Would you trade IT + 3-5 pick for Jimmy Butler ?

[CoachBo]

The original trade is insane. I thought it was someone who might have bumped their heads but it's just trollboy16f.

PER 36 (this is one of those times per 36 works well):

IT: 24.8 ppg, 3.3 rebounds, 6.9 assists, .562 true shooting percentage, $7m/yr contract
Butler: 20.4 ppg, 5.2 rebounds, 4.7 assists, .563 true shooting percentage, $19m/yr contract

They're basically the same age. So offensively, Butler gains you absolutely nothing. Nada. If anything, IT is the superior offensive player. Defensively, there's little doubt Butler >>>> IT. So if everything is equal, I'd rather have Butler.

But everything isn't equal. So is Butler's superiority on the defensive end worth $12m a year? Maybe, but probably not. Is it worth $12m a year AND a top 5 pick? Not just no, but 7734 (calculator humor) no.

Good post...

Not really

And Bulls are not likely taking number 3-5 as a centerpiece asset for Butler. It would need to include crowder or IT etc.

Butler overall is a better player. The other poster is confused , talking out loud. End conclusion Butler is better overall.

Plus is receiving a fair contract.

For a change I do agree with Triboy here.

It's hard to imagine Chicago trading Butler here for JUST a 3-5 range pick.  He's worth far, far more then that.

On the other hand, I do also feel that the proposed trade (Thomas + 3-5 pick + more) is a bit excessive and doesn't do much for us.

Butler is an excellent scorer - one of the best in the NBA.  But he's not as good a scorer as Thomas.  Thomas is kinda more suited to being your #1 offensive option because of his style of play - he's just REALLY good at creating his own offence.  Butler isn't too far off Thomas offensively, but he's not quite on the same level.

To me the idea of getting Butler was so appealing because I wanted to pair him with Thomas - he would give us that second go-to scorer that we desperately need, without sacrificing anything defensively.  Personally, I'd put Butler at the SF spot (rather than SG) and go with a Thomas / Bradley / Butler perimeter lineup.  That lineup would be absolutely devastating offensively and outstanding defensively (even with Thomas in there). 

Unfortunately that makes Crowder the odd man out, and so there seems to be little point in us holding on to him.  I don't think it's fair to bring him off the bench behind Butler - he is too talented for that, and deserves a bigger role.

So I think the best thing to do would be to send the Brooklyn pick (3-5) and Crowder, then add filler as needed to get the deal done.  I would do that trade without hesitation because replacing Crowder with Butler is a major upgrade offensively, without sacrificing anything on defence.  It's a move that makes us MUCH better.

Trading IT for Butler..I don't know.  It's giving up one scorer to gain another...and then replacing Thomas with Smart at PG really hurts us (we've seen this from our previous attempts at it). 

I think we really need to keep Thomas.

I love Butler, but I'd prefer to keep Crowder at SF and Butler at SG simply because of the defensive versatility they'd bring.
 They can both guard pretty much anyone on the court other than traditional centers and would make us extremely hard to score on.

I just think that overall for our championship hopes, Crowder is the better answer with Butler here.
If we could somehow keep Smart AND Crowder in a Butler trade (probably only possible with the #2 or perhaps #3 pick), Smart could play Avery's role defensively off the bench and hopefully improve his 3 point shooting.

I personally just don't see the point.

From what I'm seeing, Crowder offers pretty much nothing that we wouldn't get from Butler.  They are the same height, both strong/physical guys, but similar levels of athleticism.  Butler offers similar defensive versatility.

To me having Crowder and Butler at the same time is just completely redundant.

I would much rather have Bradley and Butler on the court, because they have different skill sets that I feel compliment each other better.

For example, Bradley is a much better outside shooter then Crowder or Butler, and he's much quicker and more athletic.  Bradley has the ability to defend really quick PG's who guys like Butler and Crowder might have trouble with, and he has the ability to pressure the ball in ways that Crowder and Butler can't do nearly as effectively.

