Would the Bulls 'reset' and trade Jimmy Butler this offseason ? What would Celtics need to give you?

[ralphisBullsFan]

2016-17 offseason..
Celtics send:
2016 Brooklyn pick unprotected (currently #4)
2016 Dallas pick
2016 Celtics pick
2018 Brooklyn pick unprotected
Avery Bradley
Amir Johnson (Salary)

for

Jimmy Butler+Mike Dunleavy Jr. filler.

DONE DEAL

[Gnarc90]

Spoiler:

I wouldn't do it for several reasons.

Firstly the argument is flawed.

If anyone believes our front office has issues (Gar, Pax or both) PLUS you have a head coach who so far looks pretty bad, why in the world would anyone want to compound the problem by moving their best asset?

It would either mean you have total trust in the front office and the head coach. If any of that is in question, then blowing up things is just a bad idea.

Really, I just really hate how the league is such a copy cat. They look at one success story (Boston) and think lets just do this and suddenly our team is back on track. LMAO

If that were the case, the numerous teams that have dropped their stars would be on top of the league. Namely the Sixers.

Think of Orlando Magic who were FAR WORSE with their star when he was traded. That relationship between he, the coach and mgmt was toxic. This is what followed

20-62
23-59
25-57
30-43 currently

Are the Magic really any better off? There is always too many thing that has to go right. They even look to be doing more rebuilds by moving Vucevic and even Dipo for other assets. They already moved Harris.

In short, 9/10 times a rebuild is long painful and UGLY. People say they dont want a treadmil, but you dont want to win 20 games a year either.

The Twolves haven't even sniffed the playoffs in 13 years and since KG left they have only have 1 season in like 10 years of competitive basketball. People may say, they have alot of nice young talent now, but thats still at least 14 years from when they were last in the playoffs. Thats because their deal for KG did not work out the way they wanted.

Does anyone want to watch a Lakers team? Which is essentially what people are asking for. All young talent that may or may not work out. Its usually a mess.

I've been lucky enough to have seen the rise and end of the Dynasty. And everyone who said, yeah we can drop everyone and get back within 3 years (As Krause Promised) bailed after it didnt happen. We were the laughing stock of the league for 6 straight years and eveyrone and it was even hard to find anyone brave enough to admit they were bulls fans. So for me been there done that.

That could easily be us again. Its not fun. Its not enjoyable.

People see we can be like Boston or Twolves and get a bunch of young guys.

But I only imagine 2017 versions of Dragan Tarlac, Kornell David, Rusty Larue and Dalibor Bagaric

I agree with a lot of what you said. Full rebuilds take a long time, even if most things go right. They can also go completely wrong and treadmill at the bottom for a long time. The FO has drawn a lot of ire from fans, yet people want to trust them to successfully rebuild the team.

I still think the Bulls best chance at winning a title involves Jimmy Butler.

[Red Larrivee]

I agree. It's a legitimate direction at least, but be careful what you wish for. Not every rebuild ends up like OKC.

[DRoseCantStop]

Let's get this rebuild going!

[vvgotgame19]

Spoiler:

I wouldn't do it for several reasons.

Firstly the argument is flawed.

If anyone believes our front office has issues (Gar, Pax or both) PLUS you have a head coach who so far looks pretty bad, why in the world would anyone want to compound the problem by moving their best asset?

It would either mean you have total trust in the front office and the head coach. If any of that is in question, then blowing up things is just a bad idea.

Really, I just really hate how the league is such a copy cat. They look at one success story (Boston) and think lets just do this and suddenly our team is back on track. LMAO

If that were the case, the numerous teams that have dropped their stars would be on top of the league. Namely the Sixers.

Think of Orlando Magic who were FAR WORSE with their star when he was traded. That relationship between he, the coach and mgmt was toxic. This is what followed

20-62
23-59
25-57
30-43 currently

Are the Magic really any better off? There is always too many thing that has to go right. They even look to be doing more rebuilds by moving Vucevic and even Dipo for other assets. They already moved Harris.

In short, 9/10 times a rebuild is long painful and UGLY. People say they dont want a treadmil, but you dont want to win 20 games a year either.

The Twolves haven't even sniffed the playoffs in 13 years and since KG left they have only have 1 season in like 10 years of competitive basketball. People may say, they have alot of nice young talent now, but thats still at least 14 years from when they were last in the playoffs. Thats because their deal for KG did not work out the way they wanted.

