Butler trade rumor - KC Johnson update: pg 63

[AirP.]

Butler is one of the best players in the NBA and he is locked up on a cheap long term deal.

No, he's signed for 2 more years and then will demand the super max to stay, either they sign him leaving even less money for his help or they move him, the longer they wait the less he'll be worth. He's at his apex now because of his play, age and he's under contract for 2 more years(also the rest of this season). He will only go down in value.

Normally, superstars are traded right before their deal expires and they get a supermax deal. There will be many players in the NBA next year who aren't nearly as good as Jimmy making nearly twice as much as him. That's why teams pay a king's ransom for him and that's why the Bulls should hold out for that.

Good luck, his value will continue to drop. The team will go nowhere with him(because of the current roster state) and if he happens to go down... this franchise is screwed.

Crowder (15.4 PER) and Brown (10.7) are crap. You are basically trading Butler for a lottery pick and filler. Given what a crapshoot that the lottery is, you probably are giving Butler away for nothing with that deal.

Crowder is your 3 and d guy who can actually slow up anyone in the league, you put him next to Butler(moving Butler to SG, removing Wade all together) the Bulls are a much better team. He's one of the best roleplayers you could want to have and at a good price also, I'm quite sure there's teams that would give up assets for him if you didn't want to move forward with him.

I would ask for both of Brooklyn's picks, a future Boston pick and the future Memphis pick from them. If they don't want that deal (which they won't) then they can pound salt.

They'll pound sand then and possibly so will Chicago. It'll be fun to see what they do after next season when they're at risk at losing him unless they give him the new super max at age 29(his game shouldn't degrade much till his mid 30s though). But if they haven't "hit" on any draft picks by then they're going to have a hard time putting enough talent around him to be anything more then a slightly above .500 team.... then they can trade him and rebuild.

Philly actually has the better package possible. Simmons or Embiid, a lottery pick and a non lottery pick.

Philly won't move Simmons or Embiid for Butler, they both have the upside of being as good or better then Butler while being drastically younger then him.

[TheStig]

Embiid might have the highest trade value of anyone in the league aside from the obvious guys like LBJ and Curry. No way Philly even thinks about trading him for Jimmy. Simmons and a first they probably would think about long and hard.

Not even close. He missed a couple of years with injuries and is on a minutes limit. He's strung together what? 30 games? Please, he's a great prospect but nowhere near the value of guys like Kat or AD or Greek Freak. That might change in a year. But certainly not the case of elite players or the young guys doing great.

GM's will trade actual star players for potential if they think the ceiling is high enough. All those injury plagued years are out the window if they think they are in the past. People tend to have short term memories on these things.

How are they out of the window if they just happened and he is still on a minute restriction. They're current. That's why I said, in a year things can change.

While Embid is really good, he has a track record of less than half the season. There isn't a large body of work or even a year.

[Rerisen]

Citing who was available at any given draft spot is actually just as strong an argument to stand pat and to hope to land another Butler, or great player that develops from later in the draft, to add on top of him. Because even where the Bulls have been picking the last few years as an average team, you can easily find 1 or 2 excellent to great players that are still available, if we want to play that game.

For example this year, we are likely to have 2 picks between 10 and 20 even without tanking. If we use those 2 picks to get the absolute best players in the draft that are available next summer, we'll probably be back into contention quite soon.

[AirP.]

od of getting a nothing player with a single top 5 pick is way too high for that to be the primary return. Gotta get 2 - 3 serious prospects/players to consider trading Jimmy.

And here I thought J.Brown and the Brooklyn pick(could end up #1) were 2 serious prospects and using whatever good vet they got to get 1 more serious prospect.

[Proven_Winner]

I think Jimmy alone could get u a dame lillard or maybe john wall but would it be worth it?

Nah, you're trading Jimmy for someone slightly worse (at best) and somewhat younger. All the arguments about being too good to get lottery picks but not good enough to do anything likely still apply, just your centerpiece is worse if you choose to build around him. That's not even including contract issues.

Well that's exactly what wall and dame are. Slightly worse and younger than jimmy. The good thing about then being worse though is that you may get a little extra on top. And even if they are slightly worse they are still younger which means the window is wider for us.

