avatar

Miller and Salmons Headed to Chicago

by Chris Alvino on February 18th, 2009 at 6:24 pm

According to ESPN.com, Brad Miller and John Salmons are headed to Chicago for Andres Nocioni and Drew Gooden.

Instead of getting into the logistics of this deal, I really have to question where Donnie Walsh was on this deal. The Knicks could have taken those two players, and Kenny Thomas, for Marbury’s expiring deal and and Jeffries (I would have to assume this would have been a better deal for Sacramento). That would have put us in good shape for both this next year and a half, and for the future. Salmons would have been a good player to put around our beloved 2010 prize.

I am not sure where Donnie will turn now… if he turns anywhere at all. If this roster remains unchanged after tomorrow’s deadline, I will be pretty upset. This team is not a contender right now. I am not saying that Miller and Salmons would have propelled us to the top of the East, but they both would have filled major holes for us. And I do not want to hear that Miller would not have helped us. He is not a great defender, but he is big body… bigger than Lee, Tim Thomas, and the rail-thin Jared Jeffries.

Seeing this deal go down makes me wonder where Donnie is headed. If you ask me, he has not helped this team in the short-term. He has until tomorrow at 3 to get something done, but let’s face it, this deal was one Donnie should have made. Who knows, maybe Donnie pulls a rabbit out of his hat. But something tells me he won’t. And that is simply unacceptable.

avatar

About Chris Alvino

Chris Alvino grew up in Crestwood, NY. He graduated from Regis High School in 2005. There he played both basketball and baseball. Chris is currently a student at Boston College, where he practices with the varsity Women's Basketball Team (... seriously). Chris has been a Knicks' fan for years and can literally talk about them all day long, every day of the week. Chris enjoys writing on this blog and seeing what everyone out there has to say about it. View all posts by Chris Alvino →
  • Mucha

    “Unacceptable” is exaggerated, Donnie Walsh should not make a move if he can’t get the better end of the trade. Miller & Salmons would have been useless, maybe they would have gotten us a few more wins and lowered our position in the lottery. And I don’t want that kind of scenario.

    Kevin Martin would be great under D’Antoni and like I said, it’s harder to get 25 ppg on a bad team because you draw more attention. Open the lanes and create some space around the 3 point line and Martin gets 30 ppg. And a scoring guard is what Donnie Walsh is looking for anyways, Duhon is a floor general but he needs a guard who can score because he’ll never be that kind of player.

    Kevin Martin and Kenny Thomas for Marbury, a protected pick (unprotected in 2012?) and cash would be a great deal. Spencer Hawes would be a great fit as well but I can’t see the Kings trading him. If Hawes is available, do something.

  • putiger78

    Basically your proposed trade would have us pay Miller and Thomas $20MM ($40MM luxury tax), that we wouldn’t have had to pay if we let Marbury expire. And we get back Salmons, who doesn’t save us anything against what Jefferies is making.

    So you were asking Dolan to eat $40MM for one and half years of Brad Miller and an upgrade at shooting guard. Too big a price in my opinion. We have wasted money in the past, but this is something else and in a bad economy. Also, taking Salmons dooms any chance you have of resigning Nate and having a realistic shot at signing a max free agent next year.

    Take Salmons out of the trade, and allow us to shed all of Jefferies salary for 2010-11, and maybe its worth it.

  • BiggieSmalls

    You have to think of it from the Kings perspective. Nocioni is an actual player whereas none of the pieces rumored to be going to Sacto from the Knicks were. (Marbury?? Jared Jeffries??)

    Nocioni can shoot 36+ % from 3 and give you good defense for 24 or so minutes a game.. His contract is a decreasing value 5 year deal so it is not terrible for future flexibility. And Gooden is a 7 mil expiring player who actually contributes 13 and 8 in 30 minutes and could sign a cheaper deal next year.

    Id take Nocioni/Gooden over Marbury alone or JJ/Malik any day if Im the Kings

    Was DW gonna put Nate in the deal to make it work?sounds like he didnt want to do that.

    Could this be the first shoe to drop?

  • Its The Kid

    The move now is Malik for Darko….

    He fills a definite need and his contract ends in 2010…

  • metsman1020

    get ramon sessions
    hes a monster

  • jcmoney

    Chris – The deal the Knicks could have had was Miller and Kenny Thomas for Marbury, not Marbury and Jeffries and not including Salmons.

    If there was a feasable way to get Salmons without giving up Lee or Nate, I wouldn’t frown upon it. I like him as a player, but he was very popular and had a lot of interest. The Kings werent giving him away like they would Miller.

    Biggie is right on in the fact that Nocioni is a player. He is not Jared Jeffries who has a similar contract length. Nocioni can ball.

    And Mucha, Kevin Martin is out of the question because of his contract alone. I dont want Kevin Martin as the second best player on my team after 2010. That would not make me comfortable. He’s just not good enough. He is not a 30 a game player. He is not being double teamed nightly in Sacramento. He will not get the same touches on a good team, wont be asked to create his own shot. He becomes Rip Hamilton, who is nice as a third or fourth best player on a championship team. Not fine as a cornerstone of the franchise. Ask, well, Sacramento.

