PDA

View Full Version : Can the Bulls keep Jimmy Butler?



Nikeman
12-30-2014, 04:08 PM
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/chicago-bulls-breakout-star-jimmy-191652079.html

Interesting article, Butler easily gets a max extension.

With Rose making the max, and Gibson, Noah and Gasol each making large salaries, can the Bulls keep this core together?

dhopisthename
12-30-2014, 04:11 PM
yes and if they really don't want to pay the tax they can just trade someone else to get under

Sadds The Gr8
12-30-2014, 04:18 PM
Yes. They'd prolly trade Taj if anything imo...

Kaner
12-30-2014, 04:18 PM
Lazy article, but the answer is of course yes. I think they're going to keep Butler with no cap clearing moves and go into the Luxury tax. But even if you think they will make moves to avoid the luxury tax there is literally no chance it involves Butler, anyone saying otherwise is just wishful thinking.

Kyben36
12-30-2014, 04:21 PM
yes and if they really don't want to pay the tax they can just trade someone else to get under

Eactly, taj will probably be expendable in the offseason, and even possibly now, but we own his bird rights, so we can go over cap to keep him, not aimed at you the name, but people need to understand how the nba cap works beffore making threats, even the article states the bulls can match any offer, Butler is going nowhere.

InRoseWeTrust
12-30-2014, 04:24 PM
Here come the "Reinsdorf is cheap lololol" comments without any substantive support...

abe_froman
12-30-2014, 04:26 PM
yes ,i know a lot of fans of other teams want him/hoping we dont.but he's an rfa and we can match any offer,and its "no duh" that we will.if anything,its much more likely we would jettison some of our other players like taj gibson if there was a worry about the tax(which is an overblown issue created by outside fanbases,i mean we've gone over it a couple times over the past several years)

....also gasol isnt making a large salary,i think it's only like 7m per year

BIG worm
12-30-2014, 04:27 PM
How is this even a question people are entertaining? Wishful thinking?

DamnGoat
12-30-2014, 04:33 PM
:sigh:

Of course they can and will match whatever he's offered. It's such a non-issue and past the point of being annoying now. They aren't letting a 25 year old SG, that's broken out in the way that he has, just walk all of a sudden.

If people are so concerned about Reinsdorf paying the luxury tax, then Taj can be dealt pretty easily so that doesn't happen. But that's also something that's constantly blown out of proportion.

abe_froman
12-30-2014, 04:34 PM
How is this even a question people are entertaining? Wishful thinking?

basically,yeah.its like marc gasol,he isnt leaving,but every fan of a team in need of a center is saying that he's coming to (insert name of fav team here) .free agency is a time when fans can dream of great/high profile players coming to their fav team(we saw it with our own fanbase last year and carmelo anthony)

RowBTrice
12-30-2014, 04:43 PM
Just a fan of a rival team trying to bait. Awesome.

JustinTime
12-30-2014, 04:44 PM
I think they will be forced to trade him to Toronto for Derozan because he's cheaper.

Goose17
12-30-2014, 05:07 PM
What about that rumour of him dating Bosh's cousin and them being really close friends? Wasn't Bosh recruiting him to Miami a couple years back?

I figure that's a better city to play in and he won't be in the shadow of Rose. He can be the alpha.

I think he goes to Miami.


I am making all of this up. This entire post is B.S

albertajaysfan
12-30-2014, 05:10 PM
Considering the jump the cap is supposed to take the Bulls would probably only need to pay the tax for one season. Reisndorf may be a little cheap but isn't so cheap to wade into the waters of being an idiot.

smiddy012
12-30-2014, 05:13 PM
Here come the "Reinsdorf is cheap lololol" comments without any substantive support...

Lol the Bulls wouldn't even pay Jimmy 12 per instead of 11 a couple months ago, which is the whole reason we'll have to end up paying him a max....

I would consider that pretty cheap. But I think Reinsdorf will dip into the luxury for the second superstar we've been waiting forever for.

Shmontaine
12-30-2014, 05:23 PM
Lol the Bulls wouldn't even pay Jimmy 12 per instead of 11 a couple months ago, which is the whole reason we'll have to end up paying him a max....

