Kings and Rockets Trade

[Jespher]

Trade Breakdown:

Sacramento Outgoing:

Brad Miller

Sacramento Incoming:

Mike James
Shane Battier

Houston Outgoing:

Mike James
Shane Battier

Houston Incoming:

Brad Miller

Sacramento Trade Breakdown
Change in Team Outlook: +11.2 ppg, -0.3 rpg, and +2.1 apg.

Houston Trade Breakdown
Change in Team Outlook: -11.2 ppg, +0.3 rpg, and -2.1 apg.

Why Sac Does this: Sacramento has not had a reliable backup point guard since they traded Bobby Jackson for Bonzi. Mike James is a scorer and proved with his Detroit days that he also isn't a slouch on the defensive end. Shane Battier is also a terrific defender who is excellent insurance at the 2 or the 3 (See Artest and Crazy). This opens up playing time at the center position for several of our young (see athletic) centers like Justin Williams, Spencer Hawes, and though he isn't young, Mikki Moore (Shareef Can play there too). This splits Brad's contract into two smaller ones and gives us great insurance with two quality character guys. This helps the Kings win more this season, and gives them more financial flexibility.

Why Sac doesn't do this trade: It often is bad to trade big for small. Also, this trade must wait until August 14th, because Mike James was just traded from Minnesota so the Kings might want to make a move before then, but so far they haven't had an itchy trigger finger...The Kings would miss Brad's inside passing and offensive brain, but I think several of us would agree that the time to move him has passed.

Why Houston does this trade: This move gives the Rockets two good (Mutumbo and Miller) and one great (Ming) center. Brad is still a terrific passer and can help Rick Adelman teach his brand of basketball. Also, Brad will be around much longer than Mutumbo to back-up Yao. Houston got Scola from San Antonio, but they could spell him with Brad at power forward alongside Yao Ming, improving their offense, while Yao makes up for Brad's defense. This would also help relieve the logjam at point guard for Houston, while giving them needed front court help. Houston is trying to win now, and Brad would give them another savy veteran to do that. Houston isn't as concerned with Brad's contract as they are shopping to win it all this year. Also, Bonzi figures to play a more prominant role, and moving Battier would free up minutes for him.

Why Houston doesn't do this trade: Houston recently traded for Mike James to solve the point guard position and this would make them much younger there. If Bobby Sura is still injured and isn't going to play, then it leaves the PG position to Rafer Alston and a bunch of Rookies, which isn't a great thought for Rockets fans. Shane Battier is also a game changing defender, and obviously Brad is much less than that, so Houston would be losing some defensive prowess too. All in all though, the front court is a bigger concern for Houston now than the back court, and McGrady and Wells should eat up most of the Wing minutes anyway IMO.

New Sacramento Lineup

PG: Mike Bibby/Mike James/Mustafa Shakur/Quincy Douby/John Salmons
SG: Kevin Martin/Francisco Garcia/Quincy Douby/John Salmons
SF: Shane Battier/Ron Artest/John Salmons/Francisco Garcia
PF: Ron Artest/Kenny Thomas/Mikki Moore/Shareef Abdur-Rahim/Hawes
C: Mikki Moore/Spencer Hawes/Justin Williams/Shareef Abdur-Rahim

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

...and Houston does this WHY?? Not in 1000 years would THIS ever happen.

 

[Jespher]

...and Houston does this WHY?? Not in 1000 years would THIS ever happen.

Why Houston does this trade: This move gives the Rockets two good (Mutumbo and Miller) and one great (Ming) center. Brad is still a terrific passer and can help Rick Adelman teach his brand of basketball. Also, Brad will be around much longer than Mutumbo to back-up Yao. Houston got Scola from San Antonio, but they could spell him with Brad at power forward alongside Yao Ming, improving their offense, while Yao makes up for Brad's defense. This would also help relieve the logjam at point guard for Houston, while giving them needed front court help. Houston is trying to win now, and Brad would give them another savy veteran to do that. Houston isn't as concerned with Brad's contract as they are shopping to win it all this year. Also, Bonzi figures to play a more prominant role, and moving Battier would free up minutes for him.