This is just flat out wrong. Butler is one of the most athletic players in the NBA and can jump out of the gym. He jumped 39 inches at the combine (Bradley 37.5 and Crowder 34). I'll give you Bradley having quicker feet than Butler, but not by the disparity you think and certainly Crowder (who I love) does not have the quickness Butler has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAKpm0hGtGQ

Cosign.

[Vermont Green]

For example, Bradley is a much better outside shooter then Crowder or Butler, and he's much quicker and more athletic.  Bradley has the ability to defend really quick PG's who guys like Butler and Crowder might have trouble with, and he has the ability to pressure the ball in ways that Crowder and Butler can't do nearly as effectively.

This is just flat out wrong. Butler is one of the most athletic players in the NBA and can jump out of the gym. He jumped 39 inches at the combine (Bradley 37.5 and Crowder 34). I'll give you Bradley having quicker feet than Butler, but not by the disparity you think and certainly Crowder (who I love) does not have the quickness Butler has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAKpm0hGtGQ

Cosign.

I think what Crimson is saying is that Bradley is more athletic than Crowder, not more athletic than Butler, at least that is something I could agree with.  It is an interesting question though.  Would you rather play Butler (SG) and Crowder (SF) or Bradley (SG) and Butler (SG).

I think Butler could be productive at either position but I would rather go with Butler and Crowder just to have the added size and strength.  Either way, having Butler in the line up is a plus.

[MBunge]

For example, Bradley is a much better outside shooter then Crowder or Butler, and he's much quicker and more athletic.  Bradley has the ability to defend really quick PG's who guys like Butler and Crowder might have trouble with, and he has the ability to pressure the ball in ways that Crowder and Butler can't do nearly as effectively.

This is just flat out wrong. Butler is one of the most athletic players in the NBA and can jump out of the gym. He jumped 39 inches at the combine (Bradley 37.5 and Crowder 34). I'll give you Bradley having quicker feet than Butler, but not by the disparity you think and certainly Crowder (who I love) does not have the quickness Butler has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAKpm0hGtGQ

Cosign.

I think what Crimson is saying is that Bradley is more athletic than Crowder, not more athletic than Butler, at least that is something I could agree with.  It is an interesting question though.  Would you rather play Butler (SG) and Crowder (SF) or Bradley (SG) and Butler (SG).

I think Butler could be productive at either position but I would rather go with Butler and Crowder just to have the added size and strength.  Either way, having Butler in the line up is a plus.

As much as we love Crowder, though, we need to remember that he's undersized at SF.  He's got the body for it but not the height.

Mike

[slightly biased bias fan]

My reservation with Bradley is A) he is reportedly unhappy with his current contract and will most probably want to be overpaid on his next deal aka Tony Allen and B) given his height when his athleticism goes will he be able to guard/create space on the same level?

Crowder is 6'5-6'6 and is still improving, growing and he does not rely on his athleticism to defend, as much as Bradley.

[chambers]

For example, Bradley is a much better outside shooter then Crowder or Butler, and he's much quicker and more athletic.  Bradley has the ability to defend really quick PG's who guys like Butler and Crowder might have trouble with, and he has the ability to pressure the ball in ways that Crowder and Butler can't do nearly as effectively.

This is just flat out wrong. Butler is one of the most athletic players in the NBA and can jump out of the gym. He jumped 39 inches at the combine (Bradley 37.5 and Crowder 34). I'll give you Bradley having quicker feet than Butler, but not by the disparity you think and certainly Crowder (who I love) does not have the quickness Butler has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAKpm0hGtGQ

Cosign.

I think what Crimson is saying is that Bradley is more athletic than Crowder, not more athletic than Butler, at least that is something I could agree with.  It is an interesting question though.  Would you rather play Butler (SG) and Crowder (SF) or Bradley (SG) and Butler (SG).

I think Butler could be productive at either position but I would rather go with Butler and Crowder just to have the added size and strength.  Either way, having Butler in the line up is a plus.