I would consider that pretty cheap. But I think Reinsdorf will dip into the luxury for the second superstar we've been waiting forever for.

they wanted him to take a discount. that's a far cry from letting him walk as a RFA. this isn't Asik we're talking about here.

and the beauty of the RFA is that no team can offer more that MLE for first two years of any offer. the third and fourth year may get a little crazy, but the first two will be no problem.

IMO, i think the bulls and jimmy work out a max extension without jimmy signing an offer from another team.

if the bulls make it known that they will match any offer to jimmy, i doubt teams even try.

JustinTime
12-30-2014, 05:32 PM
they wanted him to take a discount. that's a far cry from letting him walk as a RFA. this isn't Asik we're talking about here.

and the beauty of the RFA is that no team can offer more that MLE for first two years of any offer. the third and fourth year may get a little crazy, but the first two will be no problem.

IMO, i think the bulls and jimmy work out a max extension without jimmy signing an offer from another team.

if the bulls make it known that they will match any offer to jimmy, i doubt teams even try.

You kidding? they will try harder because any rival would know that they could **** their competition hard by offering him something crazy,

InRoseWeTrust
12-30-2014, 05:40 PM
Lol the Bulls wouldn't even pay Jimmy 12 per instead of 11 a couple months ago, which is the whole reason we'll have to end up paying him a max....

I would consider that pretty cheap. But I think Reinsdorf will dip into the luxury for the second superstar we've been waiting forever for.

Dude. Come on. A few months ago he was coming off a season where he shot .397 from the field. The Bulls were at 11, Butler's camp was at 14.

Tony_Starks
12-30-2014, 05:41 PM
Its all fun and games until a team throws out a ridiculous offer.....

nycericanguy
12-30-2014, 05:42 PM
they wanted him to take a discount. that's a far cry from letting him walk as a RFA. this isn't Asik we're talking about here.

and the beauty of the RFA is that no team can offer more that MLE for first two years of any offer. the third and fourth year may get a little crazy, but the first two will be no problem.

IMO, i think the bulls and jimmy work out a max extension without jimmy signing an offer from another team.

if the bulls make it known that they will match any offer to jimmy, i doubt teams even try.

thats completely false... you're thinking of a poison pill... that doesnt apply to Butler. teams with cap can offer him a max... just like DAL did with Parsons.

Shmontaine
12-30-2014, 05:43 PM
You kidding? they will try harder because any rival would know that they could **** their competition hard by offering him something crazy,

only if said team isn't in the hunt for another free agent? once they an offer sheet is signed it ties up their cap for 3 days until the home team matches. if any team was in the search for a 2 guard an offered jimmy just to try to make the bulls pay, it's a gamble. they could miss out on viable free agents, no?

Kyben36
12-30-2014, 05:48 PM
Lol the Bulls wouldn't even pay Jimmy 12 per instead of 11 a couple months ago, which is the whole reason we'll have to end up paying him a max....

I would consider that pretty cheap. But I think Reinsdorf will dip into the luxury for the second superstar we've been waiting forever for.

jimmy considered himself worth 12 a month ago, no he thinks he is worth max ( which he is) truth is, bulls should have gotten him signed early, but im guessing they were going with the taj gibson plan, with taj, taj wanted more, so the team helled out, when he started out the season poorly he came back and took the offer, , this time it backfired. if your going to gamble, you might loose some times.

InRoseWeTrust
12-30-2014, 05:50 PM
Its all fun and games until a team throws out a ridiculous offer.....

They can only throw him a max, which we will match. Whether or not that is ridiculous is up for debate. I don't think it's anywhere close to ridiculous.

InRoseWeTrust
12-30-2014, 05:51 PM
You kidding? they will try harder because any rival would know that they could **** their competition hard by offering him something crazy,

What can they offer him that is 'crazy'? He's going to get offered a max, period.

abe_froman
12-30-2014, 06:19 PM
You kidding? they will try harder because any rival would know that they could **** their competition hard by offering him something crazy,

this isnt baseball where you can theoretically can keep adding money/years infinitely,they can only offer up to a max contract(something nearly everyone acknowledges he is getting).so no,they cant **** up a rival by offering something crazy

Tony_Starks
12-30-2014, 06:22 PM
You kidding? they will try harder because any rival would know that they could **** their competition hard by offering him something crazy,

What can they offer him that is 'crazy'? He's going to get offered a max, period.

