Is it possible for the Cs to add two of Butler/George/Griffin/Hayward this offseason?

heavyde050

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2006
11,257
San Francisco
FWIW. People may think Stephen A is a clown(which he is) but he has a ton of good sources in the NBA.

Kevin O'Connor‏Verified account @KevinOConnorNBA 1m1 minute ago
.@stephenasmith just said Bulls wanted #3 pick from Philly for Butler, now Celtics angling for Butler then Hayward.
So the core would be IT, Horford, Butler, and Hayward? And it would only be on the cheap side for one more year? That doesn't sound like the best path to the next banner, but I am sure Ainge has some magic planned to make it all work.

Edit - I misread the quote. If it is only the #3 for Butler that is great. I was still under the impression that Butler would cost significantly more than that, which is why I said I don't think it is the best move.
I would rather just draft Jackson/Tatum and sign Hayward.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,539
If you add George and Hayward, I don't think IT is even the sort of PG you need or want. He seems expendable in that scenario, so worrying about how you afford all 4 seems unnecessary.
I know Danny will likely prove me wrong, but IT seems to be such an ambassador for the team that I think he's much more highly valued within the organization than a lot of people seem to think. I don't think they'll max him, but I think the two sides will work on a middle ground and get something worked out.
 

finnVT

superspreadsheeter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2002
2,153
I posted something on how the cap stuff would work in the other thread, making the assumption that they'd have to do Hayward first. The jist is that it works, but the Butler deal then *has* to include AB+Crowder to make the finances work. Working through the numbers, if they were to do Butler first...

Assuming the #3 pick, with a cap hold of 4.74m, renouncing Zeller & Young means they can add Butler without returning salary (assuming #3 is going), putting them at 90.7m. To make room for a max deal, they'd need to then free up 20.3m. Moving AB + Crowder for future picks still leaves you 4.6m short. If we assume Yabu and Zizic are coming, you're still like 8.5m short. Renouncing Olynyk gets you to within about 1m, but with only 11 players (i.e.: Horford, IT, Brown, Smart, Rozier, Mickey, DJackson, Butler, Hayward, Yabu, Zizic puts you at 101.9m), but you need a cap hold for the 12th players, so you still end up ~2m short. There's probably a way to manage that (e.g., stashing/trading Yabu), but's a little tricky. It's actually close enough that the specifics of where the cap land (101/102/etc) will probably make a difference.

It becomes much harder if the Butler deal is for that LAL/SAC future pick, since then you have the ~5m cap hold for #3 to deal with. In that case, I think you pretty much have to get the max FA first, then do the Butler deal, since in the latter you can go slightly over cap by matching salaries (I believe). The downside to that is that you have to include AB+Crowder in the deal to CHI, rather than getting assets back from another team for them.
 

Grin&MartyBarret

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2007
4,932
East Village, NYC
I know Danny will likely prove me wrong, but IT seems to be such an ambassador for the team that I think he's much more highly valued within the organization than a lot of people seem to think. I don't think they'll max him, but I think the two sides will work on a middle ground and get something worked out.
The bigger question I have is about whether he even fits on the court in that scenario. IT had a ridiculously high usage rate this year, and I'm not sure what he does really works all that well off-the-ball if he's sharing the court with Hayward and George. Both of those guys should and will have the ball in their hands a lot. Add in Horford, who's also a good option to run the offense through for stretches, and I just don't see how that team can accommodate a ball dominant PG like Thomas. Especially an expensive one who is such an issue on defense. Of that group, he's the obvious option to move given the luxury tax implications.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
David Aldridge's latest column on NBA.com

"But Celtics president of basketball operations Danny Ainge has surprised people on Draft night before -- most recently last year, when he took Cal rookie Jaylen Brown with the third pick overall. (And: no one had coach Brad Stevens going to Beantown.) The drumbeat has gotten louder in recent days that the Celtics are zeroing in on Chicago Bulls All-Star guard Jimmy Butler, whom they inquired about at the trade deadline, and are ready to cash in a good chunk of their cache of future Draft picks to go get him".

