Klomp wrote:MPLSwolves wrote:lol. Bulls fans have gotten so cocky the past few days, jumping into our threads now to act like they won the trade.
This is not necessary.
MPLSwolves wrote:I don't read their forum, so maybe they get traffic from Wolves fans over there and this is normal.
They do. At minimum, I pop over there almost daily to join in about LaVine's return or in their Around the League thread to chat about our team. There's a split over there, but many of them enjoy watching us play.
I updated my post to admit my rudeness.
don't want to discourage discussion.
and again, don't want to denigrate the players they received in the trade. I like LaVine and it seems like Markkanen is legit.
Just have 2 bickering points with the whole "who won the trade" debate: (1) Jimmy Butler is a top 10-15 talent and none of the three players we gave up have proven to be worth that value and (2) everyone is projecting out the three young Bulls players as all-stars, but Patton is considered nothing, apparently.
My overall problem with this debate is that we are looking at these trades in a vacuum. Even if we except the premise that the Bulls got 3 young, solid starters and perhaps even an all-star or 2 out of the trade, it's not like Bulls have set themselves up to be better than the Wolves going forward. Sure, the Bulls might appeal to some big-name free agents next offseason, but unless they get LeBron James, I don't see how they will be better off than the Wolves.
So to me the Wolves "won" the trade. Bulls fans can counter and say that Butler was done in Chicago, couldn't work with Hoiberg, and it was time for both parties to part ways. But that is not the Wolves fault, so not sure how the Bulls starting with a handicap means they look like the better franchise in the end.