Does anyone want to watch a Lakers team? Which is essentially what people are asking for. All young talent that may or may not work out. Its usually a mess.

I've been lucky enough to have seen the rise and end of the Dynasty. And everyone who said, yeah we can drop everyone and get back within 3 years (As Krause Promised) bailed after it didnt happen. We were the laughing stock of the league for 6 straight years and eveyrone and it was even hard to find anyone brave enough to admit they were bulls fans. So for me been there done that.

That could easily be us again. Its not fun. Its not enjoyable.

People see we can be like Boston or Twolves and get a bunch of young guys.

But I only imagine 2017 versions of Dragan Tarlac, Kornell David, Rusty Larue and Dalibor Bagaric

I agree with a lot of what you said. Full rebuilds take a long time, even if most things go right. They can also go completely wrong and treadmill at the bottom for a long time. The FO has drawn a lot of ire from fans, yet people want to trust them to successfully rebuild the team.

I still think the Bulls best chance at winning a title involves Jimmy Butler.

All very valid points. However, we currently lack any direction whatsoever. A rebuild would at least give us some direction. And I know I'll be in the minority, but when it comes to rebuilding, i do trust GarPax. Their shortcomings are finishing what they've started. Theyve been successful starting competitive teams. They've rebuilt the team twice, once when Pax was first hired, and once again when the Ben Wallace experiment failed. Granted they got extremely lucky with Rose, but both times were successful and rather quick and painless. Let them start the rebuild, and bring someone new in to finish it!

[Jeffster81]

I am not against trading butler, I am against THIS front office making that decision. I have no confidence that could get full value for butler and make the right choices on the draft pieces. Just keep butler instead of giving this front choices more chances to screwup.

[RebuildaBulls]

I agree. It's a legitimate direction at least, but be careful what you wish for. Not every rebuild ends up like OKC.

im hoping for something like Boston. young players plus draft picks up the arse. they are flexible beyond belief with all their assets.

OKC is nice but too much luck involved

[BeatDaCavs420]

According to Chris Mannix of The Vertical (h/t Chuck Myron of HoopsRumors.com), there is "legitimate interest in Chicago in potentially dealing [Butler] this offseason," and the Orlando Magic have emerged as one of the top suitors.

Per Mannix, there are reportedly chemistry issues between head coach Fred Hoiberg and his players, with Butler standing out as the most glaring example. That led to multiple teams inquiring about Butler's availability at the trade deadline, including the Boston Celtics.

The issues between Butler and Hoiberg may stem from a December incident that saw the two-time All Star criticize his coach, according to ESPN.com's Nick Friedell:


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2629150-jimmy-butler-trade-rumors-latest-news-speculation-on-bulls-star?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=programming-national

[JohnnyKILLroy]

If management is going to back Fred then Jimmy has to go. His desire to be the Alpha undermines what Fred wants to do. It's not just Jimmy either but Gasol is on his way out I would imagine and Rose has another year.

[Flames24Rulz]

If management is going to back Fred then Jimmy has to go. His desire to be the Alpha undermines what Fred wants to do. It's not just Jimmy either but Gasol is on his way out I would imagine and Rose has another year.

Great idea, let's back this idiot coach over an All-Star player. This organization, I swear...

FWIW, I'm not against listening to offers for Butler, but if you choose Hoiberg over Jimmy? LOL.

[JohnnyKILLroy]

If management is going to back Fred then Jimmy has to go. His desire to be the Alpha undermines what Fred wants to do. It's not just Jimmy either but Gasol is on his way out I would imagine and Rose has another year.

Great idea, let's back this idiot coach over an All-Star player. This organization, I swear...

FWIW, I'm not against listening to offers for Butler, but if you choose Hoiberg over Jimmy? LOL.

It's much more nuanced than that.

[jnrjr79]

Butler is MOST definitely a #1. Why?

1) He's efficient - and he scores heavy. 20 PPG on high efficiency is gold.
2) He is a very capable defender
3) He's clutch
4) His efficiency comes from going to the free throw line - which is also a very good trait.
5) He doesnt make super max money - so you can fit better pieces around him.
6) He WANTS to be a leader. Even if his efforts are misguided - I always prefer to build around someone who wants to wear the crown of thorns.
7) He has a soul that translates to TV and he will not think twice before making a call to a free agent to come join him. It will not be a text message - that much is for sure.

