CJ Miles drawing interest from Lakers (signing w/Cavs)

I'd welcome both Meeks and miles, could never have to much dept....but if I had to choose I'd take miles for the size...I don't trust undersized two's

Sign both of Miles and Meeks and call it a day...our bench would be SOLID

Hill
Jamison
Miles
Meeks
Blake

If we are indeed getting Dwight, then I'm thinking we sign Miles, and J-Rich would be our back up 2 instead. GLock, Ebanks, Eyenga, and McRoberts would all be gone....possibly even Blake.

if we get meeks miles and j-rich then blake should be gone

Ariza3 wrote:if we get meeks miles and j-rich then blake should be gone

We'd have no need for one of Miles or Meeks if we got Richardson. And say hello to a lot of minutes for Darius Morris if Blake is gone... pass.

Ariza3 wrote:if we get meeks miles and j-rich then blake should be gone

I know Meeks played some PG in Philly but I don't think he can handle being a replacement for Blake unfortunately. These three players seem redundant. Trust me, I want to punch myself in the groin for even suggesting Blake needs to be here.

hahaha yeah youre right. as much as blake sucked (minus game 7 vs denver) he knows the team/coaches/etc and hes got the experience (i sound like mike brown). Pretty solid bench regardless:

Blake
Rich
Miles
Jaminson
Hill

If blake can come in for nash, hold his own, and give us like 1-2 3's or J's and like 2-3 assists for jaminson and rich id be pretty happy with our backup PG. we know Rich and Jaminson would do their thing. Hill crash the boards and get the putbacks. and Miles to be the defensive guy off the bench with the occasional open 3 or whatever. they could easily hold their own and give the starters rest. Also having Glock to spread the floor if J-Rich or Blake is out...could be noice

the_Dude wrote:

Ariza3 wrote:if we get meeks miles and j-rich then blake should be gone

I know Meeks played some PG in Philly but I don't think he can handle being a replacement for Blake unfortunately. These three players seem redundant. Trust me, I want to punch myself in the groin for even suggesting Blake needs to be here.

Take Turk instead and then sign Meeks and Miles. See if you can keep Blake. Call it a doubly good day.

I'd put our bench up there with the best in the league if we got both Meeks and Miles....you add defense, 3 point shooting, athleticism and some much needed youth. That 2nd unit will have a lot of spacing too....with literally 4 guys that can hit the 3 ball (I know miles sucked last year, but he was pretty good when he had DWill next to him, plus i"d like to think the lock out had a lot more to do with his poor shooting than anything....percentages were down across the board last year). I could even see Miles starting over MWP, since MWP could probably be a focal point in that 2nd unit.

Hill
Jamison
MWP
Meeks
Blake

Please let the Lakers get BOTH players. That would be a SOLID off-season getting Nash, Jamison, Miles, Meeks, and re-signing Jordan Hill while letting Sessions and Barnes walk (even though I would have preferred to keep Sessions as our back up PG...ugh)

Ariza3 wrote:blake should be gone

fixed it for you.

KB24 wrote:

Ariza3 wrote:blake should be gone

fixed it for you.

Nice fix.

Really hope this happens in the next couple of days

Both Miles & Meeks would be amazing & there'd be no questions at all about our bench.. If we had to choose one I'd go with Miles because Artest is our weakest starter & probably the most likely to be dumped if we don't win a ring.. If Meeks could be our main backup PG I might change my stance because we're looking at limited minutes & high injury risk for Nash.. I also think Miles is a much better all around player, especially on the defensive side of the ball.. He played some great team defense under Sloan & I think Mike Brown will love the guy.. Miles can also back up Kobe.. He's just much more versatile imo

If we lose Blake, I would think we would get Duhon right? Just seems weird that Mitch and crew would think that we would be OK with Nash as our Starter and nobody to back him up outside of like Morris.

I think it would be interesting to get Dwight, Davis or Turk, and Duhon and then sign both Meeks and Miles.

Might make out Bench on of the most decent we have had in a while.

CJ was pretty decent shooter during Williams/Boozer "dynasty" there is no reason he shouldn't be again with our squad

I really like CJ Miles as a player and am very happy Lakers are looking at him. He has good size at either the SG or SF position, can shoot the ball, can score, plays with a lot of hustle and is a good defender

I think the Lakers getting both Meeks and Miles may be a stretch, but if they do get both, I hope they don't both end up being busts and playing like their names suggest....Meek and Mild

Miles and the Lakers
7:59
AM ET
C.J. Miles | Jazz
RECOMMEND0COMMENTS0EMAIL

C.J. Miles remains unsigned and The Salt Lake Tribune reports the Los Angeles Lakers have interest in the swingman.

According to the newspaper, Miles might make his decision within the next few days. If he does choose the Lakers, they would use the $3.09 million taxpayer exception to sign Miles.

Miles has also met with the Cleveland Cavaliers and Dallas Mavericks. The Mavs already have a full 15-man roster, so it could come down to the Cavs and Lakers, or re-signing with the Utah Jazz.

-- Nick Borges

Hmmmm Cavs or LA? Should be an easy choice....

Alonzo Gee has stated that he wants to stay with the Cavs, so if the Cavs keep him on board, I like our chances of landing Miles.

The last 3 role players who were hyped up by CL turned out to be busts, at least when it came to the playoffs.

kobe_mamba wrote:I really like CJ Miles as a player and am very happy Lakers are looking at him. He has good size at either the SG or SF position, can shoot the ball, can score, plays with a lot of hustle and is a good defender

Even when he played with Deron he wasn't a great shooter. He shot well in 08 and was decent in 09 but since then has been below average. He's kind of like a younger Matt Barnes. Maybe a bit more offensive minddd and not as defensively inclined.

I like Miles but why the sudden willingness to use the mini mle? We should have given it to Foye if that's the plan.. Go get Tmac or Terrance Williams for the minimum to back up Ron..

lakersin4 wrote:I like Miles but why the sudden willingness to use the mini mle? We should have given it to Foye if that's the plan.. Go get Tmac or Terrance Williams for the minimum to back up Ron..

Foye was paid 2.5 million by Utah. He's not even worth the mini-MLE to a crap team like Utah. Why would we pay him 3.1?

If they did have plans to use this mini MLE i would tried it on Rush for even 3yrs just to test GSW, I realize he got $4mill for 2yrs but based on reports Rush didn't receive any offers at all.

khmrP wrote:If they did have plans to use this mini MLE i would tried it on Rush for even 3yrs just to test GSW, I realize he got $4mill for 2yrs but based on reports Rush didn't receive any offers at all.

The mini-MLE can only be a max of 2 years I think.

therealdeal wrote:

khmrP wrote:If they did have plans to use this mini MLE i would tried it on Rush for even 3yrs just to test GSW, I realize he got $4mill for 2yrs but based on reports Rush didn't receive any offers at all.

The mini-MLE can only be a max of 2 years I think.

It's 3 years.....

Mini Mid-Level Exception (mini-MLE) – Teams that were over the salary cap and did pay the luxury tax in the previous season may sign a player to the mini-MLE. The value of the mini-MLE is $3MM in the first year of the new CBA. Again, teams may again use the mini-MLE on more than one player. The duration of a contract signed using the mini-MLE can be no more than three years. Just like the full MLE, the mini-MLE increases at a rate of three percent.

An example -- Vince Carter was a free agent this offseason and the Mavericks (over the cap and paid luxury tax last year) used their mini-MLE to sign him to a three-year deal in which he makes $3MM this season.

Well then nevermind.