I could see doing that one. But then we have the logjam of Butler/Batum/Webster at SF. I don't really mind seeing Webster benched right now, but I have a feeling he'll vanish off the map if we put him in as a third stringer. If we made that deal I think you have to do another deal to unload Webster. Otherwise you face a pretty big risk that he regresses, and his trade value goes down the tubes. I'd like to strike while the iron is hot on Webster.
We don't have the Diogu exception anymore. We had to renounce all exceptions when we chose to use cap space to sign Miller, including the trade exception.
Well this thread proves one thing....that it isn't just Kevin Pritchard who is a bit myopic when it comes to certain players on this team..... Let's see here...Bayless is the next Kevin Johnson and Batum is the next Scottie Pippen....Yeah uh huh, alright
Both were projected pre-draft as having top-5 talent, and both have shown several flashes of that talent. They are easily the two players that I'd put highest on the "Jermaine O'Neal" scale. In fact, they're probably the only ones (outside of "the big three") that would be worthy of that mention should they be traded.
They don't have to be that good to be valuable to the team. At least more valuable then a Rent-A-Center or a rapidly aging small forward. I think Batum could be very good with a small chance at being a special player. Butler is on the downside of his career. Right now is as good as he will ever be. Frankly that isn't very good at all. Not good enough to trade more then one valuable asset (Rudy or Bayless) along with one bag of popcorn (Blake).
It's fun to daydream, but I don't see KP making the sacrifices necessary to acquire a player of Butler's caliber.
I'm in the camp that Rudy is movable while Batum is not. Bayless is in between, but I'd rather not move him as I think he can very easily become a Mo Williams borderline all-star type of player....particularly given his work ethic. Rudy, Webster, Outlaw, Blake....whatever, I'd give to get Butler. I'd love to see Batum get more minutes but Butler is a good player. For the person who questioned his defense...I haven't seen his defense in person that much, but a few years ago he was averaging 2+ steals a game which puts him in an elite category for that statistic. He is also an excellent free-throw shooter. We have too much depth, we could consolidate down if possible. If we used those expendable pieces I mentioned (and Washington would like to start over, with cheap young pieces): Miller/Bayless/Mills Roy/Batum Butler/Batum LMA/Pendergraph/Cunningham Oden/Pryzbilla With other prospects such as Claver and Freeland who could be worthy of a roster spot too. Ideally we'd have another wing player for insurance, but those can be picked up reasonably cheap, certainly for the MLE. I love it!
I would trade any combination of Bayless, Travis, Blake, Webster for Butler. Regardless of stats Butler is an improvement over any of our SF's. Although I'm also fine with Batum being our starter for the next 12 years.
We don't need another wing, we need a center, but Pritchard is using Butler to balance the trade. I don't think Butler is the centerpiece of the trade, or at least, not the motivation for the trade.
Butler is having a poor year, but has been very good recently both on offense and defense. I think morale could be an issue with his performance this year. so, who would I trade for him? I'd prefer to trade some combo of Webster, Rudy, Blake and Outlaw- but would consider including Batum if we also got Heywood because this would put us in contention this year, assuming Butler can bounce back. It would give us three people in the starting lineup capable of creating their own shot off the dribble (along with roy and Miller), another good passer and potentially some veteran leadership.
The thing I would remind people about is Batum is versatile. He can play 1 through 4, obviously with the 4 being against less physical players. The thing is, I could see Roy, Batum, and Butler all on the floor at once without a hitch. It may be going small. It may be going big. But I don't see Butler and Batum as "mutually exclusive".