He doesnt work as a #1 in Chicago - because our organization has pitched its tent in Team Rose's side. As terrible a decision as that it, I can see why they did it.

But lets not sully Jimmy here - he's a true #1 for a team that wants to create a winning environment.

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

[Shill]

If management is going to back Fred then Jimmy has to go. His desire to be the Alpha undermines what Fred wants to do. It's not just Jimmy either but Gasol is on his way out I would imagine and Rose has another year.

Great idea, let's back this idiot coach over an All-Star player. This organization, I swear...

FWIW, I'm not against listening to offers for Butler, but if you choose Hoiberg over Jimmy? LOL.

It's much more nuanced than that.

This.

I'm not in a rush to ship off Jimmy, but if he's usurping the coach's authority, that's a bigger issue.

Should we fire Fred and let Jimmy pick the next coach, too?

Jimmy isn't some Kobe-level talent that must be placated at all costs.

I've been very critical of GarPax, but there's a certain way an organization needs to run.

Again, this doesn't mean Jimmy is some cancer. But if the reports are true, we're completely screwed.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[musiqsoulchild]

Butler is MOST definitely a #1. Why?

1) He's efficient - and he scores heavy. 20 PPG on high efficiency is gold.
2) He is a very capable defender
3) He's clutch
4) His efficiency comes from going to the free throw line - which is also a very good trait.
5) He doesnt make super max money - so you can fit better pieces around him.
6) He WANTS to be a leader. Even if his efforts are misguided - I always prefer to build around someone who wants to wear the crown of thorns.
7) He has a soul that translates to TV and he will not think twice before making a call to a free agent to come join him. It will not be a text message - that much is for sure.

He doesnt work as a #1 in Chicago - because our organization has pitched its tent in Team Rose's side. As terrible a decision as that it, I can see why they did it.

But lets not sully Jimmy here - he's a true #1 for a team that wants to create a winning environment.

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

Different tiers of winning need different types of #1 players.

Boston will remain a middling team if they dont take care of getting a #1 player. And any #1 player they get - including Durant - doesnt help them win the champsionship.

They need an intermediate step - a Joe Johnson to Atlanta kind of signing. Thats exactly what Jimmy is. He's a #1 option on a Top 3 squad. He will not get you a ring - but thats not anywhere near Boston's radar.

When you cant do the infeasible, then do whats feasible.

[bulliedog8]

Butler is MOST definitely a #1. Why?

1) He's efficient - and he scores heavy. 20 PPG on high efficiency is gold.
2) He is a very capable defender
3) He's clutch
4) His efficiency comes from going to the free throw line - which is also a very good trait.
5) He doesnt make super max money - so you can fit better pieces around him.
6) He WANTS to be a leader. Even if his efforts are misguided - I always prefer to build around someone who wants to wear the crown of thorns.
7) He has a soul that translates to TV and he will not think twice before making a call to a free agent to come join him. It will not be a text message - that much is for sure.

He doesnt work as a #1 in Chicago - because our organization has pitched its tent in Team Rose's side. As terrible a decision as that it, I can see why they did it.

But lets not sully Jimmy here - he's a true #1 for a team that wants to create a winning environment.

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

At the same time though, you dont need a true #1. You can have multiple #2s and win a title. Spurs didnt have a true #1 their last title. The celtics didnt have a true #1 when they won. But they had good #2s plus were in great systems. Put butler in a great system with legit role players and another #2 with him, and that could be a team that wins a title.

[jnrjr79]

Butler is MOST definitely a #1. Why?

1) He's efficient - and he scores heavy. 20 PPG on high efficiency is gold.
2) He is a very capable defender
3) He's clutch
4) His efficiency comes from going to the free throw line - which is also a very good trait.
5) He doesnt make super max money - so you can fit better pieces around him.
6) He WANTS to be a leader. Even if his efforts are misguided - I always prefer to build around someone who wants to wear the crown of thorns.
7) He has a soul that translates to TV and he will not think twice before making a call to a free agent to come join him. It will not be a text message - that much is for sure.

He doesnt work as a #1 in Chicago - because our organization has pitched its tent in Team Rose's side. As terrible a decision as that it, I can see why they did it.

But lets not sully Jimmy here - he's a true #1 for a team that wants to create a winning environment.

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

Different tiers of winning need different types of #1 players.

Boston will remain a middling team if they dont take care of getting a #1 player. And any #1 player they get - including Durant - doesnt help them win the champsionship.