 

[VF21]

Trade Breakdown:

Sacramento Outgoing:

Brad Miller

Sacramento Incoming:

Mike James
Shane Battier

Houston Outgoing:

Mike James
Shane Battier

Houston Incoming:

Brad Miller

Sacramento Trade Breakdown
Change in Team Outlook: +11.2 ppg, -0.3 rpg, and +2.1 apg.

Houston Trade Breakdown
Change in Team Outlook: -11.2 ppg, +0.3 rpg, and -2.1 apg.

Why Sac Does this: Sacramento has not had a reliable backup point guard since they traded Bobby Jackson for Bonzi. Mike James is a scorer and proved with his Detroit days that he also isn't a slouch on the defensive end. Shane Battier is also a terrific defender who is excellent insurance at the 2 or the 3 (See Artest and Crazy). This opens up playing time at the center position for several of our young (see athletic) centers like Justin Williams, Spencer Hawes, and though he isn't young, Mikki Moore (Shareef Can play there too). This splits Brad's contract into two smaller ones and gives us great insurance with two quality character guys. This helps the Kings win more this season, and gives them more financial flexibility.

Why Sac doesn't do this trade: It often is bad to trade big for small. Also, this trade must wait until August 14th, because Mike James was just traded from Minnesota so the Kings might want to make a move before then, but so far they haven't had an itchy trigger finger...The Kings would miss Brad's inside passing and offensive brain, but I think several of us would agree that the time to move him has passed.

Why Houston does this trade: This move gives the Rockets two good (Mutumbo and Miller) and one great (Ming) center. Brad is still a terrific passer and can help Rick Adelman teach his brand of basketball. Also, Brad will be around much longer than Mutumbo to back-up Yao. Houston got Scola from San Antonio, but they could spell him with Brad at power forward alongside Yao Ming, improving their offense, while Yao makes up for Brad's defense. This would also help relieve the logjam at point guard for Houston, while giving them needed front court help. Houston is trying to win now, and Brad would give them another savy veteran to do that. Houston isn't as concerned with Brad's contract as they are shopping to win it all this year. Also, Bonzi figures to play a more prominant role, and moving Battier would free up minutes for him.

Why Houston doesn't do this trade: Houston recently traded for Mike James to solve the point guard position and this would make them much younger there. If Bobby Sura is still injured and isn't going to play, then it leaves the PG position to Rafer Alston and a bunch of Rookies, which isn't a great thought for Rockets fans. Shane Battier is also a game changing defender, and obviously Brad is much less than that, so Houston would be losing some defensive prowess too. All in all though, the front court is a bigger concern for Houston now than the back court, and McGrady and Wells should eat up most of the Wing minutes anyway IMO.

New Sacramento Lineup

PG: Mike Bibby/Mike James/Mustafa Shakur/Quincy Douby/John Salmons
SG: Kevin Martin/Francisco Garcia/Quincy Douby/John Salmons
SF: Shane Battier/Ron Artest/John Salmons/Francisco Garcia
PF: Ron Artest/Kenny Thomas/Mikki Moore/Shareef Abdur-Rahim/Hawes
C: Mikki Moore/Spencer Hawes/Justin Williams/Shareef Abdur-Rahim

Nice breakdown, Jespher.

I think the "why Houston doesn't do this trade" is more compelling than the "why Houston does this trade" but I really like this kind of detail.

Nice job.

 

[dude12]

I think that Battier is terribly underrated in this trade scenario and Mike James has had about 1...maybe 2 good years. Houston would not trade Battier straight up for Miller at this point unless Miller shows something.

 

[supamari0]

Our GM's response: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No seriously, Brad Miller? And that too for Battier and James. Two extremely productive players for a declining center with a huge contract?

