John Ireland said Bulls are shopping Butler
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
january
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 106

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 5:09 am    Post subject:

This is unbelievable how many billy kings we have here. I dont like Mitch, but im glad that any impatient and shortterm looking lakerfans from LG cant make decisions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
adkindo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 6:04 am    Post subject:

Eindhoven wrote:
adkindo wrote:
wish some of you guys could listen in on the call when Mitch offers the packages you suggest....just to hear how loud Chicago laughs before you hear an eternal dial tone.


If - and that's a BIG IF - Chicago is shopping Butler, they can't expect other teams to surrender everything for him. I'm not willing to trade Russell, Ingram or Randle for him. They don't want it? Fine, knock on someone else's door. I'm not the one shopping him around.


I agree, we do not currently have enough assets to acquire a player like Butler and still have enough quality left on the roster to be competitive.....at least there is a chance the young talent could develop into a contending team...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 6:10 am    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:
I'd trade russell for him, and if we could move mozgov or deng along with him so we can get some cap space then we could pursue the very unlikely paul george in 2017. He'd be much more willing to join if we had butler.


They'd want DLO + Ingram or Randle + other stuff. That's why this is problematic.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
unleasHell
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 11591
Location: Stay Thirsty my Friends

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 7:07 am    Post subject: Re: John Ireland said Bulls are shopping Butler

scoobs wrote:
I would trade Ingram, Randle and Clarkson for him. I might even include Zubac.

Those 3-4 players are an awful lot to give up, but we really do need s star player and Butler is that.


I would say that it the dumbest trade of the year, but it is only Jan 6th...


So... No, No way, never...
_________________
“Always remember... Rumors are carried by haters, spread by fools, and accepted by idiots.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SGV-Laker fan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 May 2013
Posts: 8839

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 7:32 am    Post subject:

justsomelakerfan wrote:
If the Lakers actually got Butler... They're giving up the good stuff.


what good stuff? none of ours are good, they're just okay stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ShowtimeDynasty_24/7
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 8361

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 7:38 am    Post subject:

I truly doubt the Bulls are considering trading Butler... It makes no sense. Butler is big time and its hard to get a big time player in this league. Especially one that has the handwork mentality that Butler. Secondly, there is no other player on the Bulls roster that they can point to and say "he'll be a player in our new young core going forward". So that means the Bulls would be relying directly on a trade to bring that type of player into fold. Then, the Bulls aren't even bad enough to where they are going to be getting a high lottery pick. So they would be relying on a trade to bring that as well.

The Bulls mistake was signing Wade and Rondo and it turned out exactly as people expected. Wade has worked out adequately, but Rondo is turning into a disaster.

Their best chance is to double down and try to bring in another scorer, and try to make something happen in free agency next year. But Butler is going to be a Bull for a long time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 7:40 am    Post subject:

Yeah. I don't buy the Bulls trading their best asset b/c the other FA acquisitions (Wade and Rondo) don't work.

Bulls are notorious for dipping their feet in trade talks mid-year and never making a trade, much to the consternation of fans and GMs alike.

He has one of the more friendlier contracts for a top 15 player that is not on a rookie deal.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vesper
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2016
Posts: 387

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:34 am    Post subject:

Not just the Bulls, but it could be Hoiberg that wants Butler gone....

Which is a huge difference. Some coaches have a set vision on what they want and some players just dont match that vision ala Luke Walton and Westbrook.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:35 am    Post subject:

Vesper wrote:
Not just the Bulls, but it could be Hoiberg that wants Butler gone....

Which is a huge difference. Some coaches have a set vision on what they want and some players just dont match that vision ala Luke Walton and Westbrook.


Would you rather cut Hoiberg or trade a top 15 player?

Most teams elect to keep the latter.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vesper
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2016
Posts: 387

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:40 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Vesper wrote:
Not just the Bulls, but it could be Hoiberg that wants Butler gone....

Which is a huge difference. Some coaches have a set vision on what they want and some players just dont match that vision ala Luke Walton and Westbrook.


Would you rather cut Hoiberg or trade a top 15 player?

Most teams elect to keep the latter.