http://www.nba.com/article/2017/06/19/morning-tip-assessing-state-land-2017-draft-sixers-celtics-lakers
 

heavyde050

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2006
11,257
San Francisco
David Aldridge's latest column on NBA.com

"But Celtics president of basketball operations Danny Ainge has surprised people on Draft night before -- most recently last year, when he took Cal rookie Jaylen Brown with the third pick overall. (And: no one had coach Brad Stevens going to Beantown.) The drumbeat has gotten louder in recent days that the Celtics are zeroing in on Chicago Bulls All-Star guard Jimmy Butler, whom they inquired about at the trade deadline, and are ready to cash in a good chunk of their cache of future Draft picks to go get him".

http://www.nba.com/article/2017/06/19/morning-tip-assessing-state-land-2017-draft-sixers-celtics-lakers
The bolded part potentially scares me. I need to see a definition of "good chunk of their cache".
Butler may be worth the #3 in this draft (apparently what Chicago wanted from Philly). Even though Ainge has some apparent love for him, the Celts should not pay a premium to get him. No on including the 2018 Nets Pick or the Lakers/Sac pick. Butler should cost no more than the #3 and maybe some salary filler. He just doesn't get the Celts over the top and will be expensive in two seasons.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
If you add George and Hayward, I don't think IT is even the sort of PG you need or want. He seems expendable in that scenario, so worrying about how you afford all 4 seems unnecessary.
Especially not with the longevity track record of smurfy players. Lil' Zeke would rapidly become the highest paid sixth man in NBA history.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
Woj and Bobby Marks talking Paul George on his latest podcast. Only listened to the first half of it.
--Marks says Indiana should move PG by 7/1.
--Woj says nobody wants to give up anything of value for PG and won't take back bad contracts.
--Woj doesn't see the package from Cleveland that would be a good fit for Indiana. No picks and no young, cheap players.
--Will the Pacers allow a meeting with PG from prospective teams?
--Boston and Cleveland keeps coming up from these two the more I listen as teams interested in him. They say Indiana should be worried that if they trade PG to one of them and he re-signs with them to compete with them in the East.
--Woj's sense with Indiana is that Larry Bird is still influential with Kevin Pritchard and that Bird does not want to send George to LA. He says Lakers aren't giving them #2 pick or Ingram. Says Randall is a piece and maybe the #28 pick would be their offer.
--Woj gives the allusion that if George gets traded to another destination such as Boston that he'd fall in love with playing here and playing for Stevens. Can LA risk that? Says the Bird rights would make it tough for him to leave for LA.
--
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,300
deep inside Guido territory
With the Cavs rocky situation, I think Danny should pounce and roll the dice on George. Take the gamble that George likes the culture and atmosphere in Boston and likes playing for Brad Stevens. If they go back to the ECF and LBJ leaves for LA the path to the Finals is wide open. Is LA worth giving up the amount of money he'll need to?
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,661
where I was last at
LAL could assume George, a man of his word, will be theirs in '18. And having no '18 pick, and indifferent to where they finish, may not bid for George to keep those assets for the pursuit of other players. Perhaps the Celts should offer a lowball package (2nd round pick + Crowder ?? or some other reasonable 1 yr rental package) to the Pacers to just keep George out of LA for a year to protect their option on the '18 LA pick.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,897
Los Angeles, CA
LAL could assume George, a man of his word, will be theirs in '18. And having no '18 pick, and indifferent to where they finish, may not bid for George to keep those assets for the pursuit of other players. Perhaps the Celts should offer a lowball package (2nd round pick + Crowder ?? or some other reasonable 1 yr rental package) to the Pacers to just keep George out of LA for a year to protect their option on the '18 LA pick.
Bad timing...I just commented in the offseason thread that I was against a Paul George rental. However, if he can actually be had for this cheap (not likely), that's an entirely different story. Even if he leaves, we might get close to our value back simply by increasing the odds of the Lakers pick falling #2-5.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,816
Honolulu HI
Bad timing...I just commented in the offseason thread that I was against a Paul George rental. However, if he can actually be had for this cheap (not likely), that's an entirely different story. Even if he leaves, we might get close to our value back simply by increasing the odds of the Lakers pick falling #2-5.
But why would the Lakers allow that to happen? Getting a superstar like George is too important for their future and hoping he is "a man of his word" is not the safest way to make sure this happens.The Lakers aren't stupid. If they think George is about to be traded to a contender they will offer a competitive bid...
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,897
Los Angeles, CA
But why would the Lakers allow that to happen? Getting a superstar like George is too important for their future and hoping he is "a man of his word" is not the safest way to make sure this happens.The Lakers aren't stupid. If they think George is about to be traded to a contender they will offer a competitive bid...
Yes, it's probably wishful thinking that he can be had for a pittance.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,522
Maine
Doing something like this (a low ball offer) would have the consequence of making the Lakers "up" thier offer should they not choose the "Wait and See"
I would offer a couple of "lesser" 1st round picks (like the Celt Picks and/or the Lower of the 1st rounders next year).