As much as we love Crowder, though, we need to remember that he's undersized at SF.  He's got the body for it but not the height.

Mike

I get your point, but I think he's proven that his lack of height (which is not significant anyway) hasn't caused him any difficulty guarding the elite SF's and some PF's.

Up until he was injured he was statistically a top 5 or 6 SF and had one of the best defensive lines of the season for all NBA SF's.

[i believe in brad]

IT4 not getting traded, especially not after he's the representative the Celts are sending to the draft lottery.

[Tr1boy]

Crowder-butler-ab

Would work.  This would make it hell on earth for most sf-sg-pgs to deal with

[MBunge]

For example, Bradley is a much better outside shooter then Crowder or Butler, and he's much quicker and more athletic.  Bradley has the ability to defend really quick PG's who guys like Butler and Crowder might have trouble with, and he has the ability to pressure the ball in ways that Crowder and Butler can't do nearly as effectively.

This is just flat out wrong. Butler is one of the most athletic players in the NBA and can jump out of the gym. He jumped 39 inches at the combine (Bradley 37.5 and Crowder 34). I'll give you Bradley having quicker feet than Butler, but not by the disparity you think and certainly Crowder (who I love) does not have the quickness Butler has.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAKpm0hGtGQ

Cosign.

I think what Crimson is saying is that Bradley is more athletic than Crowder, not more athletic than Butler, at least that is something I could agree with.  It is an interesting question though.  Would you rather play Butler (SG) and Crowder (SF) or Bradley (SG) and Butler (SG).

I think Butler could be productive at either position but I would rather go with Butler and Crowder just to have the added size and strength.  Either way, having Butler in the line up is a plus.

As much as we love Crowder, though, we need to remember that he's undersized at SF.  He's got the body for it but not the height.

Mike

I get your point, but I think he's proven that his lack of height (which is not significant anyway) hasn't caused him any difficulty guarding the elite SF's and some PF's.

Up until he was injured he was statistically a top 5 or 6 SF and had one of the best defensive lines of the season for all NBA SF's.

With undersized guys, though, it's always a question of longevity.  It's the same as with IT.  They're playing at a disadvantage so when their physical gifts start to decline, the effect is more pronounced.

Mike

[Eddie20]

I don't see why a package of Bradley, Crowder, Rozier (who they were rumored to be in love with and wanted to take in the draft), along with picks # 16 and #23 for Butler wouldn't work? This would give the Bulls 2 young starting caliber players on team friendly deals and what's basically 3 rookies, giving them the ultimate roster reset when you consider they have Portis and the #14 pick in this draft. As for us, trading Crowder is contingent on us having confirmation of landing Durant, as well as the Nets pick landing in the top 2, which considering the upside of Simmons and Ingram, I wouldn't trade for Butler.


PF- Simmons (if it's Ingram then he would come off the bench and we would likely have Olynyk at the 4)
SF- Durant
C- ?
PG- Thomas
SG- Butler

Bench- Smart, Olynyk, and whoever wins the other spots as part of our 9 man rotation.



The Bulls would have a young core of McDermott, Mirotic, Bradley, Crowder, Rozier, Portis, and picks #'s 14, 16, and 23.

[mctyson]

Trade

To Bulls: IT, 2016 nets pick, Celtics pick, 35th pick, Amir
To Celtics: Butler, Barstow


Celtics lineup after trade (not considering draft or FA results)

C- ?
PF-  KO
SF- Crowder
SG- Butler (also primary ball handler)
PG- AB  (guards pg anyways)

C-  Jerebko
PF- Mickey/Barstow
SF- ?
SG-  Smart
PG-  Rozier
 

yay or nay?

Nay and this makes no sense.  Jimmy Butler did not make the playoffs this year.  Isaiah Thomas did.  Why oh why on earth would trade IT and a Top-3 pick for him?

By this logic, half the league's players shouldn't be targeted in trade, even if Ainge buys low on them.

