Author Topic: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.  (Read 4806 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« on: May 03, 2016, 01:21:13 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
There's probably about 5 threads about Butler at this point.  We've seen it referenced in dozens of articles that Butler is the key to acquiring KD.  I don't agree with the premise.  I think (assuming he actually leaves OKC) you can convince Durant without having Butler in the fold.

Also, some of the trade ideas I see would actually make it impossible to use double-max cap space.  For instance, one of the most popular ideas I see is centered on the pick ending up top 2 and simply shipping out Amir + Jerebko and the pick for Butler.  If you did this, you'd still have 25 mil for signing Durant, but no longer have max room for acquiring a second star.  That then becomes counter-intuitive.  You're adding a star sidekick in Butler, but removing the possibility to add a star sidekick via free agency - all while losing a pick that could develop into a star in it's own right.
 
I read Ryan Bernardoni's (dangercart on Reddit) article in which he lays out a dream offseason acquiring Butler and still maintaining double-max cap room:  http://www.celticshub.com/2016/05/02/navigating-the-offseason/

One of the biggest points he makes is that Boston would be taking a bit of a risk since any Butler trade is most likely to happen on draft night and draft night is weeks before we can officially talk to Durant.  His hypothetical trade offer was the Brooklyn 1st, Avery Bradley, Marcus Smart, RJ Hunter, and James Young for Jimmy Butler.

Quote from Ryan Bernardoni's article:
Quote
The bigger risk, and a definite possibility given the timing of the offseason, is trading away the Nets pick for that Butler or Cousins level player but then not having the other shoe drop. If you, for example, make the Butler trade for the Nets pick, Bradley, and Smart and then, failing to entice Durant, bring back Sullinger and add some other mid-tier veteran you’re pushing up your age and cost profile but not getting to the realm of title contenders.

He makes a good point here and it's one of the several reasons I'd prefer to just hang onto the picks/prospects and approach Durant in free agency with the team as-is.  I think the team is plenty appealing already and you can spell out all the potential follow-up moves to Durant directly.   I wrote a lengthy article about my rationalization for CLNS Radio here:  http://clnsradio.com/boston-celtics-news/item/13678-boston-celtics-why-not-build-a-big-5

In it, I imagine a dream scenario in which Boston ends up with a team like:  Thomas, Ben Simmons (if the pick lands #1), Durant, Max Free Agent (Horford? Derozan?) + another impact star (Marc Gasol? Melo?). You could theoretically build a "Big 5" and depending on the price of that final impact star, you might be able to keep Smart and Crowder in the process.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2016, 01:45:22 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2016, 01:25:39 PM »

Offline Smart457

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 424
  • Tommy Points: 23
I like that trade only if the Nets pick is 3rd or worse.

I'd tried to hold onto AB or try to get Mirotic back if they really want AB that badly.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #2 on: May 03, 2016, 01:34:07 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
Thanks for links David, good ideas.

I also find the idea of trading for Butler risky. I am not even sure I want Butler more than AB+Smart, let alone if you add in the equation the Brooklyn pick.

Another thing to consider here is that if we sign Durant this summer, even if we fail to attract another big name FA, there will be plenty of cap space to do it next summer.

I've argued this already several times, IMO the key is to improve the team while at the same time maintaining flexibility; we should give up our flexibility (cap space, picks,cheap contracts) only if we are confident we can build a contender in exchange. Otherwise we might end up with an ATL- stuck in golden mediocrity - scenario.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #3 on: May 03, 2016, 01:41:33 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
Thanks for links David, good ideas.

I also find the idea of trading for Butler risky. I am not even sure I want Butler more than AB+Smart, let alone if you add in the equation the Brooklyn pick.

Another thing to consider here is that if we sign Durant this summer, even if we fail to attract another big name FA, there will be plenty of cap space to do it next summer.

I've argued this already several times, IMO the key is to improve the team while at the same time maintaining flexibility; we should give up our flexibility (cap space, picks,cheap contracts) only if we are confident we can build a contender in exchange. Otherwise we might end up with an ATL- stuck in golden mediocrity - scenario.

Right, in my article I imagine a wild hypothetical where we build a "Big 5" while still keeping Crowder and Smart.  In that scenario, you might be able to even add a 6th star (all while keeping Crowder and Smart) Summer 2016-17 when the cap jumps another roughly 20 mil. 

Also, one of the team's greatest strengths is their epic defensive back court.  Bradley and Smart are dangerous.  What the team lacks is superior scoring.  Isn't there some appeal for a guy like Durant to just join a team with Bradley and Smart doing their thing on the defensive end?

