Author Topic: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16  (Read 8469 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2016, 10:18:15 PM »

Online BitterJim

  • NGT
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8913
  • Tommy Points: 1212
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.

The amount of skepticism on here amazes, but mostly just because it's appearing now after the draft where it wasn't before the draft. This isn't some fake account tweeting this; this is a legitimate Bulls writer that has many connections with the team. If he thought there were more principal pieces to the trade, then he'd put them on there. There's no motivation for him to leave those off.
Obviously you do that deal. But do you honestly believe that was the deal? I think it's foolish to think nit was that simple.

I mean, that was the reported trade rate at the trade deadline for him (pretty well accepted, too), and his value would've only got lower since then. Why would it be much different?

It's hard to compare a trade now to one at the deadline, when the pick could have been anywhere
I'm bitter.

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2016, 10:18:18 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.
I'm not so sure what's so obvious about it. Crowder is no chopped liver, so it depends on how much you like the guy you've got at 3.

Also, most people evaluate the "obviousness" of this deal on some sort of misguided idea that this will gift-wrap Durant for you. It won't.

No, Butler is certainly enough in himself to trade for. Let me ask you this - do you think Crowder is ever as good as Butler or makes an All-Star Game?

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2016, 10:19:37 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
why would you do that deal? Butler is not that good.

If Butler was that good Chicago would not be trying to trade him. The coach is already gone, Rose is gone, so why are they still trying to dump Butler?

Uh, does the word re-build mean anything to you?  Much like Ainge when he traded KG and PP, the Bulls were preparing to move on and the Bulls apparently valued Dunn, Crowder and the #16 pick as being worth trading Butler for.
Trading your best player for three inferior players and no future draft considerations is a fantastic way to rebuild. This is nothing like trading the calcified remains of the players that were one Pierce and Garnett for multiple lottery picks in different drafts.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2016, 10:20:51 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
The way it is written, it could have been Ainge offering Crowder, the #3 and the #16 and being turned down by Chicago.

Mike

Underneath it says "But the Celtics have a reputation of trying to win trades and kept changing terms, none of which ultimately met the Bulls' liking."

That suggests that this proposal was the Bulls' proposal, and, once again, this was essentially the same rate for Butler that was rumored at the deadline, so it makes sense why it would be them still proposing that.


Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2016, 10:21:29 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
And just to further this narrative that has came out about Danny  in the last several days:

"But the Celtics have a reputation of trying to win trades and kept changing terms, none of which ultimately met the Bulls' liking."

How much smoke do you want before you yell fire?

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2016, 10:22:14 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.
I'm not so sure what's so obvious about it. Crowder is no chopped liver, so it depends on how much you like the guy you've got at 3.

Also, most people evaluate the "obviousness" of this deal on some sort of misguided idea that this will gift-wrap Durant for you. It won't.

No, Butler is certainly enough in himself to trade for. Let me ask you this - do you think Crowder is ever as good as Butler or makes an All-Star Game?
No, but I think Brown could. And I certainly think that the combination of Brown and Crowder may end up being more valuable down the road than Jimmy Butler, who is not someone who can carry a franchise by himself.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2016, 10:22:26 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19479
  • Tommy Points: 1871
why would you do that deal? Butler is not that good.

If Butler was that good Chicago would not be trying to trade him. The coach is already gone, Rose is gone, so why are they still trying to dump Butler?

Uh, does the word re-build mean anything to you?  Much like Ainge when he traded KG and PP, the Bulls were preparing to move on and the Bulls apparently valued Dunn, Crowder and the #16 pick as being worth trading Butler for.

that is my point.... we are rebuilding too. So if Chicago does not want to rebuild with Butler, why should we send all our rebuilding assets to rebuild with Butler????

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2016, 10:22:52 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.

The amount of skepticism on here amazes, but mostly just because it's appearing now after the draft where it wasn't before the draft. This isn't some fake account tweeting this; this is a legitimate Bulls writer that has many connections with the team. If he thought there were more principal pieces to the trade, then he'd put them on there. There's no motivation for him to leave those off.
Obviously you do that deal. But do you honestly believe that was the deal? I think it's foolish to think nit was that simple.

I mean, that was the reported trade rate at the trade deadline for him (pretty well accepted, too), and his value would've only got lower since then. Why would it be much different?

It's hard to compare a trade now to one at the deadline, when the pick could have been anywhere

It's not like it dropped to five or six - it stayed exactly where it was predicted to go. And I even think Brooklyn was still in third place in February. Further, the Dallas pick wasn't mentioned at the trade deadline, so perhaps that's the extra cost between then and now.

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2016, 10:23:30 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
And just to further this narrative that has came out about Danny  in the last several days:

"But the Celtics have a reputation of trying to win trades and kept changing terms, none of which ultimately met the Bulls' liking."

How much smoke do you want before you yell fire?
Sorry, that article was hogwash.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2016, 10:24:27 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.
I'm not so sure what's so obvious about it. Crowder is no chopped liver, so it depends on how much you like the guy you've got at 3.

Also, most people evaluate the "obviousness" of this deal on some sort of misguided idea that this will gift-wrap Durant for you. It won't.