Brad would be useful but that salary will always be a negative. If he was several million dollars cheaper, then it would certainly be a consideration.

 

[SacTownKid]

Just one thing though. Why does Sacramento even do this trade!?

 

[hrdboild]

It makes no sense for Houston (why do they need three centers? better yet, why do they trade a starting player and a key bench player for a third center?) or for the Kings (Bibby, Martin, Douby, Garcia, Shakur, Salmons -- and you want to add Mike James too? Battier is either your starting PF or backing up Artest at SF getting limited minutes.)

On the other hand, this post just made me realize that Salmons is an anogram for Slamson. No wonder we signed him! Still trying to figure out the Mikki Moore signing though.

 

[John Galt]

Just one thing though. Why does Sacramento even do this trade!?

I bet Sacramento would do almost anything to shed Brad and his salary. I know it would cheer me up considerably to have any trade that sheds either Brad or Kenny - even if it is for some expensive bench fodder for one or two years.

edit to clarify I don't consider Battier and James bench fodder.... this deal would be WAY too good to be true. I'd be happy to trade Brad for a lot less.

 

[Bricklayer]

I'm afraid the only Miller to Houston deal that really did/does make any sense is the one maybe foreclosed by the Smush Parker signing in Miami (never thought I'd be saying that!).

Brad to Houston

Sura's ender to us

Rafer to Miami

JWill's ender to us (or Doleac + ?? to us)

and maybe some low level candy from somebody to us since we gave away the best player in the deal. Pure salary liquidation, while giving the Heat a patch at PG and the Rockets an extra big who runs Adelman's stuff and can play big and slow PF to Scola's small and quick(er) PF.

 

[BawLa]

Just one thing though. Why does Sacramento even do this trade!?

To give us enough pretext to trade Artest and Bibby.


Jespher - I did scratch my head a little bit too on this one. But the only reason I didn't pupu it right away is because you make a very compelling argument. I think your strongest selling points are as follows:

1. Miller fits with Adelman. (Adelman would probably need to strongly urge management to okay the trade)

2. Miller being outside of the paint will suit there deep threats as well as open up room for Bonzi to slash/post up.

3. Mutumbo is 41.

4. When Yao is on the bench, you do not lose scoring ability.


Houston's biggest concerns:

1. Miller's 06/07 campaign.

2. Miller's injuries.

3. Miller's contract.

4. Losing defensive prowess.

 

[Jespher]

I think that Battier is terribly underrated in this trade scenario and Mike James has had about 1...maybe 2 good years. Houston would not trade Battier straight up for Miller at this point unless Miller shows something.

Battier would become the Kings starting SF, so I don't think he would be underrated for Sacramento. It would be impossible to trade Battier for Brad straight up anyways because the salaries do not match. Most seven footers are overpaid in this league, but they are pieces teams can build around much easier than wing players like Battier. Don't forget also that Mutumbo is 75 and probably on his last legs too. I think that Yao and BM would make a great post tandem for Houston.

 

[cfechter]

Why houston doesn't do this trade: Brad Miller has one of the worst contracts in the NBA for the level of production he'll probably give this year.

 

[CruzDude]

In one way this trade makes sense: Miller mentoring Adelmans high post style for a passing BIG plus Miller as a backup. Also Miller is a good guy like Battier. But Houston has been after Battier for a bit to get some veteran leadership. Miller is not the leader Battier is and is a quiet do'er.

Yao seems to be still trying to find his game whether down low or high post. Motumbo is strictly a down low guy, a shot blocker and rebounder but at his age his utility is quite low as well.

On the other hand, James leaving the Rockets leaves them short at the point.

An intriguing idea tho'.

 

[supamari0]

In one way this trade makes sense: Miller mentoring Adelmans high post style for a passing BIG plus Miller as a backup. Also Miller is a good guy like Battier. But Houston has been after Battier for a bit to get some veteran leadership. Miller is not the leader Battier is and is a quiet do'er.