True but you don't think a max that is loaded on the back end would give them cause to pause? Especially seeing how they dealt with this past negotiation?

nycericanguy
12-30-2014, 06:29 PM
True but you don't think a max that is loaded on the back end would give them cause to pause? Especially seeing how they dealt with this past negotiation?

you can't backload a max deal... how could you possible? MAX means he's getting the MOST he can get.

InRoseWeTrust
12-30-2014, 06:30 PM
True but you don't think a max that is loaded on the back end would give them cause to pause? Especially seeing how they dealt with this past negotiation?

(1) I'm not sure they can really "backload it" under the CBA. If they are going to give him max raises per year, that's really all they can do.

(2) I'm just not sure there is a deal that can be structured right now for Jimmy that the Bulls even hesitate to match. He's by far and away our best player right now, and is playing like a top 15 guy in the league.

abe_froman
12-30-2014, 06:32 PM
True but you don't think a max that is loaded on the back end would give them cause to pause? Especially seeing how they dealt with this past negotiation?

no,the structure doesnt matter for max...anyway ,a backloaded deal would actually be more beneficial for us as there are less commitments as we project into the future and a giant jump in the cap thats coming

and we dealt with it the way we did because he had yet to show that this offensive explosion.while he was great defender,last year we was crap offensively.so its right to "lowball" him(eventhough under the circumstances it shouldnt be surprising and something most would have advocated doing)

Tony_Starks
12-30-2014, 06:35 PM
True but you don't think a max that is loaded on the back end would give them cause to pause? Especially seeing how they dealt with this past negotiation?

(1) I'm not sure they can really "backload it" under the CBA. If they are going to give him max raises per year, that's really all they can do.

(2) I'm just not sure there is a deal that can be structured right now for Jimmy that the Bulls even hesitate to match. He's by far and away our best player right now, and is playing like a top 15 guy in the league.

By backload I mean construct it in a way where he gets the most money the last 2 years of his deal. I'm not saying they won't match but historically teams hate those kind of contracts depending on the opt out clause.....

kozelkid
12-30-2014, 07:55 PM
By backload I mean construct it in a way where he gets the most money the last 2 years of his deal. I'm not saying they won't match but historically teams hate those kind of contracts depending on the opt out clause.....
You don't seem to understand how contracts work.

For one, it seems like you're confusing this with the Gilbert Arenas provision which is irrelevant here since the new CBA got rid of it and Butler was a first round pick anyway so it's still irrelevant.

Given that, the maximum annual salary increase allowed is 15%.

So none of this backloaded nonsense you're talking about can happen.

In the end of the day, he's getting a maximum contract and Bulls will be the ones to match. Right now he's playing almost as well as Rose was during his MVP season. Anyone who thinks Bulls will let him walk are dreaming.

Kaner
12-30-2014, 07:56 PM
By backload I mean construct it in a way where he gets the most money the last 2 years of his deal. I'm not saying they won't match but historically teams hate those kind of contracts depending on the opt out clause.....

That automatically happens on a max deal, their are restrictions on how big raises can be from one season to the next and on a max deal you are going to the limit each year of the contract.

SeoulBeatz
12-30-2014, 08:06 PM
How is this even a question people are entertaining? Wishful thinking?

Yep. I would love for the Sixers to throw the max at him but the Bulls will retain him at whatever cost.

BIG worm
12-30-2014, 08:14 PM
You kidding? they will try harder because any rival would know that they could **** their competition hard by offering him something crazy,

More then Chicago can offer?

Shammyguy3
12-30-2014, 10:41 PM
Thread #2 on Butler leaving the Bulls, no?

TheNumber37
12-31-2014, 01:15 AM
Butler shouldn't get the max. He should get take 60 million for 4 years and praise the organization for getting him to where he is.

GodsSon
12-31-2014, 01:25 AM
Butler getting the max for ONE really good year is going to be a contract someone ends up regretting.

GodsSon
12-31-2014, 01:30 AM
.

Shammyguy3
12-31-2014, 01:34 AM
Butler getting the max for ONE really good year is going to be a contract someone ends up regretting.

