What do you think the price is for Butler now?

[celts55]

I'm thinking Crowder, either Rosier or Smart, Nets 18' pick and throw in some seconds if they want. I figure if they get Butler and draft one of Fultz, Tatum, or Jackson these guys are expendable anyway.
I guess if it was a deal breaker, I'd consider swapping Bradley for Smart/Rosier, but really like the way he's been playing. While Smart makes great plays, I feel that Bradley is a better man on man defender, and much better shooter. But that's just my opinion.

[hodgy03038]

Bradley (or Crowder), Zeller, 2017 Nets pick for Butler is a fair trade and honestly one we should consider if Ainge wants to sign IT to a max.

I finally switched sides and feel IT should get paid, and by us, but now I reverse my stance which for the entire season was if we end up with Fultz signing IT to a 5 year max is a mistake.
I still think having both is a mistake, you don't draft the next potential NBA superstar PG to have him ride the pine for the first 5 years of his career behind IT.

Sign IT to the max, build this team and play for now. I think we would have been the best team in the NBA if Durant came here seeing what we have been doing without him.
While Butler is not as good Durant, he has never had a supporting cast (or coaching) like he would have here.. he would be a BEAST in Boston and I think he would help us surpass an aging Cleveland team. He's also entering the prime of his career, I could only Imagine the greatness Stevens could get out of him.

Regarding Fultz, I think your too hung up on the idea of traditional position roles which Ainge and Stevens don't care about. Fultz is 6'4, same height as Bradley. You could easily play IT and Fultz together, with Fultz allowing IT to play off the ball more and be even more of a scorer. Stevens wants positionless basketball, this would work well.

When exactly did Bradley grow to 6'4"? He has been 6'2" as long as I can remember.

[celts55]

Bradley (or Crowder), Zeller, 2017 Nets pick for Butler is a fair trade and honestly one we should consider if Ainge wants to sign IT to a max.

I finally switched sides and feel IT should get paid, and by us, but now I reverse my stance which for the entire season was if we end up with Fultz signing IT to a 5 year max is a mistake.
I still think having both is a mistake, you don't draft the next potential NBA superstar PG to have him ride the pine for the first 5 years of his career behind IT.

Sign IT to the max, build this team and play for now. I think we would have been the best team in the NBA if Durant came here seeing what we have been doing without him.
While Butler is not as good Durant, he has never had a supporting cast (or coaching) like he would have here.. he would be a BEAST in Boston and I think he would help us surpass an aging Cleveland team. He's also entering the prime of his career, I could only Imagine the greatness Stevens could get out of him.

Regarding Fultz, I think your too hung up on the idea of traditional position roles which Ainge and Stevens don't care about. Fultz is 6'4, same height as Bradley. You could easily play IT and Fultz together, with Fultz allowing IT to play off the ball more and be even more of a scorer. Stevens wants positionless basketball, this would work well.

When exactly did Bradley grow to 6'4"? He has been 6'2" as long as I can remember.

Last series against the Bulls? He was big against Butler.

[hodgy03038]

Bradley (or Crowder), Zeller, 2017 Nets pick for Butler is a fair trade and honestly one we should consider if Ainge wants to sign IT to a max.

I finally switched sides and feel IT should get paid, and by us, but now I reverse my stance which for the entire season was if we end up with Fultz signing IT to a 5 year max is a mistake.
I still think having both is a mistake, you don't draft the next potential NBA superstar PG to have him ride the pine for the first 5 years of his career behind IT.

Sign IT to the max, build this team and play for now. I think we would have been the best team in the NBA if Durant came here seeing what we have been doing without him.
While Butler is not as good Durant, he has never had a supporting cast (or coaching) like he would have here.. he would be a BEAST in Boston and I think he would help us surpass an aging Cleveland team. He's also entering the prime of his career, I could only Imagine the greatness Stevens could get out of him.

Regarding Fultz, I think your too hung up on the idea of traditional position roles which Ainge and Stevens don't care about. Fultz is 6'4, same height as Bradley. You could easily play IT and Fultz together, with Fultz allowing IT to play off the ball more and be even more of a scorer. Stevens wants positionless basketball, this would work well.

When exactly did Bradley grow to 6'4"? He has been 6'2" as long as I can remember.

Last series against the Bulls? He was big against Butler.

Nice! Now that is a TP.

[jambr380]

Two key pieces of information to keep in mind: Because of future salary implications, if Danny plans on signing a free agent this summer to more than a one year deal, then Crowder is basically  untradable and AB or Smart have to go (IT is very likely staying).

Danny may not sign anybody or try more of the 1+1 contracts he has used in the past with Amir and Zeller, but simply gauging what Chicago might most want isn't taking into account all that matters in a trade for Butler.

[Surferdad]

I consider Butler as untradeable.  He's the only thing that team has going for it:
-  bad coach
- an aging superstar sucking up $23mm
- a hot/cold PG who sometimes hurts the team when out there
- no really good prospects (except perhaps Valentine, a matter of opinion) and
- no lottery pick

....why would they trade Butler?

[kozlodoev]

Bradley (or Crowder), Zeller, 2017 Nets pick for Butler is a fair trade and honestly one we should consider if Ainge wants to sign IT to a max.

I finally switched sides and feel IT should get paid, and by us, but now I reverse my stance which for the entire season was if we end up with Fultz signing IT to a 5 year max is a mistake.
I still think having both is a mistake, you don't draft the next potential NBA superstar PG to have him ride the pine for the first 5 years of his career behind IT.

Sign IT to the max, build this team and play for now. I think we would have been the best team in the NBA if Durant came here seeing what we have been doing without him.
While Butler is not as good Durant, he has never had a supporting cast (or coaching) like he would have here.. he would be a BEAST in Boston and I think he would help us surpass an aging Cleveland team. He's also entering the prime of his career, I could only Imagine the greatness Stevens could get out of him.

Regarding Fultz, I think your too hung up on the idea of traditional position roles which Ainge and Stevens don't care about. Fultz is 6'4, same height as Bradley. You could easily play IT and Fultz together, with Fultz allowing IT to play off the ball more and be even more of a scorer. Stevens wants positionless basketball, this would work well.

When exactly did Bradley grow to 6'4"? He has been 6'2" as long as I can remember.

Bradley has never been 6'2 except barefoot. He measured 6'3 1/4 at the combine.

[RIPRED]

Crowder, AB, Rozier, and C's 2018 should get it done.

I don't think the Bulls want draft picks or need Smart/Brown. This deal also wouldn't hurt the C's slow build plan of keeping the development going and signing guys like Hayward. Bulls could probably also make the playoff still. I'd use Wade as the PG on offense and AB would cover the PG on defense.

C's
IT, Butler, Hayward*, Horford, Zizic
Smart, Fultz*, Nader, Brown, Yab, AJ*

Bulls
Wade, AB, Crowder, Portis, Lopez
Rozier, Valentine, Zipser, .......

I'd never make that trade, and I'd be very upset if Danny did. Losing one of Crowder/AB/Rozay may be sustainable, but no way this team can lose all three. Crowder and Butler play the same position and we have Jaylen who will need more minutes so that part is fine, but losing two of our proven guards seems like a death sentence for this team. I know the logic is we get Fultz, but who's to say he's ready to make a significant impact from day 1 (and that's leaving out the part where we're not guaranteed to get Fultz). The old saying goes whoever got the best player won the trade, but I don't think that applies in this case.

[Chris22]

We don't need Butler.
This summer we will add a quality free agent and top four pick.

[Kuberski33]

I consider Butler as untradeable.  He's the only thing that team has going for it:
-  bad coach
- an aging superstar sucking up $23mm
- a hot/cold PG who sometimes hurts the team when out there
- no really good prospects (except perhaps Valentine, a matter of opinion) and
- no lottery pick

....why would they trade Butler?

That's actually been my stance all along, but I've concluded that the Bulls are an amazingly dysfunctional organization so anything's possible.

[colincb]

Don't think Bulls will trade Butler except for an offer they can't refuse. Celtics won't do that.

[JOMVP]

I consider Butler as untradeable.  He's the only thing that team has going for it:
-  bad coach
- an aging superstar sucking up $23mm
- a hot/cold PG who sometimes hurts the team when out there
- no really good prospects (except perhaps Valentine, a matter of opinion) and
- no lottery pick

....why would they trade Butler?

That's actually been my stance all along, but I've concluded that the Bulls are an amazingly dysfunctional organization so anything's possible.

Because Butler doesn't tip the needle. He's a great player, don't get me wrong but I just don't see him as an alpha. He is a great secondary player but that doesn't help the Bulls situation. They need to blow it up and gather assets to look for a transcedant star. I mean, I suppose they could tank with Butler on the roster but he'll just bolt by the time they find that next star most likely.

[Surferdad]

I consider Butler as untradeable.  He's the only thing that team has going for it:
-  bad coach
- an aging superstar sucking up $23mm
- a hot/cold PG who sometimes hurts the team when out there
- no really good prospects (except perhaps Valentine, a matter of opinion) and
- no lottery pick

....why would they trade Butler?

That's actually been my stance all along, but I've concluded that the Bulls are an amazingly dysfunctional organization so anything's possible.

Because Butler doesn't tip the needle. He's a great player, don't get me wrong but I just don't see him as an alpha. He is a great secondary player but that doesn't help the Bulls situation. They need to blow it up and gather assets to look for a transcedant star. I mean, I suppose they could tank with Butler on the roster but he'll just bolt by the time they find that next star most likely.

Butler not an alpha?  I am not so sure.  He has played most of his career with ball-dominant point guards, and still manages to put up good numbers.  This whole debate is so subjective.  What is less subjective is that you need 2 or preferably 3 all-star level players to compete.  I don't see how getting rid of the only one they have advances their cause.

[Darío SpanishFan]

I consider Butler as untradeable.  He's the only thing that team has going for it:
-  bad coach
- an aging superstar sucking up $23mm
- a hot/cold PG who sometimes hurts the team when out there
- no really good prospects (except perhaps Valentine, a matter of opinion) and
- no lottery pick

....why would they trade Butler?

To rebuild, trading every veteran and go on a different direction, first. They may finally realize that they are not being ever close to a ring with this group and so they break it up and tank.
And second, because the Bulls' front office is going nowhere (trading Gibson for almost nothing, signing Wade, etc) and so anything can be expected.

[RIPRED]

I consider Butler as untradeable.  He's the only thing that team has going for it:
-  bad coach
- an aging superstar sucking up $23mm
- a hot/cold PG who sometimes hurts the team when out there
- no really good prospects (except perhaps Valentine, a matter of opinion) and
- no lottery pick

....why would they trade Butler?

These actually sound like reasons the Bulls should trade him, especially with regard to the bolded piece. Their team stinks, they currently have no future, Jimmy is useless to them right now other than for marketing purposes. Jimmy actually represents their only chance to get any good assets to build for the future. I would think they value a top 5 pick and a few young studs more than an aging star at this pint in their trajectory, but I've been wrong before.