The Salmons & Miller trade, revisited

[Shakes]

When we made this trade and went on a run to end the year, much was made about how we'd managed to dump a contract in Nocioni while also improving the team. Now obviously I'd still do the trade because of the whole dumping Nocioni bit, but I'd like to examine the whole improving the team part.

Salmons and Miller have been unspeakably awful this year. Remember that run we went on to end last year? OK, go and look up the percentages those two are shooting this year, and assign those percentages to them last year and see what the figures look like. Don't look so good do they? They're that bad that had Miller and Salmons played like this last year the team would have significantly regressed offensively compared to before the trade. Given the primary improvement post trade was offensive, I think it's fair to say that we'd have missed the playoffs if they'd played like this last year.

A lot had been made of Ben Gordon's departure and it's effect on the offense, and that's fair. But when comparing to the end of last year you absolutely have to keep in mind that Miller/Salmons are costing us a combined 7+ points a game compared to how they played during that stretch. If we had last year's versions, this year's offense would be around league average instead of second worst (yes really, again plug last year's numbers into this year's team and take a look).

Again, I still do the trade because of the salary implications (not to mention Gooden & Nocioni have also sucked this year). Yes, management are paid to have the foresight that and older player and a fluke year player might not be as good the following year, so I'm happy to see them blamed for this. But in terms of how much this team is hurting this year, Miller/Salmons have more to do with it than Gordon. Letting Gordon go on the grounds of his contract being too much is at least debatable, whether Kirk could have been flipped to keep Gordon is speculation, that Miller and Salmons are not playing like NBA level players when they were acquired not just as expirings but to be part of the rotation is clear as day and is really where management should be taking heat for their moves.

(Inspired by the following exchange in the game thread ...)

TheStig wrote:

Shakes wrote:

You mean the offense that was average last year and this year stinks? Could it perhaps not be the coach's fault and instead the players (both personnel changes and player regression)?

Average, we were one of the best after the trade with the same core minus BG. I highly doubted taj gibson has brought us down.

 

[TheStig]

I'd also like to point out that this trade made it a 100% certain BG wasn't coming back. Gooden would have expired and miller wouldn't be on the books so we would have had enough to resign BG and be under the LT.

Furthermore, I think Salmon's is the bigger fluke. We foresaw Miller declining as he was clearly on the downside of his career. Salmons has dropped off a cliff for no apparent reason. So I would say Salmons has been most of the problem that you are noting.

I'd also point out that BG was key in their production too. I think you underestimate how much he opened up the floor. Salmons has had to become a jump shooter exclusively because the lane is too packed for him to get to the rim and he is getting a better defender on him now a days becuase BG isn't there to draw him anymore.

 

[Diddy1122]

TheStig wrote:

I'd also like to point out that this trade made it a 100% certain BG wasn't coming back. Gooden would have expired and miller wouldn't be on the books so we would have had enough to resign BG and be under the LT.

Furthermore, I think Salmon's is the bigger fluke. We foresaw Miller declining as he was clearly on the downside of his career. Salmons has dropped off a cliff for no apparent reason. So I would say Salmons has been most of the problem that you are noting.

I'd also point out that BG was key in their production too. I think you underestimate how much he opened up the floor. Salmons has had to become a jump shooter exclusively because the lane is too packed for him to get to the rim and he is getting a better defender on him now a days becuase BG isn't there to draw him anymore.

There's a glaringly apparent reason why Salmons has dropped off a cliff. HE'S NOT A 2 GUARD. I said it all off season that he would struggle moving to a position he's never played in his 7+ years in the league. He's not quick enough to cover quicker 2 guards (his length helps but he's getting beat off the dribble ALOT) & he's having trouble getting open because most 2's are quick enough to stay in front of him. It's taken away his slashing ability & made him a jumpshooter, which was not his strong suit to begin with. It's no surprise that the team plays better when Deng is at the 4 & Salmons is back in his natural 3 spot.