[TheStig]

Only guy I remember getting traded in there prime was a 25 year old Tmac from Orlando to Houston.

He had back issues

Harden would be a better example

Harden wasn't a superstar at the time

It's been done. Melo @26. VC @28.

[Red Larrivee]

I think building around Butler is possible.

What sucks is GarPax always throw a wrench into the mix.

Wallace-Hamilton-Boozer-Gasol-Rondo-Wade - just off the top of my head are all players where the money could have been better spent.

What were the alternatives?

[MC3]

Butler trades:

76ers:
Embiid + 76ers 1st round pick
Simmons + 76er 1st round pick

Minny:
Wiggins + Dunn + Minny's 1st round pick
Lavine + Dunn + Minny's 1st round pick

Celtics:
Brown + Smart + both Nets picks

Celtics needs to offer the most of all of them, giving they have worst "best" prospect out of all those for similar offer. 76ers needs to offer least cause they give best prospect out of all those with similar offer. For Embiid If 76ers think price is not right I would do offer additional asset like Bulls pick or Kings pick. Otherwise I wouldnt trade Butler.

[veji1]

Lend me your time machine. I'll use it to pick stocks, not players, and I'll pay you $100 million per year for its usage. Deal?

Ok. Well the other route is to build around Butler with free agents. I can go ahead and list over 100 free agent signing that have been complete disasters. I can also point to the 20+ year history of the Bulls specifically being terrible at free agency.

So please show me the time machine that you'll be using to pick the right free agents to build a contender.

This is the same mistake you (and others) continually make: you point out the flaws of going down the path of, say, tanking, but you fail to recognize that you have not come up with some foolproof plan either.

60% of this board gave the Bulls front office an "A" or "B" grade this offseason. Were you one of them? Because this past offseason of building around Jimmy (using free agency) has already been a dud. Banana boat fantasies and all.

Well the whole point is that there is no foolproof plan ever ! Fans think too fast in a way "ok we have been trying that plan A for 6 months now with Rose and Noah and Gasol dumped and Rondo and Wade in, it doesn't work, let's move to plan B and rebuild", but it doens't work that way because there is no foulproof plan, and every major change of direction has a big chance of backfiring : if you change directions every 6 months chances are you will go into Isaiah Thomas NY dementia rather than in the right direction.

[Mech Engineer]

Citing who was available at any given draft spot is actually just as strong an argument to stand pat and to hope to land another Butler, or great player that develops from later in the draft, to add on top of him. Because even where the Bulls have been picking the last few years as an average team, you can easily find 1 or 2 excellent to great players that are still available, if we want to play that game.

For example this year, we are likely to have 2 picks between 10 and 20 even without tanking. If we use those 2 picks to get the absolute best players in the draft that are available next summer, we'll probably be back into contention quite soon.

That's true. In hindsight, we criticize the GMs for failed draft picks. But, if you did a poll at the time of the draft, IMO, most GMs would pick exactly how the draft went. Most of them are possibly picking on the same theme as other GMs if given a choice.

Do you think if GS were picking 2nd or 3rd in 2007, they would have picked Curry? They would have gone with the guy with the biggest upside in the draft...maybe Tyreke Evans or Ricky Rubio. It is a crap-shoot.

[The Box Office]

He had back issues

Harden would be a better example

Harden wasn't a superstar at the time

It's been done. Melo @26. VC @28.

Charles Barkley at 29. Barkley was a proven playoff performer though when he was traded. I definitely would not trade Jimmy Butler right now unless the deal is very sweet as in getting two top 10 picks with one being in the top 3 in the 2017 draft.

I don't trust GarPax to build a contender around Jimmy Butler because they're showing that RIGHT NOW and they effed up building around Derrick Rose, who was better than Butler. GarPax actually should be fired. We're not a threat to win anything.

What about this CP3 plan I'm hearing? Wade and Butler wooing Chris Paul to come here? Wishful thinking. I don't trust GarPax in accomplishing that, but let's say we get him. Then yes, we keep Butler.

