Is This A Fair Butler Deal? (I Feel Chicago Fans Will Laugh At This)

[Phantom255x]

Bulls Receive:
- #3 Pick
- #16 Pick
- Amir Johnson (replaces Noah/Gasol who likely leave)
- Terry Rozier
- James Young
- 2018 Celtics Second Rounder
- 2019 Memphis Pick

Celtics Receive:
- Jimmy Butler

So you keep Crowder and AB, and the Bulls get lots of picks, future picks, and a few players to build around (Amir is there mostly for salary purposes and a potential short term replacement for Noah and Gasol who likely bolt in FA). The Memphis pick also becomes valuable as they are trending downward.

Is this a fair deal or do you think it takes more/less to pry Butler away?

[Donoghus]

Yeah, I think Chicago laughs at this.

They want legit building blocks if they're moving Butler.  Outside of #3, there isn't much there in that aspect.

[Phantom255x]

Yeah, I think Chicago laughs at this.

They want legit building blocks if they're moving Butler.  Outside of #3, there isn't much there in that aspect.

I don't think a Butler deal happens if it includes Bradley or Crowder. Ainge seems high on those guys and rightfully so. Bargain contracts, great defense, ability to score 14-15 ppg.

I mean Minnesota is hesitating to give up #5 + LaVine for Butler, and Chicago wants Wiggins instead.

I think there's a 99% chance Butler stays in Chicago.

[jbpats]

In theory we don't need AB if we trade for Butler so I'm a little confused why folks around here are so apprehensive to make him part of the package?

Butler/Smart would be our new 1-2 at the SG position, making Bradley expendable.

[Granath]

Yeah, I think Chicago laughs at this.

They want legit building blocks if they're moving Butler.  Outside of #3, there isn't much there in that aspect.

I'm not so sure they do. It may not be perfect but it's fairly close.

Let's use the James Harden deal as an example. A 22 year old Harden had just as much value - if not more - than Butler does right now. For Harden, OKC got 2 mid-1sts, a 2nd, a decent (aging) player in Kevin Martin and an unproven prospect (Lamb) who was drafted 12th that year without any playing time.

- #3 pick is worth far more than the 2 1sts that OKC got from Houston.
- Rozier is roughly equivalent to Lamb in the sense that they were drafted at roughly the same spot and are unproven. I'll give Lamb the edge here but not by much.
- #16 + Memphis 1st + Amir should equate to a Kevin Martin-type player.
- 2nd round picks are a wash

Frankly, I don't see where that deal is unfair. Using the Harden trade as a guide Chicago is getting more from Boston than OKC got from Houston. Now if you want to argue that Butler is worth more than Harden, feel free to do so but Harden's value as a 22 year old kid scoring 17ppg off the bench was very high.

[Donoghus]

Yeah, I think Chicago laughs at this.

They want legit building blocks if they're moving Butler.  Outside of #3, there isn't much there in that aspect.

I'm not so sure they do. It may not be perfect but it's fairly close.

Let's use the James Harden deal as an example. A 22 year old Harden had just as much value - if not more - than Butler does right now. For Harden, OKC got 2 mid-1sts, a 2nd, a decent (aging) player in Kevin Martin and an unproven prospect (Lamb) who was drafted 12th that year without any playing time.

- #3 pick is worth far more than the 2 1sts that OKC got from Houston.
- Rozier is roughly equivalent to Lamb in the sense that they were drafted at roughly the same spot and are unproven. I'll give Lamb the edge here but not by much.
- #16 + Memphis 1st + Amir should equate to a Kevin Martin-type player.
- 2nd round picks are a wash

Frankly, I don't see where that deal is unfair. Using the Harden trade as a guide Chicago is getting more from Boston than OKC got from Houston. Now if you want to argue that Butler is worth more than Harden, feel free to do so but Harden's value as a 22 year old kid scoring 17ppg off the bench was very high.

The Harden deal was awful for OKC.  Chicago should look at that as prime example #1 not to take this trade offer.    Plus, Butler's contract alone should help Chicago's end to drive up his value.  It's relatively friendly.

If the Harden trade is the template for a Butler trade, then Chicago should pass.   

[Granath]

In theory we don't need AB if we trade for Butler so I'm a little confused why folks around here are so apprehensive to make him part of the package?

Butler/Smart would be our new 1-2 at the SG position, making Bradley expendable.