They need an intermediate step - a Joe Johnson to Atlanta kind of signing. Thats exactly what Jimmy is. He's a #1 option on a Top 3 squad. He will not get you a ring - but thats not anywhere near Boston's radar.

When you cant do the infeasible, then do whats feasible.

Something tells me the Celtics have their eyes on being something greater than the Joe Johnson Atlanta Hawks. And the Celtics are basically already as good as any of those Johnson Hawks teams.

[jnrjr79]

Butler is MOST definitely a #1. Why?

1) He's efficient - and he scores heavy. 20 PPG on high efficiency is gold.
2) He is a very capable defender
3) He's clutch
4) His efficiency comes from going to the free throw line - which is also a very good trait.
5) He doesnt make super max money - so you can fit better pieces around him.
6) He WANTS to be a leader. Even if his efforts are misguided - I always prefer to build around someone who wants to wear the crown of thorns.
7) He has a soul that translates to TV and he will not think twice before making a call to a free agent to come join him. It will not be a text message - that much is for sure.

He doesnt work as a #1 in Chicago - because our organization has pitched its tent in Team Rose's side. As terrible a decision as that it, I can see why they did it.

But lets not sully Jimmy here - he's a true #1 for a team that wants to create a winning environment.

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

At the same time though, you dont need a true #1. You can have multiple #2s and win a title. Spurs didnt have a true #1 their last title. The celtics didnt have a true #1 when they won. But they had good #2s plus were in great systems. Put butler in a great system with legit role players and another #2 with him, and that could be a team that wins a title.

While I agree it's possible to win with someone who would not be viewed as a "true #1," it's happened 3 times in the last 25 years - Detroit, Boston, and San Antonio. And I'm not 100% convinced Boston really belongs in that group.

[musiqsoulchild]

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

Different tiers of winning need different types of #1 players.

Boston will remain a middling team if they dont take care of getting a #1 player. And any #1 player they get - including Durant - doesnt help them win the champsionship.

They need an intermediate step - a Joe Johnson to Atlanta kind of signing. Thats exactly what Jimmy is. He's a #1 option on a Top 3 squad. He will not get you a ring - but thats not anywhere near Boston's radar.

When you cant do the infeasible, then do whats feasible.

Something tells me the Celtics have their eyes on being something greater than the Joe Johnson Atlanta Hawks. And the Celtics are basically already as good as any of those Johnson Hawks teams.

They are not. They dont have a Pierce already on the team. Jimmy is that piece.

You'll be hard pressed to make an argument that the Celtics are 1 signing away from beating the Cavs / Spurs / Warriors next season.

Ainge is fooling himself if the thinks that this rebuild is the same as the Ray Allen + KG acquisition season. He already had Pierce and Rondo. That Rondo is better than Bradley, Thomas and Smart.

[Shill]

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

At the same time though, you dont need a true #1. You can have multiple #2s and win a title. Spurs didnt have a true #1 their last title. The celtics didnt have a true #1 when they won. But they had good #2s plus were in great systems. Put butler in a great system with legit role players and another #2 with him, and that could be a team that wins a title.

While I agree it's possible to win with someone who would not be viewed as a "true #1," it's happened 3 times in the last 25 years - Detroit, Boston, and San Antonio. And I'm not 100% convinced Boston really belongs in that group.

I wouldn't put Boston in that category. They had three #1's who came together and put egos aside.



Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[musiqsoulchild]

My test for a true #1 player is a lot simpler: can you win a championship if he is the best player on your team?

For me, I don't see it with Jimmy, as much as I otherwise really like the guy and his game.

At the same time though, you dont need a true #1. You can have multiple #2s and win a title. Spurs didnt have a true #1 their last title. The celtics didnt have a true #1 when they won. But they had good #2s plus were in great systems. Put butler in a great system with legit role players and another #2 with him, and that could be a team that wins a title.

While I agree it's possible to win with someone who would not be viewed as a "true #1," it's happened 3 times in the last 25 years - Detroit, Boston, and San Antonio. And I'm not 100% convinced Boston really belongs in that group.

You are doubling down for no reason - if Jimmy joins Boston, who on the Celtics is a better player than Jimmy?

That itself makes Jimmy the #1 player FOR the Celtics and their relative aspirations in the NBA for next season. Like I have already said --- there is NO title path in 2017 for the Celtics that involves just 1 player.