Depends how much I value the coach. Like if I had Luke Walton vs Westbrook, I keep Walton over westbrook without any question. Also, Hoiberg's offense has never looked anything similar to the vision he gave Chicago because of the roster.

Roster/personnel are key to success like Mike D's offense. Need the right guys to make it work. Butler could be an outlier from what Hoiberg wants...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53712

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:40 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Vesper wrote:
Not just the Bulls, but it could be Hoiberg that wants Butler gone....

Which is a huge difference. Some coaches have a set vision on what they want and some players just dont match that vision ala Luke Walton and Westbrook.


Would you rather cut Hoiberg or trade a top 15 player?

Most teams elect to keep the latter.


I share the same skepticism. The only hitch is that the Bulls are a wobbly 8 seed and have no real way of rising above their current position. They also have a decision to make on Taj Gibson. They either bottom out or tread water.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:55 am    Post subject:

Vesper wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Vesper wrote:
Not just the Bulls, but it could be Hoiberg that wants Butler gone....

Which is a huge difference. Some coaches have a set vision on what they want and some players just dont match that vision ala Luke Walton and Westbrook.


Would you rather cut Hoiberg or trade a top 15 player?

Most teams elect to keep the latter.


Depends how much I value the coach. Like if I had Luke Walton vs Westbrook, I keep Walton over westbrook without any question. Also, Hoiberg's offense has never looked anything similar to the vision he gave Chicago because of the roster.

Roster/personnel are key to success like Mike D's offense. Need the right guys to make it work. Butler could be an outlier from what Hoiberg wants...


Hoiberg is a really underwhelming coach. I wouldn't put him in any rarified status.

You easily keep Butler over Hoiberg. Chicago FO screwed up with the Hoiberg hiring, then signing FAs that absolutely do not work with Hoiberg (Wade + Rondo). Butler isn't the problem.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Raijin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 6576

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:12 am    Post subject:

Truck Turner wrote:
anth2000 wrote:
After the Nash deal, I believe anything can happen. That was a bad deal and Deng and Mozgov were not good deals either.

This is the track record lately...


That deal was only bad in hindsight. At the time people were praising Mitch for stealing Nash from Phoenix. NOBODY could have predicted Steve Nash breaking down the way he did, if anything some were expecting his career to be extended because he wasn't going to be carrying as much of a load.

Just because people were praising Mitch for the deal doesn't mean it's not a bad deal. Dude was a 38 year old PG. PG's don't last much beyond 33-34 and every year past that you take a chance. Regardless I wanted to keep Sessions because at least he had some semblance of the ability to play defense.
_________________
"It was tough," Kobe Bryant said. "But when it got really tough for me, I just checked myself in."


Last edited by Raijin on Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:32 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31783
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:18 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
I'd trade russell for him, and if we could move mozgov or deng along with him so we can get some cap space then we could pursue the very unlikely paul george in 2017. He'd be much more willing to join if we had butler.


They'd want DLO + Ingram or Randle + other stuff. That's why this is problematic.


I'm just spitballing here, but what if you could get Butler for DLO plus Randle plus a 1st round pick? (I think Nick Young could fetch a 1st rounder, so it's essentially like trading DLO plus Randle plus Nick.) And let's say we could get Noel for JC. (We'd have to take on an expiring contract or 2 from Philly to make the salaries work, but I see viable matches there based on a quick look of their payroll.) And let's say we could get Jrue Holiday or George Hill in free agency (as I said, just spitballing here). Our starting 5 next season could be Jrue or Hill, Butler, Ingram, Deng, and Noel. We'd still have Lou, Nance, and Mozgov too, as well as Zubac.

I'm just assuming that it would work salary cap wise, accounting for large contracts given to Noel and Holiday or Hill, but I didn't look at it fully. (Again, spitballing.) But if you knew we could end up with this end result for next season, which do you prefer: what we have now, or that? Just curious as to what people think.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vesper
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Dec 2016
Posts: 387

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:06 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
Vesper wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Vesper wrote:
Not just the Bulls, but it could be Hoiberg that wants Butler gone....

Which is a huge difference. Some coaches have a set vision on what they want and some players just dont match that vision ala Luke Walton and Westbrook.


Would you rather cut Hoiberg or trade a top 15 player?

Most teams elect to keep the latter.


