This is my biggest issue with him. I don't care about him yelling at the coach - sometimes coaches need to be dressed down by their players. Remember 'Dre/McMillan? You better believe 'Dre was in the right on that altercation. But the fact that he wants to be traded to shit teams makes me think he's PHX-era Joe Johnson - doesn't care so much about winning, but instead wants to dominate the ball. I'm also concerned about how he'd react to playing with Dame/CJ - guards who aren't great defenders. It's fine if he gets on them occasionally to get better effort from them, but given his history I wonder if Dame/CJ could ever live up to Jimmy's expectations. And if not, what happens with that relationship? Jimmy hated Rose in CHI (I can't fault him, I did too!), but back then many people felt that Dame/Rose were similar players. I just don't know that Dame (or CJ) is the sort of guy that Jimmy would be fine playing second fiddle to.
Even with those concerns I keep going back on forth on whether I'd do Turner+Simons for Jimmy. On face value I'm in. But then I remember we'd have to give Jimmy a MAX contract next summer and then I'm out. Honestly, that's the final deal-breaker for me - signing him to that contract would pretty much cement our fate as a good-but-never-great team for the next 5 years. I'm of the opinion that the only way we can possibly become great is if at least two of Simons/Trent/Collins become top-flight players and Nurk improves his offensive efficiency.
We wouldn't have to give him a max. If acquiring him makes us a contender, then it would be well worth giving him a max. However, if adding Butler to this squad isn't enough to elevate it to contender status, then you let him walk and be happy with being rid of Turner (in the scenario you described).
They dont have to pay him though if things dont work out he’s a one year rental and we got one less year of ET. If things go well and they’re a good team paying him wouldnt be as hard to swallow. At one point I wouldve been ok giving up CJ for him, now Im not though. Way too much of a risk to give up CJ.
While I'd be happy to get rid of Turner, I'm not into the idea of giving away a young player on a rookie contract for a one-year rental. Our life-blood is rookie contracts at this point! In that scenario, I'd rather keep Turner and just let him expire. If we could somehow swing a Turner+anyone other than Dame, CJ, Nurk, Collins, Simons, or Trent then sure - but I'm not gonna hold me breath on that ever happening.
Im not saying that Simons is a sure fire stud, but I'm not sure if one less year of ET is worth giving up on him, especially given that it's an unknown that he (Butler) re-signs nor is it a given that he's not a detriment to the team. Bottom line, if Damian wanted him here, he'd be here. Since he's not here, I'm sure there's a valid reason. And it's not that Olshey is a bum/not good at his job.
Yes, Butler not elevating the squad and leaving would be a worst-case scenario. There would be a potential risk of loss in taking the Butler gamble. Can you show me a path to contention that doesn't contain some risk? I'd submit that none exist. Simons would essentially be the ante for a shot at the contender-with-Butler jackpot. It's a risk I'm willing to live with.
Dame wanted Ed here, he’s not. I think its fair to say theres too much risk there for Olshey to do it, but I also kind of want them to take a risk.
Different scenarios. Ed's game was limited and really not going to change the trajectory of the teams future. Trading CJ (or a combo of Collins/Simons, etc) would potentially set the franchise back several steps.
My point was that Dame doesnt get everything he wants. I understand every situation is different, but even if NO went after Minnesota hard they couldve just said no they arent interested in what we have.
I get that. But there isn't a better offer than CJ for him. My point is if Damian doesn't want Jimmy butler here, they're not going to trade for him.
Probably the most likely scenario. It’s the simplest answer, so it’s probably the closest to the truth. Olshey probably told Minnesota you can have anyone outside Dame, CJ, and Collins (Nurk isn’t eligible) and thibs probably said thanks bye.
So no Butler/Dieng for Turner/Leonard/Harkless? It works on the Trade Machine so it must be a pending deal.
See: The risk is that it doesn't happen. I think being a contender - with or without Jimmy - is a huge long-shot. I guess I'd rather have more flexibility (rookie contracts) and see what happens with Simons/Collins/Trent. If Simons pans out, then perhaps we trade CJ down the road for a SF/PF that puts us in contention. If Simons and Collins both pan out we trade CJ for a SF. If all three pan out, then we have an excellent team and lots of good players to make any fine-tuning trades that might be necessary.
Yes, that's the risk. With the path you'd prefer, the same risk exists...it just takes multiple years to find out. I'd like to know sooner. Also, given Butler's demonstrated performance, and the odds of those picks panning out, as well as Olshey's overall track record on trades, I think a lot of things would have to work out for a wait-and-see approach to bring results. All that said, the discussion is moot if MIN isn't interested in anything we're offering, and I think that's the case.