Wrong due to the following:
1) Butler's an elite defender. That won't change, he's proven this over a number of seasons.
2) Butler's an elite rebounder for his position. He's proven this since coming into the league.
3) Butler's very good at not turning the ball over. He's proven this every season.
4) Butler's boost in efficiency isn't due to a career high in 3 point shooting, an outlier of free throw rate, and so forth. Butler's efficiency is due to his ability to get to the free throw line (50.7% FTR for his career, 56.2% this season)
5) Butler takes half of his attempts within 10 feet (45%)

Butler's defense and rebounding has always been there. Butler's never been a turnover prone guy (career 9.5tov%). Butler's ability to get to the free throw line, his ability to get into the paint, him knowing when to take shots, and his variety of post-moves leads to crazy efficiency levels.

I have the liberty to watch him every game. This isn't a fluke. This is simply Butler's natural development from his hard-work.

effen5
12-31-2014, 05:16 AM
Bye bye taj

Goose17
12-31-2014, 06:47 AM
I love Gibson's game. Hope he lands in Golden State.

Tony_Starks
12-31-2014, 11:47 AM
By backload I mean construct it in a way where he gets the most money the last 2 years of his deal. I'm not saying they won't match but historically teams hate those kind of contracts depending on the opt out clause.....

That automatically happens on a max deal, their are restrictions on how big raises can be from one season to the next and on a max deal you are going to the limit each year of the contract.

Oh ok thanks for the info. For some reason I was still thinking about the old CBA where you could get a little more creative with the max....

MILLERHIGHLIFE
01-02-2015, 09:59 AM
Instead of backloaded can it be frontloaded? Instead of the flat rate of $15M per. Can it be like $18M or $19M? Then decrease following years?

InRoseWeTrust
01-02-2015, 10:31 AM
Instead of backloaded can it be frontloaded? Instead of the flat rate of $15M per. Can it be like $18M or $19M? Then decrease following years?

Nope. There are maximum raises per year that can either be given or not. You can't take whatever the total amount would be and redistribute it as you see fit.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
01-02-2015, 11:42 AM
Nope. There are maximum raises per year that can either be given or not. You can't take whatever the total amount would be and redistribute it as you see fit.

So it cant be in reverse? Instead of final year with 15% increases for each of the 4 year deal. Still no matter what when Bulls match they will be in luxury tax. Their at $61M before matching a max of $15M per for Jimmy. That be $76M. 11 players only. Doesn't include salaries for draft picks. Moore and Bairstow are team options but on the cheap. Every player added will make Bulls deeper in luxury tax. Yeah they could unload Gibson. That's probably their only option. Doubt they trade Rose.

InRoseWeTrust
01-02-2015, 11:45 AM
So it cant be in reverse? Instead of final year with 15% increases for each of the 4 year deal. Still no matter what when Bulls match they will be in luxury tax. Their at $61M before matching a max of $15M per for Jimmy. That be $76M. 11 players only. Doesn't include salaries for draft picks. Moore and Bairstow are team options but on the cheap. Every player added will make Bulls deeper in luxury tax. Yeah they could unload Gibson. That's probably their only option. Doubt they trade Rose.

We paid the luxury tax 2 years ago (I think 1 of only 6-7 teams to do so) for a much worse team. I don't think anyone in Chicago is sweating that right now. I wouldn't be surprised to see them unload Gibson, however, for a back up wing. I don't see them doing it as a purely salary related move.

kozelkid
01-02-2015, 12:22 PM
So it cant be in reverse? Instead of final year with 15% increases for each of the 4 year deal. Still no matter what when Bulls match they will be in luxury tax. Their at $61M before matching a max of $15M per for Jimmy. That be $76M. 11 players only. Doesn't include salaries for draft picks. Moore and Bairstow are team options but on the cheap. Every player added will make Bulls deeper in luxury tax. Yeah they could unload Gibson. That's probably their only option. Doubt they trade Rose.
No it can't. There are certain annual figures attributed to how much a player can make based on the years they've spent in the NBA. The most Butler can receive for his first year is somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 mill.

In other words, if he wants to get the largest contact he can, it's to his advantage to take the max which had 15% annual increase as that increase relates to the most he can make each year as his number of seasons in the NBA tally up. If that makes sense...

RLundi
01-02-2015, 01:16 PM
I hope not. The Magic will have lots of cap space this summer ;)

RLundi
01-02-2015, 01:23 PM
and the beauty of the RFA is that no team can offer more that MLE for first two years of any offer. the third and fourth year may get a little crazy, but the first two will be no problem.




I'm sorry but what the **** are you talking about?