I don't either. I think the deal as #3 + Bradley is going to be about the limit here. I could see the 2018 Boston 1st as an additional incentive but Chicago isn't going to get more than that. Even that deal may very well be an overpay. I'm not sure that Butler is so much better than Bradley as to warrant the #3 pick in the draft.

In fact, Butler may not help the team much more at all than Bradley does. Blasphemy, I know, but hear me out.

Statistically, Butler offers 4 points, 2 rebounds and 2.5 assists per 36 more than Bradley. Avery has a slight advantage on the defensive end. Bradley is slightly younger as well. But here's the rub - Bradley shoots 36% from 3 point land. In fact he's shot 39%, 35% and 36% the last 3 years. Butler's game isn't from the 3 point line. He has shot 28%, 38% and 31% the last 3 years.

Butler's game is much more a slashing, driving game. Except on the Celtics that role is already filled by IT. Bradley's threat from 3 point land causes teams to respect that shot, opening up the court. If teams don't have to respect Butler's 3 point shot and instead have to guard against his penetration game, wouldn't that limit the opportunities for IT to drive the middle as well? While IT (36%) may open the floor at bit for Butler, might Butler actually negatively impact IT's game?

I'm not saying that Butler is a net negative to the Celtics. But he may actually not be that much of a positive in the grand scheme of things. He might offer a decent (but not huge) upgrade over Bradley, but he may also adversely impact IT's game. I'm not so sure that's worth the #3 pick in the draft plus the additional cap space.

[Rhyso]

IMO I say it's too much for Butler if anything, although I may not rate him as high as others. #3, #16 or Rozier, Amir, plus some 2nd rounders is as much as I would call fair. Probably wouldn't get a deal done though.

[Granath]

Yeah, I think Chicago laughs at this.

They want legit building blocks if they're moving Butler.  Outside of #3, there isn't much there in that aspect.

I'm not so sure they do. It may not be perfect but it's fairly close.

Let's use the James Harden deal as an example. A 22 year old Harden had just as much value - if not more - than Butler does right now. For Harden, OKC got 2 mid-1sts, a 2nd, a decent (aging) player in Kevin Martin and an unproven prospect (Lamb) who was drafted 12th that year without any playing time.

- #3 pick is worth far more than the 2 1sts that OKC got from Houston.
- Rozier is roughly equivalent to Lamb in the sense that they were drafted at roughly the same spot and are unproven. I'll give Lamb the edge here but not by much.
- #16 + Memphis 1st + Amir should equate to a Kevin Martin-type player.
- 2nd round picks are a wash

Frankly, I don't see where that deal is unfair. Using the Harden trade as a guide Chicago is getting more from Boston than OKC got from Houston. Now if you want to argue that Butler is worth more than Harden, feel free to do so but Harden's value as a 22 year old kid scoring 17ppg off the bench was very high.

The Harden deal was awful for OKC.  Chicago should look at that as prime example #1 not to take this trade offer.    Plus, Butler's contract alone should help Chicago's end to drive up his value.  It's relatively friendly.

If the Harden trade is the template for a Butler trade, then Chicago should pass.

What player in recent memory was traded for more than that? Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, KG, Pau Gasol, Ray Allen? I don't think so.

The only recent deal where a team got more than that was the trade for 'Melo - who was clearly better than Butler - and what did they get for him and Chauncey Billups (who was still quite good)? They got some good younger players in Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, Raymond Felton and Timofey Mozgov. But none of those guys were expected to be studs and none have turned out to be studs. They only got an (expected) late 1st, 2 2nds and $3m as well.

Unless I'm missing an example, there's nothing out there from the last 10-15 years which shows a substantially better haul for someone of Butler's caliber. Now maybe Chicago is better off holding Butler and if so that's what they'll do. But if they want to trade him, history shows that they're not getting a King's Ransom.

[Geo123]

In theory we don't need AB if we trade for Butler so I'm a little confused why folks around here are so apprehensive to make him part of the package?

Butler/Smart would be our new 1-2 at the SG position, making Bradley expendable.

I don't either. I think the deal as #3 + Bradley is going to be about the limit here. I could see the 2018 Boston 1st as an additional incentive but Chicago isn't going to get more than that. Even that deal may very well be an overpay. I'm not sure that Butler is so much better than Bradley as to warrant the #3 pick in the draft.

In fact, Butler may not help the team much more at all than Bradley does. Blasphemy, I know, but hear me out.

Statistically, Butler offers 4 points, 2 rebounds and 2.5 assists per 36 more than Bradley. Avery has a slight advantage on the defensive end. Bradley is slightly younger as well. But here's the rub - Bradley shoots 36% from 3 point land. In fact he's shot 39%, 35% and 36% the last 3 years. Butler's game isn't from the 3 point line. He has shot 28%, 38% and 31% the last 3 years.