If we get a year of George then maybe he loves Stevens and the energy of being in contention.
If we dont get him we at least make LA up their offer to secure him a tad early.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,332
The bigger question I have is about whether he even fits on the court in that scenario. IT had a ridiculously high usage rate this year, and I'm not sure what he does really works all that well off-the-ball if he's sharing the court with Hayward and George. Both of those guys should and will have the ball in their hands a lot. Add in Horford, who's also a good option to run the offense through for stretches, and I just don't see how that team can accommodate a ball dominant PG like Thomas. Especially an expensive one who is such an issue on defense. Of that group, he's the obvious option to move given the luxury tax implications.
He's roughly a glorified Jason Terry in that scenario—certainly not under consideration for $30mil. Smart with an improved shot or a solid MLE pickup likely accomplishes most of what they need from the position if they add Hayward + another wing.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,661
where I was last at
With all the quality/elite players suddenly seemingly avaialble (Butler, George, Porzingis etc) and GMs seeming pressured to move them, its possible Ainge can leverage this into a buyer's market, and play off the sellers against one another.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
Listening to NBA radio and they said CSN Chicago reports it's down to Boston or Cleveland for Jimmy Butler.
If that's really the case, I offer the LA/Sac pick and Crowder and make them take Kevin freaking Love instead. The 3 should be off the table if CLE is the competition.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
There was a link in one of these threads that Phoenix was willing to cough up the #4 for him.
I can't possibly believe this is true. I saw an article where Cleveland wanted them to do that, not where Phoenix said they would. Which franchise looking to rebuild would take an aging and often injured Kevin Love on a max deal over Tatum/Jackson/Fox/Isaac on a rookie deal? Seems nuts.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
So who is giving up valuable picks for Kevin freaking Love? He's not really a guy for a losing team to build around.
Phoenix is/was willing to give up the #4 pick for Love. Bledsoe may have been offered as well, but it's not clear if that was in addition to #4 or in lieu of. Either way Cleveland can get a lottery pick to reroute to Chicago.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
Phoenix is/was willing to give up the #4 pick for Love. Bledsoe may have been offered as well, but it's not clear if that was in addition to #4 or in lieu of. Either way Cleveland can get a lottery pick to reroute to Chicago.
Dear Lord, that is stupid. Ugh.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
If that's really the case, I offer the LA/Sac pick and Crowder and make them take Kevin freaking Love instead. The 3 should be off the table if CLE is the competition.
This is what's important. Unless CHI is enamored with Kevin Love, we can outbid Cle without the #3.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
I can't possibly believe this is true. I saw an article where Cleveland wanted them to do that, not where Phoenix said they would. Which franchise looking to rebuild would take an aging and often injured Kevin Love on a max deal over Tatum/Jackson/Fox/Isaac on a rookie deal? Seems nuts.
Phoenix has a half-dozen former lottery picks on their roster already. What they don't have is a legitimate All-Star to build around. You can't possibly believe that a team might want to acquire a 28-year-old All-Star on a below-market contract for the next two years? Not saying they should do it but it's a perfectly fair return.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
Phoenix has a half-dozen former lottery picks on their roster already. What they don't have is a legitimate All-Star to build around. You can't possibly believe that a team might want to acquire a 28-year-old All-Star on a below-market contract for the next two years?
Yes, exactly right. I cannot fathom why a team would want to "build around" a soon to be 29 year old Kevin Love who had back problems last year for two seasons when the alternative is having the 4th pick in a draft considered to have four high caliber prospects.