You hit on the good point though. BG made Salmons better. It's been painfully obvious all season. I would say start Kirk in John's place but that's not going to make anything better because Kirk has been godawful thus far. I'd still make the trade 10 times out of 10 though. But I also wouldn't let the leading scorer go for cap space in the soon to be year 2000 redux.

 

[Shakes]

TheStig wrote:

I'd also like to point out that this trade made it a 100% certain BG wasn't coming back. Gooden would have expired and miller wouldn't be on the books so we would have had enough to resign BG and be under the LT.

I don't think the trade had anything to do with Gordon, other than that management had already decided to not keep Gordon, so that enabled them to make the trade without having to worry about the LT.

Furthermore, I think Salmon's is the bigger fluke. We foresaw Miller declining as he was clearly on the downside of his career. Salmons has dropped off a cliff for no apparent reason. So I would say Salmons has been most of the problem that you are noting.

I'm actually more surprised about Miller. He'd just had an equal or better year to the one before, so even factoring in age there was no reason to expect him to go from average starter to end of bench scrub sort of level.

I'd also point out that BG was key in their production too. I think you underestimate how much he opened up the floor. Salmons has had to become a jump shooter exclusively because the lane is too packed for him to get to the rim and he is getting a better defender on him now a days becuase BG isn't there to draw him anymore.

Miller and Salmons put up roughly the same numbers on a Kings side that was pretty bad offensively (Kevin Martin and nothing much else really) that they did when they were traded to the Bulls, so I'm not going to just write it off as being their team mate's fault.

The idea that a good shooter opens the game up for other people has some merit. I didn't think Salmons was really a slasher last year either (ironically I think that idea was started by the anti-BG people who wanted to pain Gordon as a chucker and Salmons as this guy who got great inside shots). So I checked the stats and although Salmons is taking just as many close shots, he's getting blocked twice as often and missing more of the ones that aren't blocked. As mentioned though, part of this could also be that it's harder for him to beat his man at SG. I'd put some stock in this given the assist rate of his inside attempts has skyrocketed, ie he can on longer create successfully for himself.

It also still doesn't explain how Salmons and Miller can't hit open jump shots anymore (which, especially for Salmons, is the biggest cause of the drop off). I'm also not sure Salmons is getting a better defender, if you were the opposing coach would you make it a priority to guard Deng or Salmons? I'd guard Deng, and let Salmons shoot all the threes he wants.

 

[??? ??????]

FWIW, here's what I wrote after the trades were made in February:

On Miller

Brad Miller is the new Antonio Davis. That’s the way to look at this. He is the veteran big man who knows how to get things done in the NBA. He can pass and shoot the midrange jumper, which will be big in the Bulls offense. The Bulls also look to get a lot of leadership out of Miller. He will be a good guy to have around the team.

On Salmons:

The big question is whether Salmons is just a one year wonder or not. Prior to this season, the most Salmons has scored was 12.5 PPG in a season. Outside of this year, Salmons hasn’t been a very good three point shooter. Players as old as Salmons typically don’t make the kind of leap he has made this year. This is eerily similar to the situation with Mike James in Toronto, an older player explodes for a big year on one of the worst teams in the league.

Does this mean John Salmons is a scrub in disguise? No. But he is not starter material, given his near league worst defense, and the fact that he has a better scorer and defender ahead of him in the lineup in Ben Gordon. Salmons could make a good sixth man for the Bulls over the next few years, but anything more is just overreaching with him.

On the Bulls Future:

The Bulls now are loaded with tradeable assets. Paxson is ready to swing a blockbuster trade. It is just a matter of waiting for the time to come. It could happen at the 2009 NBA draft, or prior to the 2010 trade deadline.

The small flaw with this plan is that it depends on the actions of other teams in the league. But I feel this is a brilliant plan. When Amare Stoudemire, Chris Bosh, Carlos Boozer, and others start becoming available on the trade market, Paxson is ready to make a deal.