[Rerisen]

I would like to do a poll sometime and see how many fans rate a season as equal in value if the team wins 20 games as opposed to 41 wins and makes the playoffs.

Because the "Title or bust" mentality being offered about Butler not being good enough to lead a title team, kind of suggests there are many who will be just as entertained watching multiple 20 win years of a rebuild as they will watching a team like we have right now. I kind of suspect some might be fibbing if they say that.

While this team can certainly be frustrating and tough to watch at times, it is nothing compared to the 20 win teams we had post dynasty. Those are teams that, if we have them again, I most likely won't be spending half as much time following or caring about. Been there, done that. Not worth the effort. If you have an immediate shocking level talent like MJ or Shaq to follow as a rookie sure, the losing can be tolerable, but to watch 60 losses a year just lying to yourself about a Tyrus Thomas or Kris Dunn, that they are going to become megastars if you stick it out for 4 years, is a trick beyond my ability.

[veji1]

Citing who was available at any given draft spot is actually just as strong an argument to stand pat and to hope to land another Butler, or great player that develops from later in the draft, to add on top of him. Because even where the Bulls have been picking the last few years as an average team, you can easily find 1 or 2 excellent to great players that are still available, if we want to play that game.

For example this year, we are likely to have 2 picks between 10 and 20 even without tanking. If we use those 2 picks to get the absolute best players in the draft that are available next summer, we'll probably be back into contention quite soon.

exactly, trashing the team to rebuild it would be bonkers because all we need is the 27th pick to draft the next Rudy Gobert ! Let's stand pat and be the clever ones who draft that one player that all other GMs and scouts missed !

It just shows the fallacy of believing in drafting as anything but a very uncertain way to get talent once you are past the top 3 picks...

[veji1]

I would like to do a poll sometime and see how many fans rate a season as equal in value if the team wins 20 games as opposed to 41 wins and makes the playoffs.

Because the "Title or bust" mentality being offered about Butler not being good enough to lead a title team, kind of suggests there are many who will be just as entertained watching multiple 20 win years of a rebuild as they will watching a team like we have right now. I kind of suspect some might be fibbing if they say that.

While this team can certainly be frustrating and tough to watch at times, it is nothing compared to the 20 win teams we had post dynasty. Those are teams that, if we have them again, I most likely won't be spending half as much time following or caring about. Been there, done that. Not worth the effort. If you have an immediate shocking level talent like MJ or Shaq to follow as a rookie sure, the losing can be tolerable, but to watch 60 losses a year just lying to yourself about a Tyrus Thomas or Kris Dunn, that they are going to become megastars if you stick it out for 4 years, is a trick beyond my ability.

exactly. With 30 teams in this league, like always you have 1 or 2 prohibitive favorites, 2/3 teams who could pull a great performance off, and then for the 25 other teams you go from trying to go deep in the playoffs to trying to make the playoffs to just plain sucking. Following a team that sucks is just horrible. Having a team that is in what many of you deem inproperly "nba hell", ie a team that competes to get into the playoffs and win a round there but has no realistic chance of a title is actually the best case scenario for 20 to 25 teams in the league depending on the year !

Gee I would be gutted to have to follow Spurs playing like Brooklyn...

[Mech Engineer]

I would like to do a poll sometime and see how many fans rate a season as equal in value if the team wins 20 games as opposed to 41 wins and makes the playoffs.

Because the "Title or bust" mentality being offered about Butler not being good enough to lead a title team, kind of suggests there are many who will be just as entertained watching multiple 20 win years of a rebuild as they will watching a team like we have right now. I kind of suspect some might be fibbing if they say that.

While this team can certainly be frustrating and tough to watch at times, it is nothing compared to the 20 win teams we had post dynasty. Those are teams that, if we have them again, I most likely won't be spending half as much time following or caring about. Been there, done that. Not worth the effort. If you have an immediate shocking level talent like MJ or Shaq to follow as a rookie sure, the losing can be tolerable, but to watch 60 losses a year just lying to yourself about a Tyrus Thomas or Kris Dunn, that they are going to become megastars if you stick it out for 4 years, is a trick beyond my ability.

Oh...they are plenty of people who claim they even enjoyed the baby Bulls of the early 2000s. For them, as long as there is a tiny bit of hope to land the next Micheal Jordan or LeBron James, they are happy. They are living in the now. They are not thinking of how they will feel in a year or two although they will claim they will support it.

No team has operated that way in reality except for the recent 76ers teams. In other words, there is no doubt about it. They want the Bulls to be the 76ers of the last 5 years.

For them, Toronto is in NBA hell....a guaranteed 2nd seed in the Eastern Conference and a top 5 team in the league. I don't think there is a difference between the Bulls and Raptors in that sense. Actually, shouldn't the Bulls be better than the Raptors/Celtics? Those teams don't have a player of Jimmy's caliber.

[JordansBulls]

I have no issue with shopping Jimmy. He is at peak value and I'm not sure the team is going anywhere with him.

My concern is trading him for a crap package. Even guys like Wiggins are a joke.

People keep talking about the 'package' we would get in return. Makes little sense to me.

The whole idea of starting over would be because Butler is not a Top 3 player, and you presumably can't build a title team around him as the best player.

So in starting over the only way you win such a endeavor is to end up with a player better than Butler. And you pretty much are only going to get one shot - likely a single top 3 draft pick in return - on which the entire plan hinges on. If that pick turns out to be Tryus Thomas, or even LaMarcus Aldridge, both avenues are a fail, and you end up with a franchise player no better than Butler, but in the meantime set your franchise back between 3 to 7 years, at which point, you'll be in the spot we are now, except next time you don't even have a Jimmy Butler level asset as a starting point.

If you get Shaq, MJ, LeBron, only then did the plan truly succeed, and support the entire rational for trading Butler in the first place.

Historically, the odds of success of drafting such a player, even with a top 3 pick, is less than 5%.

Exactly or a Magic, Bird, Duncan, Hakeem to name a few more examples.

[BloodyQ]

Why can't the Bulls go after Millsap?

Wouldn't he paired up with Butler, Wade and MCW make the team more dynamic and better? Get into the playoffs, make some noise, have Wade and Butler recruit some FA next off-season and try to be a contender next year?

If it doesn't work out then blow it up....why do it now?

[veji1]

Why can't the Bulls go after Millsap?

Wouldn't he paired up with Butler, Wade and MCW make the team more dynamic and better? Get into the playoffs, make some noise, have Wade and Butler recruit some FA next off-season and try to be a contender next year?

If it doesn't work out then blow it up....why do it now?

that would be more my line of thinking : try to buy rather than sell...

[AirP.]

I would like to do a poll sometime and see how many fans rate a season as equal in value if the team wins 20 games as opposed to 41 wins and makes the playoffs.

Because the "Title or bust" mentality being offered about Butler not being good enough to lead a title team, kind of suggests there are many who will be just as entertained watching multiple 20 win years of a rebuild as they will watching a team like we have right now. I kind of suspect some might be fibbing if they say that.

Well, the FO has done nothing to help build the team around Butler, they moved a ball dependent PG for... a ball dependent PG, I understand Wade falling into their lap but no trades or FA pick ups to complement your "star" which should lead people to believe they aren't interested in building this roster around him or at least get some players to complement his skill set. Butler showed the ability to distribute the ball, attack the basket yet the FO/Coach has not shooting(Gibson over Mirotic) on the court to help spread out the defense nor putting a PG out there that Butler could find open to make an outside shot.

It has to be frustrating as hell to a lot of fans that this year is basically a waste of 1 year of Jimmy's prime especially when you toss in that draft experts expect the lottery to be full of good players.

[AirP.]

Why can't the Bulls go after Millsap?

Wouldn't he paired up with Butler, Wade and MCW make the team more dynamic and better? Get into the playoffs, make some noise, have Wade and Butler recruit some FA next off-season and try to be a contender next year?

If it doesn't work out then blow it up....why do it now?

That would be a good move if they had Butler in their long term plans. What Chicago did in the off season did nothing to really help build the roster around Butler to have the best chance of winning with him.