No. Not willing to trade our future (four first round picks?) in the random hope that Butler decides he likes it here and stays. No. No, No, No.
I definitely wouldn't trade CJ for him. He's not nearly the scorer, I don't like him much and he never reached any team success. But I guess anyone besides the big 3 for him would be ok for me, but he's definitely not a favorite of mine
He's just an ugly player. gets his points somehow, is maybe a good defender. but he isn't fun to watch and I don't think he's fun to root for. just another player gettting too much hype
I disagree with the lists, but nearly all of them rank him above Dame. Hell, I think PG is a better player but Jimmy is getting more credit these days.
How's Butler not nearly the scorer? Not only does Butler score at a higher clip, he's also much more efficient with his scoring. Per 36 stats last year: JB - 21.7ppg on 59.0 TS% CJ - 21.3ppg on 53.6 TS% So what outta that opinion based on? Butler is better than CJ at everything except for 3pt shooting. He's the far superior player.
Its much more likely we win a championship by landing Jimmy Butler than by holding on to mediocre draft picks. I don't understand how four Justin Jackson/Bam Adebeyo/John Collins type players are superior to the chance of adding Jimmy Butler to our core long-term. We'd have protections to that we could tank and keep our picks for down the road. Gotta do something at some point, and refusing to trade picks for a borderline top 10 player would be a mistake. Toronto traded their franchise player, a lottery pick, and another pick for Kawhi Leonard...
That depends on how much he respects CJ as a player i guess. If he thinks CJ is so much inferior to him than yea i guess, but even then - Anthony Davis is not someone he can guard so...
All of the teams he wants to be traded to can sign him in the offseason for free anyway. Of course the question is whether he will still be willing to sign with them next year and having him around for a year between now and then would make you more likely to come to agreement with him when the time comes. They won’t be willing to offer them a haul and they don’t even have that much to offer. A few young players, very few established players (Harris is probably the only one across the three teams who is worth something and he’s also expiring) and they probably won’t be willing to part with picks that easily. Nets should be coming up with the best offer though. They got some expiring so to match salaries in Faried and Carroll, could throw in a young player with potential like RHJ, Dinwiddie or even Russell and then add one of the picks with protection or Nuggets pick. I doubt Wolves are getting a better offer. Alternatively I could maybe see someone like Philadelphia or Denver swooping for him.
Im not disagreeing here, but Ive seen expiring contracts come up a lot. Does minnesota after expiring contracts? I could be wrong here but it doesnt seem like Minnesota is known as a free agent destination (well except for old broken down players that used to play for thibs - I kid!!!).
Me Don't like giving up all those picks. For a popular free agent destination like the Blazers, that's franchise suicide.
Sure, I would rather substitute a couple draft picks for two of three of Baldwin, Trent and Simons. But I think Minnesota wants guys who are ready (or almost ready) to play. We would still have plenty of guards with Curry and Staukas. Could we substitute Harkless for Aminu? They already have Gibson. If we did that, we could pull one of those three out of the deal. http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=y874sueg