That was kind of the plan going into this trade deadline. The Bulls tried to get Amare Stoudemire for the expiring contract of Drew Gooden and some young prospects. It didn’t work out, but Paxson has reloaded the Bulls with expiring contracts to give it another go next year.

Following this trade deadline, the Bulls future looks much brighter to me. A key to all of this, is for the Bulls to re-sign Ben Gordon. He is their best scorer, and will be crucial in this team becoming great. Yes, Gordon isn’t good enough to lead a team by himself. But as one of the best three pointers in the game, the fourth best fastbreak scorer in the NBA this season, and a tradtionally clutch scorer, he is exactly what you want out of one of the complementry players around Derrick Rose. As long as the Bulls re-sign Ben Gordon, they will be in a position to become a championship caliber team with one, big blockbuster trade at the deadline next year.

http://dabullz.com/2009/02/20/the-bulls-in-wake-of-the-trade-deadline/

I think Brad Miller and John Salmons are largely what we thought about them prior to the trade. We were fooled a bit by their play next to Gordon, who made life incredibly easy for them on the offensive end, but they've just fallen back to what they always were.

 

[Shakes]

Diddy1122 wrote:

There's a glaringly apparent reason why Salmons has dropped off a cliff. HE'S NOT A 2 GUARD. I said it all off season that he would struggle moving to a position he's never played in his 7+ years in the league.

He might not be a good guard, but that he's never played there is simply not true. He played there plenty for the Kings, even as recently as last year. The year before that it was his primary position, Artest and Garcia took nearly all the SF minutes. When he was on Philadelphia he played the SG almost exclusively.

I'd say Salmons is the bad kind of tweener, his lack of rebounding hurts you at forward, his lack of speed hurts you at guard. Given he's also a bit of a black hole on offense and an over-rated defender, we traded Noc for the 2/3 version of himself I think.

 

[Shakes]

??? ?????? wrote:

I think Brad Miller and John Salmons are largely what we thought about them prior to the trade. We were fooled a bit by their play next to Gordon, who made life incredibly easy for them on the offensive end, but they've just fallen back to what they always were.

Brad Miller is 8% below his career FG% (and 5% below his previous worse). He's putting up career lows in both offensive and defensive rebounding rates. He's even near a career low in FTA per minute. What we're getting this year isn't what we expected, and I really don't think anyone could expect age to catch up with him this suddenly, especially given he's a guy who has never really had any athleticism to rely on.

Salmons I agree, I do wish we'd flipped him for a real expiring last off-season when his value was high enough we might have even got a pick thrown in.

Anyway my main point was that people looking at how the Bulls finished the year last year were looking at fools gold, because even if we kept Gordon, Salmons and Miller are so far off repeating that level of play it's not funny.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Miller has definitely fallen off a cliff for no reason. Maybe he's suffering from the same "I can't hit a jumper" plight that has stricken Salmons and Hinrich. For one that had no athleticism to begin with, I don't see how his age could have taken away that much from him.

Salmons is just a mystery to me. Perhaps he needs another scoring wing player to be effective (Kevin Martin in Sacramento, AI in Philly, BG last year) because by himself, he's just not the scorer we thought he could be.

 

[Bullsman24]

yeah, i agree with clonetrooper. this is the first time that salmons has had to be counted on for scoring. i think he will improve now as derrick gets more healthy and comfortable.

 

[Ron J]

what i feel it comes down to is salmons is who we thought he was he a had a good year playing next to kevin martin and ben gordon two 20 point scores now that hes asked to be a 20 point scorer he cant this season is probably lost what we need to worry about at this point is will he even opt out because if he doesnt where screwed

 

[Shakes]

The problem with the "Salmons is being asked to do more" theory is that he isn't. He's taking the same volume of shots as he was last year, he's just missing more of them.