All of this is unlikely to happen.  OKC might win the title this year.  Durant will probably stay either way.  But if we're dreaming, we might as well dream big.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2016, 01:46:59 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2016, 01:57:09 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
tbh I think Durant will stay in OKC regardless of what happens (I expect them to get eliminated by SAS no matter whether it takes 5, 6 or 7  games).

But as you say, it's better to dream big. No reason to demolish our excellent guard defence in the hope of getting KD. Keep your strengths intact and use them to attract FAs.

Even in the worst case scenario (we do not make any big trade, we fail to attract big name FAs) we have enough talent and picks to see us slowly growing into a top-3 team in the East in the next couple of years. The great thing about this scenario is that once you reach that point, you ll be young enough to stay there for some years. And still have the cap to attract all stars.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2016, 02:11:33 PM »

Offline alldaboston

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4170
  • Tommy Points: 324
I know it's cheesy, but I would keep the pick if its top 2 (take Ingram) and develop Ingram alongside durant. The last thing I want to do is pull another Cleveland and give up Wiggins for a lesser impact than I expected in Butler. Hopefully durant and Ingram could develop into something better
I could very well see the Hawks... starting Taurean Prince at the 3, who is already better than Crowder, imo.

you vs. the guy she tells you not to worry about

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2016, 02:16:02 PM »

Offline mef730

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4422
  • Tommy Points: 907
tbh I think Durant will stay in OKC regardless of what happens (I expect them to get eliminated by SAS no matter whether it takes 5, 6 or 7  games).

What would be KD's incentive to leave OKC this year, as opposed to waiting it out a year and signing a big contract when the cap jumps next year. Does he make more under a 2-yr and opt-out than he would signing a max deal at the end of 16-17?

Mike

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2016, 02:16:14 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
I agree that I don't think Butler is the key to getting Durant but I do think the C's will need another big name here to lure him.  I think it's almost a foregone conclusion Durant resigns in OKC for 1 year to synch up with Westbrook and they either leave or stay together based on how they do next year. 

However, if they could get Durant to agree to move here if they traded for Butler, I make that deal with Chicago post-haste.  In the East, that tandem gets to the ECF with what's left of our roster after the Butler deal and decent free agent role player signings.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2016, 02:18:21 PM »

Offline td450

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2330
  • Tommy Points: 254
Our current team is already highly competitive at the one, two and three spots even before adding Durant to that mix. If we were lucky enough to get him, I'd focus on adding two way talent(with a bias towards defense and toughness) at the four and five spots.

Jimmy Butler is a great player, but we get really competitive production out of those minutes now. We need better bigs more.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #9 on: May 03, 2016, 02:20:03 PM »

Online jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47894
  • Tommy Points: 2906
Perhaps Butler isn't necessary to get Durant here, but he certainly wouldn't hurt. I don't think Durant would come here by himself. He'll have to come here as a pair, with preferably another frontcourt big, in order to provide enough incentive for him to leave. That being said, having Butler on the roster might be the only way to get two potential free agents to consider teaming up and coming here.

But as you said, Butler will cost us at least one of Crowder, Smart, or Bradley, because we can't use AJ and JJ if we're wanting to keep max cap space for free agents. I personally wouldn't give two of them for Butler, especially if the pick is decent, but I'd give them one of them (preferably Crowder) and Rozier plus more picks, e.g. Dallas pick.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #10 on: May 03, 2016, 02:32:44 PM »

Offline Smart457

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 424
  • Tommy Points: 23
Butler's fair value is probably Smart, AB and the 4th pick of this draft.

Luckily we have Ainge who doesn't like to over extend. See the Garnett trade when we held onto Rondo.

Maybe the trade turns into Crowder and the fourth pick for Butler plus a couple more mid firsts. 

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #11 on: May 03, 2016, 02:41:48 PM »

Offline greece66

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7395
  • Tommy Points: 1342
  • Head Paperboy at Greenville
This is all purely hypothetical, but if we trade for Butler the best move is to give up Bradley.

First, because it is easier to fit Crowder+Butler than AB+Butler in our starting five. If anything, we lack depth in the 3/4, and with the departure of Crowder this will become even a greater liability.

Second, Crowder's contract is much more valuable than AB's- but ofc this is what makes Crowder all the more attractive to other teams.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #12 on: May 03, 2016, 02:44:42 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
Perhaps Butler isn't necessary to get Durant here, but he certainly wouldn't hurt. I don't think Durant would come here by himself. He'll have to come here as a pair, with preferably another frontcourt big, in order to provide enough incentive for him to leave. That being said, having Butler on the roster might be the only way to get two potential free agents to consider teaming up and coming here.

