offense with so much attention still having to go to Pierce/KG/Rondo he will get those looks.

There is a report, which I read in the Boston Herald, that says the C's will be targeting MIKE Miller also.

Not crazy about his defense, but man oh man is he a shooter.

bob

.

Bob,

I've been targeting Mike Miller privately. I think he could become a really good Celtic. And, as I've now said several times, I'm not as worried about defense as a lot of people are. I want the Celtics to have a very efficient defense, but I happen to believe that, when someone joins this team, the defensive urgency becomes infectious. Not everyone "gets it" (Gerald Green), but the smart ones usually do. And, last season, in 33 minutes a game, he averaged 6 rebounds and 4 assists too.

He's no mid-level exception though, as he made just about $10 million last season.

The only problem in my mind is that he's a forward (6' 8"). They must have him in mid if Pierce bolts, because I can't see him and Pierce coexisting $35 million + for one position?) unless Ray left and they moved Pierce back to SG. (I don't like Paul at SG because he's just not quick enough).

Sam

Sam wrote:Bob,

I've been targeting Mike Miller privately. I think he could become a really good Celtic. And, as I've now said several times, I'm not as worried about defense as a lot of people are. I want the Celtics to have a very efficient defense, but I happen to believe that, when someone joins this team, the defensive urgency becomes infectious. Not everyone "gets it" (Gerald Green), but the smart ones usually do. And, last season, in 33 minutes a game, he averaged 6 rebounds and 4 assists too.

He's no mid-level exception though, as he made just about $10 million last season.

The only problem in my mind is that he's a forward (6' 8"). They must have him in mid if Pierce bolts, because I can't see him and Pierce coexisting $35 million + for one position?) unless Ray left and they moved Pierce back to SG. (I don't like Paul at SG because he's just not quick enough).

Sam

sam,

I cannot imagine a player not giving 110% on defense with KG on the team. I mean, would you want him barking at you because you're playing matador defense (Ole'!)?

How about Miller at 2 and Pierce at 3? A 6'8" SG? Whoa.

Talking to Brad Miller makes sense. Whether you like Brad Miller and want us to go after him or not, we're down a big and, if Sheed retires, we'll be down 2. So, at least considering him makes abundant sense. But talking to Mike Miller is odd UNLESS there's stuff going on with Ray and Paul we don't know about, and that makes me nervous. Shaking the tree hard is a chancy thing, given our small window of opportunity. This is especially true if Doc leaves.

bob

.

Sam wrote:Bob,

I've been targeting Mike Miller privately. I think he could become a really good Celtic. And, as I've now said several times, I'm not as worried about defense as a lot of people are. I want the Celtics to have a very efficient defense, but I happen to believe that, when someone joins this team, the defensive urgency becomes infectious. Not everyone "gets it" (Gerald Green), but the smart ones usually do. And, last season, in 33 minutes a game, he averaged 6 rebounds and 4 assists too.

He's no mid-level exception though, as he made just about $10 million last season.

The only problem in my mind is that he's a forward (6' 8"). They must have him in mid if Pierce bolts, because I can't see him and Pierce coexisting $35 million + for one position?) unless Ray left and they moved Pierce back to SG. (I don't like Paul at SG because he's just not quick enough).

Sam

Sam,

The articles I've seen indicate that Brad Miller and Ray Allen are our priorities and then mention Mike Miller second to them. As you say, he's a bit too pricey to call "depth" and wouldn't fit under the MLE so perhaps it is exactly a contact just in case we should be minus Pierce or Ray. I think if Pierce and Miller were both on the roster the likely candidate to play SG is Miller since he is a true swingman, so he could very well be Ray insurance.

I've also seen accounts adding that Mike Miller is a real Doc Rivers favorite; coming back Doc?

With the number of players in free agency this year it's going to be interesting to see how many don't get the offer they're expecting. A few teams who choose to be patient might be able to pick up a fairly talented player to plug a hole at a discount later on.

Regards

Regards

And the plot thickens.

I actually thought Mike was a SG until I looked at his profile. Is he agile enough to play SG?

I still think the Celts are missing a good bet if they don't trade Sheed's contract for someone.

Sam

Sam wrote:

I still think the Celts are missing a good bet if they don't trade Sheed's contract for someone.

Sam

Sam,

They're trying Sam, I know they're trying.

bob

.

imho if we add mike miller and brad miller (the hansen bros) to the core of last years team we are very very dangerous.

One more athletic big who can JUST bang and d and we are set.

I think both Millers will be improved greatly all around by the environment within the Celts lockers.