The Celtics were the one seed and this board would explode if they traded the 3 for Kevin Love.
 

Lazy vs Crazy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
6,415

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities
If we're not giving up #3, what ARE we offering? A player and the LAL/Sac pick?

MN is supposedly in on Butler. I'd guess they've made #7 available, so that might be the floor for CHI...
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
CSN Chicago says that the Bulls offered Butler for the 3rd pick and the C's said no.

http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-bulls/sources-bulls-are-actively-shopping-jimmy-butler-prior-nba-draft-0
Except it wouldn't have just been #3 for Butler. The C's would have to send out salaries to come close to Butler's $17M. I can't see the Bulls taking an offer of 3/Zeller/Rozier/Young/Mickey/Jackson. I'd think the offer for "just #3" was more like 3/Crowder/Zeller/Rozier or something like that (if that report is to be believed).
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,030
Oregon
The part I can't believe is the idea that Butler would be eligible for $40M a year soon.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
Except it wouldn't have just been #3 for Butler. The C's would have to send out salaries to come close to Butler's $17M. I can't see the Bulls taking an offer of 3/Zeller/Rozier/Young/Mickey/Jackson. I'd think the offer for "just #3" was more like 3/Crowder/Zeller/Rozier or something like that (if that report is to be believed).
#3/Crowder/Rozier/Zeller I'd do in heartbeat. For me any deal that only includes one of the high lottery picks/JB looks pretty good.
 

finnVT

superspreadsheeter
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2002
2,153
Except it wouldn't have just been #3 for Butler. The C's would have to send out salaries to come close to Butler's $17M. I can't see the Bulls taking an offer of 3/Zeller/Rozier/Young/Mickey/Jackson. I'd think the offer for "just #3" was more like 3/Crowder/Zeller/Rozier or something like that (if that report is to be believed).
If they renounce Olynyk or Zeller they've got space to add Butler without sending anyone back. They'd have to move AB/Crowder to make room for someone like Hayward if they did this, but it wouldn't be necessary for the Butler deal if it happened first.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
Except it wouldn't have just been #3 for Butler. The C's would have to send out salaries to come close to Butler's $17M. I can't see the Bulls taking an offer of 3/Zeller/Rozier/Young/Mickey/Jackson. I'd think the offer for "just #3" was more like 3/Crowder/Zeller/Rozier or something like that (if that report is to be believed).
They could free up the $17 million easily by cutting Zeller and renouncing everyone but Olynyk.
 

Light-Tower-Power

ask me about My Pillow
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2013
15,968
Nashua, NH

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
If they renounce Olynyk or Zeller they've got space to add Butler without sending anyone back. They'd have to move AB/Crowder to make room for someone like Hayward if they did this, but it wouldn't be necessary for the Butler deal if it happened first.
Interesting. I didn't realize they had the room to make that kind of move. Thanks for the info. Danny sure has his hands full. He's got to be sorting through a thousand different options right now.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
So maybe the fireworks promised for last year were just on a long fuse.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Kinda crazy they could get Butler for less than a 3rd but Crowder and/or AB can probably net a 1st themselves if Chicago wanted to flip them.
 

nolasoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 11, 2004
6,930
Displaced
Which is the first shoe to drop? Butler? PG? Porz? Other?
Was really hoping a deal would get done today. My work week will be a wash if this plays out ’til Thursday PM.
 

cheech13

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 5, 2006
1,608
But you can't renounce until FA starts, right? So you have to wait until July 1.
Most deals that go down prior to or during the draft don't get finalized until after the start of the new league year. You can do a deal now but it's much more difficult and there is little incentive to do so.