Butler to T-Wolves?

[RushmoreAcademy]

Man, Bulls fans are the worst. Everyone on my facebook is bitching that Rose is gone and that Noah is the next one out. Do they not understand what the Cubs literally just did to become the best team in the majors?

I'm all for the trade. I think it's a great one, but you can't necessarily rebuild in the NBA with picks short of getting a dominant #1, so I don't think the Cubs situation is the same.

[RushmoreAcademy]

If I'm the Bulls, I'm trading Butler immediately. It's much easier to trade Butler now that Rose is dealt.

I doubt Boston would do it, but my offer would be Butler & 11, for Bradley, Zeller, Young, 3, and Brooklyn's 1 next year.

If I'm the Bulls, that'd give me a chance to bottom out, and have 2 high picks in the loaded 2017 draft. I'd be PG heavy in 2016 with Calderon, Grant, Bradley, but whatever. Lopez is a steal with his contract, and at 3 this year, I can get Chriss or Murray. Next year, a chance at Giles and Josh Jackson. I'd also have a ton of cap room in 2017. Sign me up for that plan.

I don't get trading Butler at all.  With any top pick you get, you'd be thrilled if they turned out like Jimmy, and there's no guarantee. It's hard to get all-stars under contract, so when you have one in your prime, I think you stick with him.
I understand the whole rebuilding thought, but that's easier said than done in the NBA.

[MerrittsMustache]

I'm all for the trade. I think it's a great one, but you can't necessarily rebuild in the NBA with picks short of getting a dominant #1, so I don't think the Cubs situation is the same.

The Cubs rebuilt via trades and free agency. Bryant is Theo's only draft pick who's currently a key contributor to the team. The NBA doesn't work that way. Teams basically need to draft a franchise player and typically that's done by getting a top 2-3 pick.

[DegenerateDish]

I don't get trading Butler at all.  With any top pick you get, you'd be thrilled if they turned out like Jimmy, and there's no guarantee. It's hard to get all-stars under contract, so when you have one in your prime, I think you stick with him.
I understand the whole rebuilding thought, but that's easier said than done in the NBA.

What are the Bulls going to be this next year? Arguably the same or worse as last season one could strongly argue. They'll most likely be picking late lottery again next year. Butler has 3 seasons before he'll opt out, so they will waste another year in basketball hell. They have no one under 25 who is a dynamic player. Bulls have one outstanding asset in Butler, and that's it. They are going to have to bottom out at some point in the next 5 years. Why not do it right now, with one of the premier draft classes coming up next year? I love Jimmy Butler, but as a Bulls fan, why prolong the inevitable?

[Pakuni]

What are the Bulls going to be this next year? Arguably the same or worse as last season one could strongly argue. They'll most likely be picking late lottery again next year. Butler has 3 seasons before he'll opt out, so they will waste another year in basketball hell. They have no one under 25 who is a dynamic player. Bulls have one outstanding asset in Butler, and that's it. They are going to have to bottom out at some point in the next 5 years. Why not do it right now, with one of the premier draft classes coming up next year? I love Jimmy Butler, but as a Bulls fan, why prolong the inevitable?

While this is true, a teardown and rebuild by trading Jimmy is just a perilous and unlikely to succeed as trying to build around Jimmy.  Primarily because, as Rushmore points out, having high draft picks in no way guarantees future success.
I mean, just look at Philly. Six lottery picks in the last six drafts, and they've been by far the worst team in the league in that span.
Between 1999 and 2008, the Bulls added 11 top 10 draft picks, and had one winning season over that decade.
The lottery and the luck of which years you win it (see: 1998 Clippers, 2006 Raptors, 2013 Cavs) guarantees that gutting a team and rebuilding is far from a sure thing.
The Bulls are better off trying to build around a 26-year-old all-star than trading him away and hoping they 1) get lucky in the lottery and 2) their pick is more Anthony Davis than Anthony Bennett.

[DegenerateDish]

While this is true, a teardown and rebuild by trading Jimmy is just a perilous and unlikely to succeed as trying to build around Jimmy.  Primarily because, as Rushmore points out, having high draft picks in no way guarantees future success.
I mean, just look at Philly. Six lottery picks in the last six drafts, and they've been by far the worst team in the league in that span.
Between 1999 and 2008, the Bulls added 11 top 10 draft picks, and had one winning season over that decade.
The lottery and the luck of which years you win it (see: 1998 Clippers, 2006 Raptors, 2013 Cavs) guarantees that gutting a team and rebuilding is far from a sure thing.
The Bulls are better off trying to build around a 26-year-old all-star than trading him away and hoping they 1) get lucky in the lottery and 2) their pick is more Anthony Davis than Anthony Bennett.

I understand all this, tough to argue against it. But you have potentially the best draft class since 2003 next year. If way back then, one had the chance to get two top 5 picks, look how that would have turned out. If it was this year's draft class...no way. To me, it's the knowledge of knowing what is going to be available next year, and taking advantage of it. Not just getting lottery picks to say you got them.

[Pakuni]

I understand all this, tough to argue against it. But you have potentially the best draft class since 2003 next year. If way back then, one had the chance to get two top 5 picks, look how that would have turned out. If it was this year's draft class...no way. To me, it's the knowledge of knowing what is going to be available next year, and taking advantage of it. Not just getting lottery picks to say you got them.

I remember when the 2014 draft class was thought to be one of the best ever. Obviously still early, but outside of Wiggins, there's no one in that class appears likely to develop into a perennial all-star (and even he's got a ways to go).
I wouldn't make any major decisions for my NBA franchise based on a hope that a bunch of kids who aren't even in college are going to become the next LeBron/Carmelo/Bosh/Wade.

[GGGG]

The only reason you trade Butler is if you think he can't coexist with Hoiberg. If you think he can't, you trade him tonight. He's very good. Not elite.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

What are the Bulls going to be this next year? Arguably the same or worse as last season one could strongly argue. They'll most likely be picking late lottery again next year. Butler has 3 seasons before he'll opt out, so they will waste another year in basketball hell. They have no one under 25 who is a dynamic player. Bulls have one outstanding asset in Butler, and that's it. They are going to have to bottom out at some point in the next 5 years. Why not do it right now, with one of the premier draft classes coming up next year? I love Jimmy Butler, but as a Bulls fan, why prolong the inevitable?

Assuming he stays healthy, and now that his usage and numbers will likely go up now that Rose is gone, Butler can easily be traded next year as well for potentially a better package. 

I'm of the mind that you keep him for now regardless but there shouldn't necessarily be a rush to deal him unless the offer is so overwhelming that you can't turn it down. 

[DegenerateDish]

I remember when the 2014 draft class was thought to be one of the best ever. Obviously still early, but outside of Wiggins, there's no one in that class appears likely to develop into a perennial all-star (and even he's got a ways to go).
I wouldn't make any major decisions for my NBA franchise based on a hope that a bunch of kids who aren't even in college are going to become the next LeBron/Carmelo/Bosh/Wade.

I understand all this, I know my side is a big time gamble. I'm looking at a year from today, and seeing what we all think. I could be wrong certainly, be a far more interesting discussion then with where Bulls are and how next year's draft looks.

[GGGG]

Oops. Nevermind.

[RushmoreAcademy]

What are the Bulls going to be this next year? Arguably the same or worse as last season one could strongly argue. They'll most likely be picking late lottery again next year. Butler has 3 seasons before he'll opt out, so they will waste another year in basketball hell. They have no one under 25 who is a dynamic player. Bulls have one outstanding asset in Butler, and that's it. They are going to have to bottom out at some point in the next 5 years. Why not do it right now, with one of the premier draft classes coming up next year? I love Jimmy Butler, but as a Bulls fan, why prolong the inevitable?

Is next year's draft deep or are there just more top tier players?  If it's deep, that helps a team that may finish mid-range.
Despite all your concerns, I think the Bulls may still be easily in the lottery despite keeping Jimmy.

[CreightonWarrior]

Bucks pick was garbage

[Pakuni]

Is next year's draft deep or are there just more top tier players?  If it's deep, that helps a team that may finish mid-range.
Despite all your concerns, I think the Bulls may still be easily in the lottery despite keeping Jimmy.

Depends what happens in free agency. The bottom of the East is weak. If the Bulls can add a player or two in FA (Conley? DeRozan?), they can be better than last year. Remember, despite all the injuries and turmoil, the Bulls needed a pretty epic collapse last year to miss the playoffs.
Now, whether it's a good thing to squeak into the playoffs as a 7-8 seed (aka NBA hell) is another discussion.

[wadesworld]

Bucks pick was garbage

Disagreed.  Bucks got a guy who will contribute right away in round 2 and a guy who has one of the top 3 highest ceilings, and possibly the very highest, in the entire draft at 10.  There were no sure fire All Star players in the 10 range in this draft, so taking a chance on a home run/strikeout pick isn't the worst thing you can do.  Only problem with it was if they didn't try to trade down with their #10 pick to the early 20s.  But I'm pretty doubtful that any teams were really looking for an opportunity to jump up to number 10 in this draft.

Thon today is better than Giannis was the day after he was drafted.  I don't expect Thon to progress like Giannis has, but the potential is absurd.

[DegenerateDish]

Is next year's draft deep or are there just more top tier players?  If it's deep, that helps a team that may finish mid-range.
Despite all your concerns, I think the Bulls may still be easily in the lottery despite keeping Jimmy.

The top of the draft is loaded. When I was at the McD AA festivities this year and got to talk to the players, the people from Adidas, and some scouts, they all reiterated how loaded the top 4-6 will be from this class, assuming most come out. I think there's depth beyond that if guys like Allen, Ferguson, Monk play well. For me as a pure basketball fan, any Duke, Kansas, Kentucky game will be must watch. Josh Jackson is the real deal.

[Pakuni]

Thon today is better than Giannis was the day after he was drafted.  I don't expect Thon to progress like Giannis has, but the potential is absurd.

Also, Thon today may be 4-5 years older than Giannis was the day after he was drafted.
Some teams had a second-round grade on him.
It may pay off for the Bucks, but it's a major risk.

Sports Illustrated:

Milwaukee Bucks: F
As inexplicable as the Papagiannis pick was, the Thon Maker pick was worse. The Kings are always going to be the Kings as long as Vlade and Vivek are in charge, but the Bucks could actually be good. You can't just throw away top–10 picks like they're nothing.
There's a way to see Maker as a case of the Bucks doubling down on the weirdness of their roster and putting together the most science–fiction lineup possible, and maybe that's how it'll play out, but I don't see it. Maker should have been a second rounder, not a top 10 pick. He has raw tools, but not many skills, and this week there were allegations that he's three years older than he claims. These are not good signs. Really, almost every move Milwaukee's made since drafting Giannis and Jabari—trading for MCW, signing Greg Monroe, trading for Grievis Vasquez, inexplicably drafting Rashad Vaughn—has been a failure. Worse, most of these moves were clearly bad ideas at the time.
Mostly, it bums me out because Giannis is absolutely for real, and Milwaukee should be one of the most entertaining teams in the league. But whoever is running things is screwing this up.
http://www.si.com/nba/2016/06/24/nba-draft-team-grades-lakers-bucks-76ers-celtics-timberwolves

[wadesworld]

Also, Thon today may be 4-5 years older than Giannis was the day after he was drafted.
Some teams had a second-round grade on him.
It may pay off for the Bucks, but it's a major risk.

Sports Illustrated:

Milwaukee Bucks: F
As inexplicable as the Papagiannis pick was, the Thon Maker pick was worse. The Kings are always going to be the Kings as long as Vlade and Vivek are in charge, but the Bucks could actually be good. You can't just throw away top–10 picks like they're nothing.
There's a way to see Maker as a case of the Bucks doubling down on the weirdness of their roster and putting together the most science–fiction lineup possible, and maybe that's how it'll play out, but I don't see it. Maker should have been a second rounder, not a top 10 pick. He has raw tools, but not many skills, and this week there were allegations that he's three years older than he claims. These are not good signs. Really, almost every move Milwaukee's made since drafting Giannis and Jabari—trading for MCW, signing Greg Monroe, trading for Grievis Vasquez, inexplicably drafting Rashad Vaughn—has been a failure. Worse, most of these moves were clearly bad ideas at the time.
Mostly, it bums me out because Giannis is absolutely for real, and Milwaukee should be one of the most entertaining teams in the league. But whoever is running things is screwing this up.
http://www.si.com/nba/2016/06/24/nba-draft-team-grades-lakers-bucks-76ers-celtics-timberwolves

It could also be that some teams in the mid to late 1st round were "leaking" that they "wouldn't touch Thon" because he might be "3 years older than what he says" so that teams above them wouldn't touch Thon...and then they can snatch them up.  Teams typically don't give out their thoughts on individual players before the draft without some kind of motive behind it.

And I'm not willing to put a whole lot of stock into SI's grades.  While that individual writer may think he was against the Monroe signing, that same site gave the Monroe signing an A and we all know how that went.

At 10 in this year's draft, what pick would there be that doesn't have some major risk?  It's not like we were passing up on a bunch of sure fire studs.  There are a lot of guys in this draft who could be something...or could be absolutely nothing.

[Pakuni]

At 10 in this year's draft, what pick would there be that doesn't have some major risk?  It's not like we were passing up on a bunch of sure fire studs.  There are a lot of guys in this draft who could be something...or could be absolutely nothing.

