Do you believe the Hawks would do the same offer for Jimmy Butler?

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

With Butler on it.  Absolutely.

So what is the ceiling for your team with Butler on it?..championship? Or another version of a treadmill team?

[macdaddy]

If you have a chance to get a star in his prime, especially one that plays D, then you do it and figure out the rest.   Sap is a fantastic 2nd option.     

[macdaddy]

7 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So what is the ceiling for your team with Butler on it?..championship? Or another version of a treadmill team?

Who gives a flip.   You'd rather have a treadmill with no star than one with one?    I think Butler/Sap together in their prime is a great building block for a contending team.   Prince may turn out to be another great piece or you trade for someone but you have to have a star so you get that and then start building around.   We're pretty good at developing good role players.   

[Peoriabird]

12 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

Who gives a flip.   You'd rather have a treadmill with no star than one with one?    I think Butler/Sap together in their prime is a great building block for a contending team.   Prince may turn out to be another great piece or you trade for someone but you have to have a star so you get that and then start building around.   We're pretty good at developing good role players.   

So another treadmill got you.

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So another treadmill got you.

I don't totally disagree with you, however, @macdaddy has a point deeply embedded within his ramblings.

Having a "star" is a positive thing even if the team is presently not quite a contender.  At least you can sell coming to play with said "star".  At least you'll get favorable TV treatment which is eons better than how we're typically treated.

All in all, there are some tangible benefits to adding a player of Butler's caliber although the w/l record may not show tremendous improvement.  Then again, it's possible that it could.

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, kg01 said:

I don't totally disagree with you, however, @macdaddy has a point deeply embedded within his ramblings.

Having a "star" is a positive thing even if the team is presently not quite a contender.  At least you can sell coming to play with said "star".  At least you'll get favorable TV treatment which is eons better than how we're typically treated.

All in all, there are some tangible benefits to adding a player of Butler's caliber although the w/l record may not show tremendous improvement.  Then again, it's possible that it could.

But you don't give up 4 1st round picks to get a guy like Butler...heck you can sign him for free at the end of his contract in a few years

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Peoriabird said:

in a few years

Lol...that's the whole point..we need him at this point of his career called the "prime".

[Peoriabird]

7 minutes ago, Spud2Nique said:

Lol...that's the whole point..we need him at this point of his career called the "prime".

To do what? Win 45 games and get beat in the 1st or 2nd round like Chicago every year he has been there???

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

To do what? Win 45 games and get beat in the 1st or 2nd round like Chicago every year that he has been there???

I think we have a better cast with Sap, Dennis and Dwight than the Bulls have probably ever had in the Jimmy era. That's a 55 win team and an eastern conference finalist for sure.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

But you don't give up 4 1st round picks to get a guy like Butler...heck you can sign him for free at the end of his contract in a few years

I mean, it's basically a bunch of late 1sts.  It's not 4 lotto picks.  Plus, we're not giving up all our picks a la the Nets so the true cost isn't as daunting as it sounds.

Next, to assume we'd only win like 40 games assumes we're making no other improvements, organically or otherwise.  And, as @Spud2Nique says, we're looking to add guys in their prime.  Not a couple years out of their prime.

Like I said, I'm not sure I'd really love the deal.  But, it's not a complete overpay.

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, Spud2Nique said:

I think we have a better cast with Sap, Dennis and Dwight than the Bulls have probably ever had in the Jimmy era. That's a 55 win team and an eastern conference finalist for sure.

That team doesn't even mesh together...paring Dennis a nd Butler will be like paring Rose and Butler....Butler ain't that good y'all...He may have some g good game but y'all acting like he is James Harding.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Peoriabird said:

That team doesn't even mesh together...paring Dennis a nd Butler will be like paring Rose and Butler....Butler ain't that good y'all...He may have some g good game but y'all acting like he is James Harding.

Now see, there's where we kinda agree.  I don't see Butler as the team player we need and I think he'd be a bad fit with Dennis.

There's where the agreement ends though.  You can have James Har_en.  All numbers, not a winning player IMHO.

I also wonder if he threw that last game vs SA but that's a whole other story.