Depends how much I value the coach. Like if I had Luke Walton vs Westbrook, I keep Walton over westbrook without any question. Also, Hoiberg's offense has never looked anything similar to the vision he gave Chicago because of the roster.

Roster/personnel are key to success like Mike D's offense. Need the right guys to make it work. Butler could be an outlier from what Hoiberg wants...


Hoiberg is a really underwhelming coach. I wouldn't put him in any rarified status.

You easily keep Butler over Hoiberg. Chicago FO screwed up with the Hoiberg hiring, then signing FAs that absolutely do not work with Hoiberg (Wade + Rondo). Butler isn't the problem.


Or you can rebuild from the bottom up, rather than be a treadmill team for all of his career.

If we get our pick, I bet Bulls will bite with the option for Hoiberg to start the team brand new with either Ball, Fultz or DSJ.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:09 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
I'd trade russell for him, and if we could move mozgov or deng along with him so we can get some cap space then we could pursue the very unlikely paul george in 2017. He'd be much more willing to join if we had butler.


They'd want DLO + Ingram or Randle + other stuff. That's why this is problematic.


I'm just spitballing here, but what if you could get Butler for DLO plus Randle plus a 1st round pick? (I think Nick Young could fetch a 1st rounder, so it's essentially like trading DLO plus Randle plus Nick.) And let's say we could get Noel for JC. (We'd have to take on an expiring contract or 2 from Philly to make the salaries work, but I see viable matches there based on a quick look of their payroll.) And let's say we could get Jrue Holiday or George Hill in free agency (as I said, just spitballing here). Our starting 5 next season could be Jrue or Hill, Butler, Ingram, Deng, and Noel. We'd still have Lou, Nance, and Mozgov too, as well as Zubac.

I'm just assuming that it would work salary cap wise, accounting for large contracts given to Noel and Holiday or Hill, but I didn't look at it fully. (Again, spitballing.) But if you knew we could end up with this end result for next season, which do you prefer: what we have now, or that? Just curious as to what people think.


I guess that is a pyrrhic result b/c that group is not enough IMO to beat out the Cavs/Warriors (and even other 2nd tier contenders) while unfortunately have core guys who will age out (Jrue, Hill, Butler) by the time 3-4 years are over.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:10 am    Post subject:

Vesper wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Vesper wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Vesper wrote:
Not just the Bulls, but it could be Hoiberg that wants Butler gone....

Which is a huge difference. Some coaches have a set vision on what they want and some players just dont match that vision ala Luke Walton and Westbrook.


Would you rather cut Hoiberg or trade a top 15 player?

Most teams elect to keep the latter.


Depends how much I value the coach. Like if I had Luke Walton vs Westbrook, I keep Walton over westbrook without any question. Also, Hoiberg's offense has never looked anything similar to the vision he gave Chicago because of the roster.

Roster/personnel are key to success like Mike D's offense. Need the right guys to make it work. Butler could be an outlier from what Hoiberg wants...


Hoiberg is a really underwhelming coach. I wouldn't put him in any rarified status.

You easily keep Butler over Hoiberg. Chicago FO screwed up with the Hoiberg hiring, then signing FAs that absolutely do not work with Hoiberg (Wade + Rondo). Butler isn't the problem.


Or you can rebuild from the bottom up, rather than be a treadmill team for all of his career.

If we get our pick, I bet Bulls will bite with the option for Hoiberg to start the team brand new with either Ball, Fultz or DSJ.


So the FO brought in all the wrong types of players for Hoiberg (Wade/Rondo) but they will trade their unquestionably best player to NOW all of a sudden build a Hoiberg centric team?

Um no.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:25 am    Post subject:

adkindo wrote:
wish some of you guys could listen in on the call when Mitch offers the packages you suggest....just to hear how loud Chicago laughs before you hear an eternal dial tone.


The Bulls will likely want what we don't have, future first round draft picks.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:27 am    Post subject:

Raijin wrote:
Dude was a 38 year old PG. PG's don't last much beyond 33-34 .



At age 35 and 36, Nash led the league in assists. The year before he joined us, at age 37, Nash was an all-star who put up 13-11 on 53-39-89 shooting.