But as you said, Butler will cost us at least one of Crowder, Smart, or Bradley, because we can't use AJ and JJ if we're wanting to keep max cap space for free agents. I personally wouldn't give two of them for Butler, especially if the pick is decent, but I'd give them one of them (preferably Crowder) and Rozier plus more picks, e.g. Dallas pick.
It actually COULD hurt. Consider the hypothetical trade offer from Bernardoni's article:  Brooklyn 1st, Avery Bradley, Marcus Smart, RJ Hunter, and James Young for Jimmy Butler.

If most of this forum is to believed, Marcus Smart and Avery Bradley are top 2 defenders at their position.  They represent one of this team's greatest advantages.  Smart and Bradley are ideal supporting pieces for a Superstar go-to scorer like Durant, actually.   If you're removing those two guys as well as a draft pick that could actually end up better than Butler (especially if it ends up top 2), and then fail to sign Durant, I see that as a potentially major setback for the organization.  It would be an even greater setback if Jimmy Butler continues to regress (his 3P% dropped to 31%) when he's no longer playing alongside Pau Gasol.   

Also keep in mind that Bradley was our most consistent shooter this season.  He shot 45% and 36% from three.   Butler is most definitely an upgrade, but depending on the package and how the pick develops... yeah, trading for Butler could hurt.

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #13 on: May 03, 2016, 02:46:49 PM »

Online bdm860

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5952
  • Tommy Points: 4586
One of the biggest points he makes is that Boston would be taking a bit of a risk since any Butler trade is most likely to happen on draft night and draft night is weeks before we can officially talk to Durant.  His hypothetical trade offer was the Brooklyn 1st, Avery Bradley, Marcus Smart, RJ Hunter, and James Young for Jimmy Butler.

I don't know if this is necessarily true.

Sure, I would say any trades involving draft picks are more likely to happen on draft night, but just because something is more likely to happen, doesn't mean the alternative is unlikely to happen, just less likely.   Does that make sense?

Especially the higher up you go in the draft where there is less fluctuation about who gets drafted where.  Simmons is #1, Ingram is #2, Bender/Murray/Brown/Dunn will all go in between #3-#8.

If Boston ends up with #3 and drafts Bender, they can still trade him to Chicago later if Chicago had interest in Bender.  The only problem that would arise is if Boston drafts Bender, but Chicago really wanted Murray.  The higher your draft pick, the less likely this is to be a problem (since it's believed everybody is taking Simmons #1 and Ingram #2).

It's possible that the C's could play it safe, make the pick, but still have potential trade lined up if Durant agreed to sign and still make the potential trade part of their pitch to Durant.

This could be very similar to LeBron agreeing to come to Cleveland as long as Cleveland agrees to trade Wiggins for Love (which happened well after the draft).

After 18 months with their Bigs, the Littles were: 46% less likely to use illegal drugs, 27% less likely to use alcohol, 52% less likely to skip school, 37% less likely to skip a class

Re: I don't think we need Butler to get Durant.
« Reply #14 on: May 03, 2016, 03:02:05 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
One of the biggest points he makes is that Boston would be taking a bit of a risk since any Butler trade is most likely to happen on draft night and draft night is weeks before we can officially talk to Durant.  His hypothetical trade offer was the Brooklyn 1st, Avery Bradley, Marcus Smart, RJ Hunter, and James Young for Jimmy Butler.

I don't know if this is necessarily true.

Sure, I would say any trades involving draft picks are more likely to happen on draft night, but just because something is more likely to happen, doesn't mean the alternative is unlikely to happen, just less likely.   Does that make sense?

Especially the higher up you go in the draft where there is less fluctuation about who gets drafted where.  Simmons is #1, Ingram is #2, Bender/Murray/Brown/Dunn will all go in between #3-#8.

If Boston ends up with #3 and drafts Bender, they can still trade him to Chicago later if Chicago had interest in Bender.  The only problem that would arise is if Boston drafts Bender, but Chicago really wanted Murray.  The higher your draft pick, the less likely this is to be a problem (since it's believed everybody is taking Simmons #1 and Ingram #2).

It's possible that the C's could play it safe, make the pick, but still have potential trade lined up if Durant agreed to sign and still make the potential trade part of their pitch to Durant.

This could be very similar to LeBron agreeing to come to Cleveland as long as Cleveland agrees to trade Wiggins for Love (which happened well after the draft).

Yeah I get that.  Ideally, we'd wait until after getting assurance from Durant before making any moves.

I think the reason people think a deal needs to get done on draft night is because of the belief that other teams are going hard after Butler.  There was a rumor here that the Lakers were prepared to trade their top 3 pick + Clarkson in an offer for Butler.  So if there's a bidding war with grand dreams of Durant, Boston might have to jump on a trade on draft night.

I'm just saying the entire premise is wonky.  I don't agree that removing guys like Bradley, Smart and the pick in favor of Butler makes our situation more desirable for Durant.  If Butler was a guarantee to get Durant, the Bulls would just sign Durant.