Butler's game is much more a slashing, driving game. Except on the Celtics that role is already filled by IT. Bradley's threat from 3 point land causes teams to respect that shot, opening up the court. If teams don't have to respect Butler's 3 point shot and instead have to guard against his penetration game, wouldn't that limit the opportunities for IT to drive the middle as well? While IT (36%) may open the floor at bit for Butler, might Butler actually negatively impact IT's game?

I'm not saying that Butler is a net negative to the Celtics. But he may actually not be that much of a positive in the grand scheme of things. He might offer a decent (but not huge) upgrade over Bradley, but he may also adversely impact IT's game. I'm not so sure that's worth the #3 pick in the draft plus the additional cap space.

They will get more than that or they just won't trade him.  They will get a better deal from Minnesota than you're offering.  To even compare Butler, an All-start to AB - and I like AB is just not right. 

[Donoghus]

Yeah, I think Chicago laughs at this.

They want legit building blocks if they're moving Butler.  Outside of #3, there isn't much there in that aspect.

I'm not so sure they do. It may not be perfect but it's fairly close.

Let's use the James Harden deal as an example. A 22 year old Harden had just as much value - if not more - than Butler does right now. For Harden, OKC got 2 mid-1sts, a 2nd, a decent (aging) player in Kevin Martin and an unproven prospect (Lamb) who was drafted 12th that year without any playing time.

- #3 pick is worth far more than the 2 1sts that OKC got from Houston.
- Rozier is roughly equivalent to Lamb in the sense that they were drafted at roughly the same spot and are unproven. I'll give Lamb the edge here but not by much.
- #16 + Memphis 1st + Amir should equate to a Kevin Martin-type player.
- 2nd round picks are a wash

Frankly, I don't see where that deal is unfair. Using the Harden trade as a guide Chicago is getting more from Boston than OKC got from Houston. Now if you want to argue that Butler is worth more than Harden, feel free to do so but Harden's value as a 22 year old kid scoring 17ppg off the bench was very high.

The Harden deal was awful for OKC.  Chicago should look at that as prime example #1 not to take this trade offer.    Plus, Butler's contract alone should help Chicago's end to drive up his value.  It's relatively friendly.

If the Harden trade is the template for a Butler trade, then Chicago should pass.

What player in recent memory was traded for more than that? Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, KG, Pau Gasol, Ray Allen? I don't think so.

The only recent deal where a team got more than that was the trade for 'Melo - who was clearly better than Butler - and what did they get for him and Chauncey Billups (who was still quite good)? They got some good younger players in Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, Raymond Felton and Timofey Mozgov. But none of those guys were expected to be studs and none have turned out to be studs. They only got an (expected) late 1st, 2 2nds and $3m as well.

Unless I'm missing an example, there's nothing out there from the last 10-15 years which shows a substantially better haul for someone of Butler's caliber. Now maybe Chicago is better off holding Butler and if so that's what they'll do. But if they want to trade him, history shows that they're not getting a King's Ransom.

Chicago is better served keeping Butler than taking that deal from BOS if that's the best deal offered to them, then.   (Personally, I think they're nuts to consider dealing him to begin with)

Outside of #3, there isn't much of substance there unless you count on the MEM pick which is absolute gambling considering the conveyance.   Rozier barely moves the needle and I'm not sure Young does anything as does the 2nd rounder.   Is Amir a real upgrade or part of their long term plans? 

I just think Chicago can get better value for Butler out there than this offer.   Especially if they're sold on going the youth movement thing.

[Granath]

They will get more than that or they just won't trade him.  They will get a better deal from Minnesota than you're offering.  To even compare Butler, an All-start to AB - and I like AB is just not right.

Then they won't trade him but that's all they're getting (and no, Minny isn't offering more).

The comparison is what it is, my friend. It's simply a fact that while Butler is better than Bradley, he's not a massive upgrade. Avery has worked hard on his game to be what he is and he's a better-than-average SG now. The knock on Bradley was injuries but he's played in more games than Butler the last 3 seasons. He's younger than Butler. He's paid less than Butler. Those are simply the facts. Butler is better, but he'd be replacing a solid starter and Butler isn't a top-tier player. He's not nearly as good as someone like Paul George. He's merely very good. And given his game, there are serious questions as to how he'd fit in with IT.