No, Butler is certainly enough in himself to trade for. Let me ask you this - do you think Crowder is ever as good as Butler or makes an All-Star Game?
No, but I think Brown could. And I certainly think that the combination of Brown and Crowder may end up being more valuable down the road than Jimmy Butler, who is not someone who can carry a franchise by himself.

But even if he doesn't gift-wrap you KD, he certainly does raise the profile of the C's to other free agents. I don't think that's a controversial statement to make, do you?

For me, I take the sure thing in the multiple-time All-Star just reaching his prime rather than gamble on Brown and Crowder.

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2016, 10:25:25 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
And just to further this narrative that has came out about Danny  in the last several days:

"But the Celtics have a reputation of trying to win trades and kept changing terms, none of which ultimately met the Bulls' liking."

How much smoke do you want before you yell fire?
Sorry, that article was hogwash.

 ??? How do you figure?

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2016, 10:25:51 PM »

Online BitterJim

  • NGT
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8913
  • Tommy Points: 1212
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.

The amount of skepticism on here amazes, but mostly just because it's appearing now after the draft where it wasn't before the draft. This isn't some fake account tweeting this; this is a legitimate Bulls writer that has many connections with the team. If he thought there were more principal pieces to the trade, then he'd put them on there. There's no motivation for him to leave those off.
Obviously you do that deal. But do you honestly believe that was the deal? I think it's foolish to think nit was that simple.

I mean, that was the reported trade rate at the trade deadline for him (pretty well accepted, too), and his value would've only got lower since then. Why would it be much different?

It's hard to compare a trade now to one at the deadline, when the pick could have been anywhere

It's not like it dropped to five or six - it stayed exactly where it was predicted to go. And I even think Brooklyn was still in third place in February. Further, the Dallas pick wasn't mentioned at the trade deadline, so perhaps that's the extra cost between then and now.

In what many consider a 2-player draft, the chance of it moving up definitely offset the chance of it moving down.  The pick was likely more valuable then
I'm bitter.

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #27 on: June 24, 2016, 10:26:24 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.
I'm not so sure what's so obvious about it. Crowder is no chopped liver, so it depends on how much you like the guy you've got at 3.

Also, most people evaluate the "obviousness" of this deal on some sort of misguided idea that this will gift-wrap Durant for you. It won't.

No, Butler is certainly enough in himself to trade for. Let me ask you this - do you think Crowder is ever as good as Butler or makes an All-Star Game?
No, but I think Brown could. And I certainly think that the combination of Brown and Crowder may end up being more valuable down the road than Jimmy Butler, who is not someone who can carry a franchise by himself.

But even if he doesn't gift-wrap you KD, he certainly does raise the profile of the C's to other free agents. I don't think that's a controversial statement to make, do you?

For me, I take the sure thing in the multiple-time All-Star just reaching his prime rather than gamble on Brown and Crowder.
If Brown turns into a player, that also raises the profile of the Celtics. And if Butler turns back into a pumpkin, that doesn't.  Butler is a guy with one good season, not someone who's guaranteed to be a perennial allstar.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #28 on: June 24, 2016, 10:26:49 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
My theory is this - Danny is way too attached to Crowder after him finding his value seemingly out of nowhere. That or he is way too stuck on combining Crowder with Butler.
My theory is this - this is carefully curated information that doesn't list the entirety of the proposed deals. A deal with "Jae Crowder, the 3rd and the 16th" isn't necessarily a deal that stops there.

Sure, and I admitted as much, but that very well could have just been salary filler since it was necessary to make the trade. So it could've been Crowder, JJ, 3, and 16, which obviously you still do.

The amount of skepticism on here amazes, but mostly just because it's appearing now after the draft where it wasn't before the draft. This isn't some fake account tweeting this; this is a legitimate Bulls writer that has many connections with the team. If he thought there were more principal pieces to the trade, then he'd put them on there. There's no motivation for him to leave those off.
Obviously you do that deal. But do you honestly believe that was the deal? I think it's foolish to think nit was that simple.

I mean, that was the reported trade rate at the trade deadline for him (pretty well accepted, too), and his value would've only got lower since then. Why would it be much different?

It's hard to compare a trade now to one at the deadline, when the pick could have been anywhere

It's not like it dropped to five or six - it stayed exactly where it was predicted to go. And I even think Brooklyn was still in third place in February. Further, the Dallas pick wasn't mentioned at the trade deadline, so perhaps that's the extra cost between then and now.

In what many consider a 2-player draft, the chance of it moving up definitely offset the chance of it moving down.  The pick was likely more valuable then

Except their target was Dunn, who was totally available at 3.

Re: K.C. Johnson - Butler deal discussed was Crowder, #3, #16
« Reply #29 on: June 24, 2016, 10:27:47 PM »

Online BitterJim

  • NGT
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8913
  • Tommy Points: 1212
The way it is written, it could have been Ainge offering Crowder, the #3 and the #16 and being turned down by Chicago.

Mike

Underneath it says "But the Celtics have a reputation of trying to win trades and kept changing terms, none of which ultimately met the Bulls' liking."

That suggests that this proposal was the Bulls' proposal, and, once again, this was essentially the same rate for Butler that was rumored at the deadline, so it makes sense why it would be them still proposing that.

That's still a little ambiguous.  Danny may have been "trying to win" by only offering that deal, while the Bulls were asking for a lot more. Without more info, it's all circumstantial
I'm bitter.