It's disingenuous to claim the risk involved with Maker is just like any other guy they could have had at 10. There were many, many guys available that had stronger bodies of work, more polish and no questions about their age and backgrounds.
Sabonis and Ellenson, for example.
Add to the fact that a skinny, raw athlete with questionable skills is just about the last thing the Bucks needed, and this pick is highly, highly dubious.

[MerrittsMustache]

It could also be that some teams in the mid to late 1st round were "leaking" that they "wouldn't touch Thon" because he might be "3 years older than what he says" so that teams above them wouldn't touch Thon...and then they can snatch them up.  Teams typically don't give out their thoughts on individual players before the draft without some kind of motive behind it.

And I'm not willing to put a whole lot of stock into SI's grades.  While that individual writer may think he was against the Monroe signing, that same site gave the Monroe signing an A and we all know how that went.

At 10 in this year's draft, what pick would there be that doesn't have some major risk?  It's not like we were passing up on a bunch of sure fire studs.  There are a lot of guys in this draft who could be something...or could be absolutely nothing.

It's easy for analysts to say that a pick was bad but who should the Bucks have taken in that spot? Sabonis? Ellenson? Baldwin? It wasn't exactly a who's who of can't-miss prospects at that point. On top of that, Milwaukee isn't exactly a top choice for big name FAs so they need to take some risks. Why not take a chance on a guy who has arguably the most potential outside of Simmons and Ingram?

Sidenote: SI.com gave the Bucks a C+ when they drafted Giannis and called him "a reach" at pick 15 (different writer than this article).

[wadesworld]

It's disingenuous to claim the risk involved with Maker is just like any other guy they could have had at 10. There were many, many guys available that had stronger bodies of work, more polish and no questions about their age and backgrounds.
Sabonis and Ellenson, for example.
Add to the fact that a skinny, raw athlete with questionable skills is just about the last thing the Bucks needed, and this pick is highly, highly dubious.

Honest question, have you ever seen Thon play?

If this kid puts on weight/strength, watch out.

Yes, his floor is lower than there were some other players out there.  But his ceiling is soooooooo much higher than Hank's and Sabonis's.  This is the exact kind of draft where you can take a huge risk and if it doesn't work out, chances are the alternatives weren't a ton better.  My guess is that a couple players from the late 1st or even 2nd round hit and are better than expected, but it's not like you can point to the guy that it's going to be today with certainty.

[wadesworld]

It's easy for analysts to say that a pick was bad but who should the Bucks have taken in that spot? Sabonis? Ellenson? Baldwin? It wasn't exactly a who's who of can't-miss prospects at that point. On top of that, Milwaukee isn't exactly a top choice for big name FAs so they need to take some risks. Why not take a chance on a guy who has arguably the most potential outside of Simmons and Ingram?

Sidenote: SI.com gave the Bucks a C+ when they drafted Giannis and called him "a reach" at pick 15 (different writer than this article).

Exactly.  If there was a guy who is just about a sure thing at a position of need like a Devon Booker from last year then yes, picking a guy with huge potential but also huge bust possibility is a bad idea.  But there wasn't that guy for the Bucks this year.

[4everwarriors]

Hammonds reached for Thon, no doubt. But, he's ether gonna hit it big or crap his trousers, ai na?

[wadesworld]

Hammonds reached for Thon, no doubt. But, he's ether gonna hit it big or crap his trousers, ai na?

Unless a team was trying to get #10 (highly doubtful in this draft), it's not a reach.  Obviously the Bucks valued Thon more than any other player available and didn't feel confident that he would be around by their next pick.

[rocket surgeon]

It's easy for analysts to say that a pick was bad but who should the Bucks have taken in that spot? Sabonis? Ellenson? Baldwin? It wasn't exactly a who's who of can't-miss prospects at that point. On top of that, Milwaukee isn't exactly a top choice for big name FAs so they need to take some risks. Why not take a chance on a guy who has arguably the most potential outside of Simmons and Ingram?

Sidenote: SI.com gave the Bucks a C+ when they drafted Giannis and called him "a reach" at pick 15 (different writer than this article).

great points!  and, so what if he's a few years older. it's not like he played running back for the NFL prior to this. how many years does one expect out of these guys?  not everyone plays 18-20 years like dirk or kareem.  who else could they have gotten?  pay the man, give him all the incentive to improve.  the guy looks like he will be able to contribute just by accident.  i think he's got plenty of rubber left on the tires