  • http://www.hotstovenewyork.com gozer

    You “don’t want to hear it” cause your wrong, Chris. It’s akin to people who argue that Zach Randolph is a “beast” because he’s been an automatic 20-10 guy his whole career. Then why don’t his teams WIN?? You’re too stat-oriented, man. Unless you’re Nate Robinson’s agent, that’s no way to be. You need to think like a scout. Kudos to Donnie for not importing this garbage to New York.

  • http://www.hotstovenewyork.com gozer

    Incidentally, Chicago’s currently a game ahead of us in the standings. Are they gonna be world beaters now with the addition of Miller’s big body? They’d better be, given the complaining going on in this post.

  • Chris Alvino

    Chicago gave them a good deal. I do not want to over-exaggerate (even though I might have a little bit).

    The bottom line is this: we have two players, Malik Rose and Stephon Marbury, that other teams want. They are also two players who add absolutely zero value to our team.

    Maybe I am naive for wanting to win this year. But if I am not, and we actually do want to win this year, we cannot do so with the roster as it is currently constructed.

  • Mucha

    I understand the fact that you don’t like his contract but your statements are wrong in my opinion.

    If he doesn’t have to “create his own shots” in New York like you said, that means that he would get better looks and easier buckets. And that would inflate his numbers. The Lakers bench is better than Sacramento’s starting lineup, Martin’s numbers are even impressive from my point of view considering the fact that he draws more attention and has very few options around him. He would get better numbers with a better team because he would get more open shots etc. I think he would be a great fit but that’s just my opinion.

    If the Knicks can get Spencer Hawes, now that would be amazing.

  • jcmoney

    They hold value to us though, in that they will expire at the end of the season, freeing up cap space and a shit load of cash for the team. The two contracts are worth roughly 27 million, to take back, say, 25 million in salary that will expire in 2010 would cost our team 50 million dollars in cash due to the luxary tax. That may be worth paying for a star, but not for Brad Miller and John Salmons.

    It doesn’t mean anything to you because you dont pay the bills, but to pay that much for two guys who will probably not help the team all that much would just be foolish. I understand why youd want people who play vs people who wouldnt, but it has to make sense financially too.

    You are not naive to want to win now. I would take a first round exit this year over a lottery pick. But don’t act like Brad Miller would put us over the edge.

    And, even if you think he would, we offered Malik Rose for him and the Kings wanted Nate aswell, so that was out of the question. Salmons is due 5.8 million in 2010 which jumps to around 8 mill with the trade kicker, so we couldn’t take that salary back either.

    I have been very critical of Donnie so far. The Marbury situation was handled bad. The Mobley situation was handled bad. The fact that we played many games with 7 healthy guys is ridiculous. This was a smart move. Relax and watch the rest of the off season.

  • danilo23

    Marcus Camby anyone????
    1. We need a shot blocker and interior post defense
    2. The guy gets plenty of rebounds and is a good double-double type player
    3. SIZE!–we have absolutely none
    4. What does his contract look like in the future?
    5. The Clippers may be desperate with the kind of season they’re having and may be willing to move him

    Any deal proposals?

  • belikmike23
  • Chris Alvino

    You are right. I do not pay the bills. But if paying the bills is the problem, then I have not noticed.

  • http://www.hotstovenewyork.com gozer

    I want to win too, Chris. If you’ve read my comments, you know I do. The difference is, I don’t think Brad Miller helps that cause. And I can’t stand to see you or any other Knicks fan crying over spilt milk here. Heck, I’m paying Miller a compliment with the analogy! If he’s the missing piece in Chicago, then I’ll admit my mistake. If he tanks, however, I expect you to admit your error likewise.

  • renenyg1

    I would rather trade with Uconn,the whole Kings team is all crap,there is not one player that is worth giving up playing time for our young sqad,Martin contract stinks,the whole team sucks,Salmon is a lazy bum,the whole team can’t play dee,they are the worst team in the NBA,the only reason I trade is to dump Jeffries contract and obsorb cash,we have money let’s weld it with the sister ‘s of the poor,the Kings are in need of cash,we have cash ,Marlbury makes sense because nwe payed most of the contract and we can take next year cash of their hands but they have to obsorb Jeffries or Curry.All their players suck ,this would be the only reason to trade ,I would aLSO FEEL SORRY FOR A CLASSY DUDE LIKE rOSE SENDING HIM TO PURGOTORY.

  • da0213

    You presume teams really want Rose and Marbury strictly because they’re expiring contracts, which are hot commodities given the economy, 2010, etc.

    But you really don’t know that they have value for sure.

  • Chris Alvino

    gozer- If Miller and Salmons (I wanted him more than Miller) do not lead Chicago to the promise land, you cannot say that they would not have helped the Knicks. One of the Knicks biggest problems right now (and for the entire season) has been their lack of depth. We would have added two starters.

    But you are right on one thing. Even if we disagree on those two players, there is no use in crying over spilled milk. That deal is done. Enough said about it.

  • http://www.hotstovenewyork.com gozer

    No one said anything about the promised land. If Miller and Salmons don’t improve Chicago, you should admit that Donnie was right to pass on acquiring the big dope. Conversely, if Chicago finishes with a better record than the Knicks, I’ll eat my words.