Butler trade rumor - KC Johnson update: pg 63

[Stratmaster]

Did I miss something? People are saying we should trade Jimmy because he's not HOF player Scottie Pippen?

Yeah, kinda. Making the argument double bad is that he pretty much is prime Scottie Pippen this year. Not the identical player, of course, but of roughly similar value. Whatever claims apply to Jimmy apply to prime Scottie, too.

no...no...no Jimmy Butler isn't prime Scottie Pippen. Not this season. Not last season when (people seem to forget) he was playing at about this same level early in the season. Jimmy Butler can be great without having to be Scottie Pippen, and that is a good thing, because he is nowhere near a prime Scottie Pippen.

[Ralphb07]

If the Bulls trade Butler it has nothing to do with them feeling he isn't a franchise player. If they do trade him couldn't it be that maybe they don't think they can get the guys around him so want to hit the reset button?

I'm not opposed either way whether they decide to build around him or reset

[jump]

I don't get the concern about "wasting Jimmy's prime." At the moment, we own his prime. We should do everything we can to take advantage of it and find a way to build a championship team around it. When it's gone, it's gone. Not our problem. Show me what team has traded away a star in his prime that has benefited and ended with players as good as the one they traded away. The middle of the draft and free agency give you just as much chance of building a champion as do early draft choices. Every year there are 25-26 teams who have tried every method possible to build a championship team. Keep Jimmy Butler.

[Stratmaster]

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.

DeRozan and Lowery are both playing at a level that is in the same tier of play as Butler. 2 are better than one. The Bulls need that 2nd player. No need to tank to get them; in fact, that is in my opinion the least likely way to find that 2nd player because by the time you hit that player (might take a few drafts) and they develop (might take a few seasons), Butler is no longer at this level.

[League Circles]

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.

Quite honestly I'm not sure I'd do any of those deals. Embiid because he's likely to spend a lot if time injured. That's just my opinion of a guy his size who at his age missed 2 years and is now missing lots of games again I assume just for rest but still. Simmons, also injured immediately and pretty doubtful to ever be as good as Jimmy is now. The Wiggins deal I might consider. I don't follow college ball but despite the hype I mostly see small guys as the top prospects. I want size. A player at least 6-8 or so. So if I could be convinced there is a specific prospect that's worth it maybe I'd do more of these deals. Embiid is the one current player listed that I think has a good chance to be better than Jimmy. Unfortunately not a good chance to be healthy long term. That's a priority for me after rose.

[JordansBulls]

Even if we had say Anthony Davis or KAT instead of Butler would we really be in any better position now?

[MC3]

Even if we had say Anthony Davis or KAT instead of Butler would we really be in any better position now?

yes. cause you have superstar and you keep him no matter what offer it is. pelicans already had one failed rebuild around davis, but davis is so young they can do another one till he gets in his prime. wolves can do 2 ones after this one.

[Bomba Navarro]

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.

DeRozan and Lowery are both playing at a level that is in the same tier of play as Butler. 2 are better than one. The Bulls need that 2nd player. No need to tank to get them; in fact, that is in my opinion the least likely way to find that 2nd player because by the time you hit that player (might take a few drafts) and they develop (might take a few seasons), Butler is no longer at this level.

DeRozan is NOT on the level of Butler, unless you consider being relatively close on offense the only thing that matters. Butler is a very good defensive player and DeRozan is subpar at best.

[Mech Engineer]

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.

Quite honestly I'm not sure I'd do any of those deals. Embiid because he's likely to spend a lot if time injured. That's just my opinion of a guy his size who at his age missed 2 years and is now missing lots of games again I assume just for rest but still. Simmons, also injured immediately and pretty doubtful to ever be as good as Jimmy is now. The Wiggins deal I might consider. I don't follow college ball but despite the hype I mostly see small guys as the top prospects. I want size. A player at least 6-8 or so. So if I could be convinced there is a specific prospect that's worth it maybe I'd do more of these deals. Embiid is the one current player listed that I think has a good chance to be better than Jimmy. Unfortunately not a good chance to be healthy long term. That's a priority for me after rose.

Think of Yao Ming and foot problems. Once big guys have problems, it is a huge risk. Embiid hasn't even played a full season, let alone the playoffs. As Hubie once said, the most important ability of a basketball player is to stay on the court.....not talent or something else.

[Stratmaster]

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.

I am a fan of the team and want to watch competitive basketball. In addition to the tank crowd, there are also fans/posters who, if the Bulls could trade their whole team for the Cavs whole team would think it's great, because we would immediately be a top 2 team in the league. I don't understand that line of thinking either. I want to have some history, some perennial players I can be a fan of. It's another reason I hated the LBJ/Wade/Bosh conspiracy so much. I want to see my favorite team built, developed, and gel followed by a natural progression of working in new talent as the team ages.

[Mech Engineer]

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.

DeRozan and Lowery are both playing at a level that is in the same tier of play as Butler. 2 are better than one. The Bulls need that 2nd player. No need to tank to get them; in fact, that is in my opinion the least likely way to find that 2nd player because by the time you hit that player (might take a few drafts) and they develop (might take a few seasons), Butler is no longer at this level.

DeRozan is NOT on the level of Butler, unless you consider being relatively close on offense the only thing that matters. Butler is a very good defensive player and DeRozan is subpar at best.

And, he is getting paid 10 million more than Jimmy. But, for whatever reason, the Bulls can't build around Jimmy when there is almost no long other long term contract on the Bulls after this season except Jimmy, Lopez.

[Stratmaster]

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.

DeRozan and Lowery are both playing at a level that is in the same tier of play as Butler. 2 are better than one. The Bulls need that 2nd player. No need to tank to get them; in fact, that is in my opinion the least likely way to find that 2nd player because by the time you hit that player (might take a few drafts) and they develop (might take a few seasons), Butler is no longer at this level.

DeRozan is NOT on the level of Butler, unless you consider being relatively close on offense the only thing that matters. Butler is a very good defensive player and DeRozan is subpar at best.

If I thought offense was the only thing that matters, I would have rated DeRozan better than Butler. Derozan is better offensively. Both are solid rebounders and passers for their positions. Butler is better defensively. Same tier of players.

[Stratmaster]

DeRozan and Lowery are both playing at a level that is in the same tier of play as Butler. 2 are better than one. The Bulls need that 2nd player. No need to tank to get them; in fact, that is in my opinion the least likely way to find that 2nd player because by the time you hit that player (might take a few drafts) and they develop (might take a few seasons), Butler is no longer at this level.

DeRozan is NOT on the level of Butler, unless you consider being relatively close on offense the only thing that matters. Butler is a very good defensive player and DeRozan is subpar at best.

And, he is getting paid 10 million more than Jimmy. But, for whatever reason, the Bulls can't build around Jimmy when there is almost no long other long term contract on the Bulls after this season except Jimmy, Lopez.

The bulls can build around Jimmy, they just shouldn't. Jimmy should be a major piece of whatever they build, but building around a player the way we have been using it means tailoring your team specifically to the skills of that player. The Bulls should not do that with Jimmy Butler.

[Bomba Navarro]

DeRozan and Lowery are both playing at a level that is in the same tier of play as Butler. 2 are better than one. The Bulls need that 2nd player. No need to tank to get them; in fact, that is in my opinion the least likely way to find that 2nd player because by the time you hit that player (might take a few drafts) and they develop (might take a few seasons), Butler is no longer at this level.

DeRozan is NOT on the level of Butler, unless you consider being relatively close on offense the only thing that matters. Butler is a very good defensive player and DeRozan is subpar at best.

If I thought offense was the only thing that matters, I would have rated DeRozan better than Butler. Derozan is better offensively. Both are solid rebounders and passers for their positions. Butler is better defensively. Same tier of players.

DeRozan is not better offensively.

[Rerisen]

I don't get the concern about "wasting Jimmy's prime." At the moment, we own his prime. We should do everything we can to take advantage of it and find a way to build a championship team around it. When it's gone, it's gone. Not our problem. Show me what team has traded away a star in his prime that has benefited and ended with players as good as the one they traded away. The middle of the draft and free agency give you just as much chance of building a champion as do early draft choices. Every year there are 25-26 teams who have tried every method possible to build a championship team. Keep Jimmy Butler.

Yep, we aren't 'wasting' his prime, we just aren't maximizing it.

Right now they are using his prime not to be a laughingstock team, and using him to keep butts in the seats, and having the team have a chance to win any given night.

[coldfish]

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.

Since 1990, or 26 years, the following players account for 21 of the titles:
Duncan, Shaq, Jordan, Hakeem, Kobe, Lebron.

People kind of get lost in that fact. 4 of those 6 guys were consensus #1 picks that you could see coming years before hand too. When you tank, you are looking for a generational talent if your true goal is to be a contender. Even good picks like Anthony Davis and KAT are just leading their teams to more lottery picks. If you want to win with that kind of player, you probably need 4 of them.

[Mech Engineer]

DeRozan is NOT on the level of Butler, unless you consider being relatively close on offense the only thing that matters. Butler is a very good defensive player and DeRozan is subpar at best.

And, he is getting paid 10 million more than Jimmy. But, for whatever reason, the Bulls can't build around Jimmy when there is almost no long other long term contract on the Bulls after this season except Jimmy, Lopez.

The bulls can build around Jimmy, they just shouldn't. Jimmy should be a major piece of whatever they build, but building around a player the way we have been using it means tailoring your team specifically to the skills of that player. The Bulls should not do that with Jimmy Butler.

Then they should tank and do what tankers want. There has to be a hierarchy and the roster has to maximize Jimmy's strengths and weaknesses. Otherwise, the team is not being optimized and it's chaos like last year where Jimmy was a major piece as was Gasol, as was Rose. Everybody was trying to take the blame or the responsibility or their turn.

Just because Miami won a few championships with LeBron/Wade doesn't mean that was the right approach. That team ideally should have won 4 or more championships but couldn't because of the fit and not catering to LeBron's needs. They just happened to win a couple because of their superior talent.

[Stratmaster]

DeRozan is NOT on the level of Butler, unless you consider being relatively close on offense the only thing that matters. Butler is a very good defensive player and DeRozan is subpar at best.

If I thought offense was the only thing that matters, I would have rated DeRozan better than Butler. Derozan is better offensively. Both are solid rebounders and passers for their positions. Butler is better defensively. Same tier of players.

DeRozan is not better offensively.

I guess if you say so... he shoots at a higher percentage. he scores more points in less minutes. He gets to the line just like Jimmy.

[Rerisen]

Derozan is better offensively.

Disagree, why do you hate efficiency so much, is the single most important stat in creating a great offense. Taking more shots to get more points - especially if those points are at league average efficiency - is no great feat.

Per 36:

Butler: 24.8 PTS, .590 TS%
Demar: 27.9 PTS, .548 TS%

It's not like DD is on a poor offense either, he has a much better offensive cast than Butler to help him get good shots and still wastes more possessions getting his points.

[Red Larrivee]

Even if we had say Anthony Davis or KAT instead of Butler would we really be in any better position now?

Nope.

Those are really good players and may even be future HOF'ers. But are they the best player on a championship team? Probably not.

How many players not named LeBron that have been drafted in the Top 3 since 2000 fit the criteria? There may not even be such a player in next year's class who is.

Tanking for the next Jimmy Butler isn't anything but 5 steps back, 5 steps forward.