Yao seems to be still trying to find his game whether down low or high post. Motumbo is strictly a down low guy, a shot blocker and rebounder but at his age his utility is quite low as well.

On the other hand, James leaving the Rockets leaves them short at the point.

An intriguing idea tho'.

Battier isn't a leader. He's quiet too but he's a good guy and does all the little things you need to win. You can't make stats for that but it always shows up if you watch him play. There are very few guys like that in the NBA.

As for Yao in the high post. He played some high post action when Rudy T was the coach and did so fairly well. In fact, coming out of China one of his biggest attributes was his court vision. Of course, playing strictly in the low post made that rather meaningless.

Adelman isn't going to run an exact replica of Sacramento's offense because Yao is just too good in the low post. I actually think you'll see a lot of McGrady in the high post because he's tall enough to see over defenders and has phenomenal court vision. And Yao will be up top as well every now and then. You saw flashes of it over the past few years, but we'll see more high post from him.

 

[chrisnu]

On the other hand, James leaving the Rockets leaves them short at the point.

Francis, Alston, and Head can all play the point. Francis could start, if necessary. Having both James and Head (quick offense) is a bit redundant, in fact.

 

[beb0p]

Why Houston doesn't do this trade: Houston recently traded for Mike James to solve the point guard position and this would make them much younger there. If Bobby Sura is still injured and isn't going to play, then it leaves the PG position to Rafer Alston and a bunch of Rookies, which isn't a great thought for Rockets fans. Shane Battier is also a game changing defender, and obviously Brad is much less than that, so Houston would be losing some defensive prowess too. All in all though, the front court is a bigger concern for Houston now than the back court, and McGrady and Wells should eat up most of the Wing minutes anyway IMO.

Also why Houston would never do this trade: They like Mike James. They like Shane Battier. They don't need Brad Miller at all if Luis Scola is as good as advertised. In the event that Scola can't come to the states, a better and cheaper solution is to sign a PJ Brown type, thereby keeping James and Battier intact.

Also, with Francis's injury history last year, the Rockets would be crazy to count on the (ex)Franchise and Rafer to take them to the promise land. Head is better at the SG and Brooks is not ready.

From our perspective, this trade doesn't do anything for us. Getting rid of Miller is fine but we end up taking on more salary (around $7 million more) than the length of Brad's contract.

 

[Jespher]

From our perspective, this trade doesn't do anything for us. Getting rid of Miller is fine but we end up taking on more salary (around $7 million more) than the length of Brad's contract.

I wouldn't mind if the kings pay 7 million more if that gives them insurance for both Mike Bibby and Ron Artest. NBA teams win with quality point guards and adding Mike James to compliment Bibby would help tremendously. Do you really think we're going anywhere with Mustafa Shakur, Quincy Douby, Mike Wilks, or Pooh Jeter as our long term backup PG? Mike James is better than all of those guys, and will make an immediate contribution to team wins and losses.

Battier is also a glue guy, NBA all defensive talent, and an outstanding, Corliss style character guy. Both of these Houston players can play alongside our current talent, as well as back it up, giving us better depth and improving our defense tremendously. So there are some reasons for Sacramento to fork out a bit more doe in this deal. This would also give us much more flexibility to move an Artest, or Bibby without suffering major talent loss.

 

[anafree]

If Kings could make trade Kenny for Alstone and Sura, it seems me much more attractive then that.

 

[beb0p]

I wouldn't mind if the kings pay 7 million more if that gives them insurance for both Mike Bibby and Ron Artest. NBA teams win with quality point guards and adding Mike James to compliment Bibby would help tremendously. Do you really think we're going anywhere with Mustafa Shakur, Quincy Douby, Mike Wilks, or Pooh Jeter as our long term backup PG? Mike James is better than all of those guys, and will make an immediate contribution to team wins and losses.