Jimmy Butler and the Bulls were clearly worse than Isaiah Thomas and the Celtics this year.  By your logic, we should react to these facts by trading Isaiah for Butler, throw in Amir Johnson to make salaries match...oh and for good measure give Chicago a top-3 pick.

I like my logic better.

Your "logic" includes a strawman fallacy.

I'm on record as wanting to keep IT to pair him with Butler.

What is a "straw man fallacy" about the fact that the Bulls were worse than the Celtics this year?  What more do you want for factual accuracy (the opposite of fallacy) then that?  The original post suggested trading:  the best player from the better team + a top 3 pick + another first round pick + our starting center (and a high 2nd round pick for good measure) for the best player on the worse team.

That is not a straw man and is a direct response to his idea that Butler is worth Thomas and all that other stuff.   He is not.  Glad you are on record on that tho.

The straw man was saying that I wanted to move IT and the pick for Butler. I don't -- unless Durant is in the fold.

Glad you see what I was saying.

My original point is against the original posters and the main topic of this thread, just to be clear.

[mctyson]

Most people seem to be ignoring that triboy said the pick is #3 or worse.
Who are we getting with #3 right now that looks like an All Star? The drop off from Simmons/Ingram to the others is enormous.

It's not about the value of the pick, it is about trading Thomas.  I am fine trading the draft pick for Jimmy Butler.  But that's it.  They don't get our only All-Star on top of it.  Our team does not get any better by adding Jimmy Butler and subtracting Thomas.

[alldaboston]

Most people seem to be ignoring that triboy said the pick is #3 or worse.
Who are we getting with #3 right now that looks like an All Star? The drop off from Simmons/Ingram to the others is enormous.

It's not about the value of the pick, it is about trading Thomas.  I am fine trading the draft pick for Jimmy Butler.  But that's it.  They don't get our only All-Star on top of it.  Our team does not get any better by adding Jimmy Butler and subtracting Thomas.

This

[chambers]

Most people seem to be ignoring that triboy said the pick is #3 or worse.
Who are we getting with #3 right now that looks like an All Star? The drop off from Simmons/Ingram to the others is enormous.

It's not about the value of the pick, it is about trading Thomas.  I am fine trading the draft pick for Jimmy Butler.  But that's it.  They don't get our only All-Star on top of it.  Our team does not get any better by adding Jimmy Butler and subtracting Thomas.

Well I disagree with the last part, because Jimmy Butler is a better player than Thomas- but you are right that the difference between the two is not worth giving up the BRK pick.
My point about it not being a top 2 pick was because a lot of replies to the OP were 'omg a top 2 pick for Jimmy Butler omg' when that wasn't part of the question.

[Granath]

The original trade is insane. I thought it was someone who might have bumped their heads but it's just trollboy16f.

PER 36 (this is one of those times per 36 works well):

IT: 24.8 ppg, 3.3 rebounds, 6.9 assists, .562 true shooting percentage, $7m/yr contract
Butler: 20.4 ppg, 5.2 rebounds, 4.7 assists, .563 true shooting percentage, $19m/yr contract

They're basically the same age. So offensively, Butler gains you absolutely nothing. Nada. If anything, IT is the superior offensive player. Defensively, there's little doubt Butler >>>> IT. So if everything is equal, I'd rather have Butler.

But everything isn't equal. So is Butler's superiority on the defensive end worth $12m a year? Maybe, but probably not. Is it worth $12m a year AND a top 5 pick? Not just no, but 7734 (calculator humor) no.

Good post...

Not really

And Bulls are not likely taking number 3-5 as a centerpiece asset for Butler. It would need to include crowder or IT etc.

Butler overall is a better player. The other poster is confused , talking out loud. End conclusion Butler is better overall.

Plus is receiving a fair contract.

Instead of addressing any of the factual information presented - statistics, age, contract differential and so forth - your best retort is "not really" and an uninformed presumption of what the Bulls would or would not take. Laughable but not unexpected since your understanding of the sport, player value and salary cap economics has always been shallow.

[BASS_THUMPER]

https://youtu.be/-K7fCQlUhj0