So he was performing at a high level. Sure, he was a risk because of his age, but I thought he was a reasonable risk. If a GM only does absolutely no-brainer moves with no risk, he won't do many moves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:28 am    Post subject:

AY2043 wrote:
Power Gasol wrote:
adkindo wrote:
Fortysixn2 wrote:
Mini Mamba wrote:
Chicago will likely want Russell in any trade for Butler as they need a PG more than anything.


They can have him and nance and lou and two future 1st.

Probably won't be enough, but as long as we can keep Randle and Ingram they can take whoever they want. As much as I like dlos smoothness and vision and shooting, I think butler is a better player right now than Dlo could ever be because of his athleticism.

A 2/3/4 of butler/Ingram/Randle is a young core that could win a championship in 5 years with a defensive minded pg and center. While we are at it, let's flip JC for Noel and do this up right.


Ingram just entering his prime and Butler most likely exited his prime (he would be older than Deng is now)...not sure that screams championship formula


Butler just entered his prime. Ingram is a rookie... not sure what year you're living in.

I'm doubtful 32 year old Jimmy a butler is playing at the same level he is now.

And even if he is I'm not sure him, Ingram and Randle are enough for a championship. Remember Westbrook, Durant, and prime Ibaka couldn't get it done either.


Butler isn't playing on the same level on a good team with other good players. Think 2006 Kobe, no decent teammates so he gets to go rouge whenever he wants. Monster numbers on a bad team. That is what we are seeing this year. Now Butler has shown he can play well on a good team as well (as did Kobe), the problem is putting a good team around him.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:29 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Raijin wrote:
Dude was a 38 year old PG. PG's don't last much beyond 33-34 .



At age 35 and 36, Nash led the league in assists. The year before he joined us, at age 37, Nash was an all-star who put up 13-11 on 53-39-89 shooting.

So he was performing at a high level. Sure, he was a risk because of his age, but I thought he was a reasonable risk. If a GM only does absolutely no-brainer moves with no risk, he won't do many moves.


Yeah. Losing 2 1st rounders at the time, didn't seem much of a concession. And Nash was balling at the time. It was a freak injury with Lillard that ended his career. Healthy Nash would have tremendously helped us at the time, even factoring in his age.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31783
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:29 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
I'd trade russell for him, and if we could move mozgov or deng along with him so we can get some cap space then we could pursue the very unlikely paul george in 2017. He'd be much more willing to join if we had butler.


They'd want DLO + Ingram or Randle + other stuff. That's why this is problematic.


I'm just spitballing here, but what if you could get Butler for DLO plus Randle plus a 1st round pick? (I think Nick Young could fetch a 1st rounder, so it's essentially like trading DLO plus Randle plus Nick.) And let's say we could get Noel for JC. (We'd have to take on an expiring contract or 2 from Philly to make the salaries work, but I see viable matches there based on a quick look of their payroll.) And let's say we could get Jrue Holiday or George Hill in free agency (as I said, just spitballing here). Our starting 5 next season could be Jrue or Hill, Butler, Ingram, Deng, and Noel. We'd still have Lou, Nance, and Mozgov too, as well as Zubac.

I'm just assuming that it would work salary cap wise, accounting for large contracts given to Noel and Holiday or Hill, but I didn't look at it fully. (Again, spitballing.) But if you knew we could end up with this end result for next season, which do you prefer: what we have now, or that? Just curious as to what people think.


I guess that is a pyrrhic result b/c that group is not enough IMO to beat out the Cavs/Warriors (and even other 2nd tier contenders) while unfortunately have core guys who will age out (Jrue, Hill, Butler) by the time 3-4 years are over.


I would tend to agree with that, although I wonder if the presence of Butler could help with free agency moving forward. (But there will probably be less stud players getting to free agency moving forward.) I'd actually love a way to get Butler while keeping DLO (that would be an awesome backcourt pairing) and Ingram. If they would bite on JC plus Randle plus, say, all the picks/young players we could get back for trades involving Lou and Nick, I'd definitely pull the trigger on that. But I'm sure they would want more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Jan 2013
Posts: 6005
Location: France

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:30 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
I'd trade russell for him, and if we could move mozgov or deng along with him so we can get some cap space then we could pursue the very unlikely paul george in 2017. He'd be much more willing to join if we had butler.