[Peoriabird]

2 minutes ago, kg01 said:

I mean, it's basically a bunch of late 1sts.  It's not 4 lotto picks.  Plus, we're not giving up all our picks a la the Nets so the true cost isn't as daunting as it sounds.

Next, to assume we'd only win like 40 games assumes we're making no other improvements, organically or otherwise.  And, as @Spud2Nique says, we're looking to add guys in their prime.  Not a couple years out of their prime.

Like I said, I'm not sure I'd really love the deal.  But, it's not a complete overpay.

Just like Chicago, San Antonio, Milwalkee, Golden State didn't know they were drafting Butler 30th, Leonard 15th, Parker 23rd, Genobli 52th,Greek Freak 17th, Desmond Green 33rd. And the list goes on and on.  we don't know who will be better. A lottery pick or a non lottery pick

[Peoriabird]

Just now, kg01 said:

Now see, there's where we kinda agree.  I don't see Butler as the team player we need and I think he'd be a bad fit with Dennis.

There's where the agreement ends though.  You can have James Har_en.  All numbers, not a winning player IMHO.

I also wonder if he threw that last game vs SA but that's a whole other story.

Harden has gone further and won more than Butler!

[Guard]

I like Butler and all but I don't see him making this team into a legit contender.

If we already had  play making number two option on the wing, I'd be all in favor of the move. To me, Sap is a great number three option on a potential championship team. When you factor in Saps age, the move makes less sense to me. 

Assuming the team actually finds a good GM, why would he purposely not want to start drafting his own guys? Good teams build through the draft across all sports that have drafts. The Spurs have been good along time and even they hold on to their draft picks. 

[macdaddy]

5 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Harden has gone further and won more than Butler!

Not without Dwight on the team.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Just like Chicago, San Antonio, Milwalkee, Golden State didn't know they were drafting Butler 30th, Leonard 15th, Parker 23rd, Genobli 52th,Greek Freak 17th, Desmond Green 33rd. And the list goes on and on.  we don't know who will be better. A lottery pick or a non lottery pick

I hear you.  But I do understand where folks would prefer to opt for the sure thing (in terms of knowing what Butler is as a player) over the unknown.  You have to admit, those are diamonds in the rough and aren't the norm of drafting outside the lottery.

And, on Har_en, I'm not a fan of his at all.  Any "winning" he's done has been in spite of him, not because of him.  Think I'm wrong?  I challenge you to find his numbers during HOU's stunning comeback vs LAC from a few years ago.  I also defy you to provide his MVP-level numbers vs SAS this year.  And I'm not even going to go back to his OKC days where he became a shrinking violet once the pressure on him increased.  Actually, that's pretty much what he does nowadays too.

[Peoriabird]

2 minutes ago, kg01 said:

I hear you.  But I do understand where folks would prefer to opt for the sure thing (in terms of knowing what Butler is as a player) over the unknown.  You have to admit, those are diamonds in the rough and aren't the norm of drafting outside the lottery.

And, on Har_en, I'm not a fan of his at all.  Any "winning" he's done has been in spite of him, not because of him.  Think I'm wrong?  I challenge you to find his numbers during HOU's stunning comeback vs LAC from a few years ago.  I also defy you to provide his MVP-level numbers vs SAS this year.  And I'm not even going to go back to his OKC days where he became a shrinking violet once the pressure on him increased.  Actually, that's pretty much what he does nowadays too.

He led a team full of nobodies to the 3rd seed in the west!

[Peoriabird]

10 minutes ago, Guard said:

I like Butler and all but I don't see him making this team into a legit contender.

If we already had  play making number two option on the wing, I'd be all in favor of the move. To me, Sap is a great number three option on a potential championship team. When you factor in Saps age, the move makes less sense to me. 

Assuming the team actually finds a good GM, why would he purposely not want to start drafting his own guys? Good teams build through the draft across all sports that have drafts. The Spurs have been good along time and even they hold on to their draft picks. 

Thank you so much!!!!!!!!

[macdaddy]

2 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

He led a team full of nobodies to the 3rd seed in the west!

 

Second round exit.   How's this any better than the Bulls or Hawks have done?