Butler is really the wrong target for the Celtics because he's not worth what it will take to get him. He simply doesn't add that many wins to this team. Getting Butler is replacing a strength for a strength. While you get somewhat stronger, you aren't going to massively improve. Where you improve is trading for a strength in a weak area and on this team that means someone up front.   

I'll pose the same challenge to you that so far no one has tried to accept - find a better deal for a player of Butler's caliber in the last 10-15 years.

[Ilikesports17]

They will get more than that or they just won't trade him.  They will get a better deal from Minnesota than you're offering.  To even compare Butler, an All-start to AB - and I like AB is just not right.

Then they won't trade him but that's all they're getting (and no, Minny isn't offering more).

The comparison is what it is, my friend. It's simply a fact that while Butler is better than Bradley, he's not a massive upgrade. Avery has worked hard on his game to be what he is and he's a better-than-average SG now. The knock on Bradley was injuries but he's played in more games than Butler the last 3 seasons. He's younger than Butler. He's paid less than Butler. Those are simply the facts. Butler is better, but he'd be replacing a solid starter and Butler isn't a top-tier player. He's not nearly as good as someone like Paul George. He's merely very good. And given his game, there are serious questions as to how he'd fit in with IT.

Butler is really the wrong target for the Celtics because he's not worth what it will take to get him. He simply doesn't add that many wins to this team. Getting Butler is replacing a strength for a strength. While you get somewhat stronger, you aren't going to massively improve. Where you improve is trading for a strength in a weak area and on this team that means someone up front.   

I'll pose the same challenge to you that so far no one has tried to accept - find a better deal for a player of Butler's caliber in the last 10-15 years.

Deron Williams to New Jersey is pretty close.

Favors was a better asset than #3 in this draft and Harris at the time was a year and a half removed from a 21 and 7 all star season and was still 27 years old.

They also got 2 first rounders.

How about KLove for Wiggins?

[Granath]

They will get more than that or they just won't trade him.  They will get a better deal from Minnesota than you're offering.  To even compare Butler, an All-start to AB - and I like AB is just not right.

Then they won't trade him but that's all they're getting (and no, Minny isn't offering more).

The comparison is what it is, my friend. It's simply a fact that while Butler is better than Bradley, he's not a massive upgrade. Avery has worked hard on his game to be what he is and he's a better-than-average SG now. The knock on Bradley was injuries but he's played in more games than Butler the last 3 seasons. He's younger than Butler. He's paid less than Butler. Those are simply the facts. Butler is better, but he'd be replacing a solid starter and Butler isn't a top-tier player. He's not nearly as good as someone like Paul George. He's merely very good. And given his game, there are serious questions as to how he'd fit in with IT.

Butler is really the wrong target for the Celtics because he's not worth what it will take to get him. He simply doesn't add that many wins to this team. Getting Butler is replacing a strength for a strength. While you get somewhat stronger, you aren't going to massively improve. Where you improve is trading for a strength in a weak area and on this team that means someone up front.   

I'll pose the same challenge to you that so far no one has tried to accept - find a better deal for a player of Butler's caliber in the last 10-15 years.

Deron Williams to New Jersey is pretty close.

Favors was a better asset than #3 in this draft and Harris at the time was a year and a half removed from a 21 and 7 all star season and was still 27 years old.

They also got 2 first rounders.

Excellent. Good find! Tommy Point! And it is a good example. But I'm going to disagree with a couple of your assumptions.

(1) Favors, at the time, was the #3 pick who was averaging 6ppg from what was seen as an extremely weak draft. He wasn't a better asset at the time than the #3 now.

(2) Harris was seen as a good player, but oft-injured and a massive defensively liability who was good for 16/6. Frankly, Bradley is a better player.

(3) The Nets' pick was projected to be in the 20s and the other pick was top 7 protected.

(4) I'd argue that Williams was seen as a better player then than Butler is now. Williams was a consistent 20 point, 10 assist PG. I'll even that up because Williams' contract was expiring.

(5) NJ at the time was widely seen as overpaying and the legacy of that trade shows why you don't overpay for a guy who isn't a top 10 player. I'd like the Cs to learn - and not just benefit - from the many blunders of the Billy King era.

Now if somehow Butler nets the Celtics KG, I'm all for it. Maybe Butler is the new Ray Allen. But Butler alone doesn't incredibly improve this team and thus any trade to get him I hope enables  some FA deal that rounds out the squad because the trade alone doesn't make a lot of sense.

As for KLove for Wiggins, Love was significantly more valuable than Butler.