Battier is also a glue guy, NBA all defensive talent, and an outstanding, Corliss style character guy. Both of these Houston players can play alongside our current talent, as well as back it up, giving us better depth and improving our defense tremendously. So there are some reasons for Sacramento to fork out a bit more doe in this deal. This would also give us much more flexibility to move an Artest, or Bibby without suffering major talent loss.

It sounds like you're in the "win-now" mode. I, and I think most of the fans here, are in the "rebuild" mode. Mike James and Battier don't fit into a rebuilding plan. And wether we have sufficient backups is irrelevant to moving Bibby or Artest. Because in a rebuild mode, we're not trying to win games. We're trying to development young talent (even if it means losing games in the process) and clear cap room. The trade does neither, it doesn't clear cap room and James/Battier only take minutes away from the youngsters. And both those vets are not going to stick around through the rebuild.

It'd be different if we get James/Battier with the intent of making another trade to bring in cap relief and/or young talent/draft pick; like Petrie's targetting of Gooden.

 

[Jespher]

It sounds like you're in the "win-now" mode. I, and I think most of the fans here, are in the "rebuild" mode. Mike James and Battier don't fit into a rebuilding plan. And wether we have sufficient backups is irrelevant to moving Bibby or Artest. Because in a rebuild mode, we're not trying to win games. We're trying to development young talent (even if it means losing games in the process) and clear cap room. The trade does neither, it doesn't clear cap room and James/Battier only take minutes away from the youngsters. And both those vets are not going to stick around through the rebuild.

It'd be different if we get James/Battier with the intent of making another trade to bring in cap relief and/or young talent/draft pick; like Petrie's targetting of Gooden.

I completely agree with this perspective, but wouldn't moving a salary clog who doesn't jump or play D for us for 2 useful pieces open up our financial options and help us rebuild? This move could also give us the talent needed (and the cajones) to actually move Bibby and Ron without dropping off the face of the planet or setting all time losing streak records. So yeah, while I agree the Kings should rebuild, I think this move would help us with that endevour as well (if not as dramatically as trading our starting lineup for expirings).

 

[Bricklayer]

I completely agree with this perspective, but wouldn't moving a salary clog who doesn't jump or play D for us for 2 useful pieces open up our financial options and help us rebuild? This move could also give us the talent needed (and the cajones) to actually move Bibby and Ron without dropping off the face of the planet or setting all time losing streak records. So yeah, while I agree the Kings should rebuild, I think this move would help us with that endevour as well (if not as dramatically as trading our starting lineup for expirings).

People are still avoiding the obvious -- we've already fallen off the face of the planet. Nobody cares. We are irrelevant, have absolutel 0% chance of mattering, are being completely ignored by the networks, are hiring third string coaches and FAs. We are WORSE than terrible. Terrible is at least a mark of distinction. We, on the other hand, don't exist. All that exists for us at this moment is an insistence on winning those few extra games every year that prevent us from having a shot at ever turning the corner and rejoining the league.

 

[BMiller52]

People are still avoiding the obvious -- we've already fallen off the face of the planet. Nobody cares. We are irrelevant, have absolutel 0% chance of mattering, are being completely ignored by the networks, are hiring third string coaches and FAs. We are WORSE than terrible. Terrible is at least a mark of distinction. We, on the other hand, don't exist. All that exists for us at this moment is an insistence on winning those few extra games every year that prevent us from having a shot at ever turning the corner and rejoining the league.

Yeah it seems like the Kings have dropped off the face of the planet. Even the local media coverage sucks. The Bee doesn't write much stuff about them during the offseason, others newspapers do about other teams. We don't hear trade rumors. We don't get any tv time. We are pretty much irrelevant.

 

[Semi]

Yeah it seems like the Kings have dropped off the face of the planet. Even the local media coverage sucks. The Bee doesn't write much stuff about them during the offseason, others newspapers do about other teams. We don't hear trade rumors. We don't get any tv time. We are pretty much irrelevant.

That's because there is nothing worth taking up space in a column. We signed Mikki Moore and called it an offseason.