They'd want DLO + Ingram or Randle + other stuff. That's why this is problematic.


I'm just spitballing here, but what if you could get Butler for DLO plus Randle plus a 1st round pick? (I think Nick Young could fetch a 1st rounder, so it's essentially like trading DLO plus Randle plus Nick.) And let's say we could get Noel for JC. (We'd have to take on an expiring contract or 2 from Philly to make the salaries work, but I see viable matches there based on a quick look of their payroll.) And let's say we could get Jrue Holiday or George Hill in free agency (as I said, just spitballing here). Our starting 5 next season could be Jrue or Hill, Butler, Ingram, Deng, and Noel. We'd still have Lou, Nance, and Mozgov too, as well as Zubac.

I'm just assuming that it would work salary cap wise, accounting for large contracts given to Noel and Holiday or Hill, but I didn't look at it fully. (Again, spitballing.) But if you knew we could end up with this end result for next season, which do you prefer: what we have now, or that? Just curious as to what people think.


My question is : What do you think you're gonna achieve with that group in the next 2, 3 years ? Seems like a first round exit at best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:31 am    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Chronicle wrote:
I'd trade russell for him, and if we could move mozgov or deng along with him so we can get some cap space then we could pursue the very unlikely paul george in 2017. He'd be much more willing to join if we had butler.


They'd want DLO + Ingram or Randle + other stuff. That's why this is problematic.


I'm just spitballing here, but what if you could get Butler for DLO plus Randle plus a 1st round pick? (I think Nick Young could fetch a 1st rounder, so it's essentially like trading DLO plus Randle plus Nick.) And let's say we could get Noel for JC. (We'd have to take on an expiring contract or 2 from Philly to make the salaries work, but I see viable matches there based on a quick look of their payroll.) And let's say we could get Jrue Holiday or George Hill in free agency (as I said, just spitballing here). Our starting 5 next season could be Jrue or Hill, Butler, Ingram, Deng, and Noel. We'd still have Lou, Nance, and Mozgov too, as well as Zubac.

I'm just assuming that it would work salary cap wise, accounting for large contracts given to Noel and Holiday or Hill, but I didn't look at it fully. (Again, spitballing.) But if you knew we could end up with this end result for next season, which do you prefer: what we have now, or that? Just curious as to what people think.


I guess that is a pyrrhic result b/c that group is not enough IMO to beat out the Cavs/Warriors (and even other 2nd tier contenders) while unfortunately have core guys who will age out (Jrue, Hill, Butler) by the time 3-4 years are over.


I would tend to agree with that, although I wonder if the presence of Butler could help with free agency moving forward. (But there will probably be less stud players getting to free agency moving forward.) I'd actually love a way to get Butler while keeping DLO (that would be an awesome backcourt pairing) and Ingram. If they would bite on JC plus Randle plus, say, all the picks/young players we could get back for trades involving Lou and Nick, I'd definitely pull the trigger on that. But I'm sure they would want more.


Yeah. If you want Butler, you absolutely need DLO. However...

1. Butler is not ideal for Luke's system. He's been on record saying he's not a fan of shooting 3s. Ok. We can live with that, but he is also very ball dominating so you would need less ball-hawking guys to pair with him.

2. Butler gives off the "this is my team" vibe, which can be good as well. Not sure how effective he is as a FA recruit. Seemed DWade just wanted to go home and Rondo wanted the most $. Not sure how much Butler was a factor in that.

JC/Randle...I would strongly consider that. But giving up DLO or Ingram in any package would be rough (and even Randle as his recent play has really impressed me).
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Vancouver Fan
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Apr 2006
Posts: 17740

PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:32 am    Post subject:

Chronicle wrote:
I'd trade russell for him, and if we could move mozgov or deng along with him so we can get some cap space then we could pursue the very unlikely paul george in 2017. He'd be much more willing to join if we had butler.
If it was one for one, we should want to trade ANY of our young guys for him. Lol @ I'd trade Dlo specifically for him. ONLY DLO.

Imo, a Dlo and Butler back court would be deadly.
_________________
Music is my medicine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 7 of 9
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB