# Trade proposal: Bulls - Lakers



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Something Kupchak should atleast look at:

Los Angeles sends:
Caron Butler
Devean George
2005 1st rounder

Chicago sends:
Eddy Curry
Eric Piatkowski

Works cap wise.

The Bulls are hesitant on overpaying Curry right now, and they need some big guards to play the 2/3. The potential of Curry is enticing, but with Tyson Chandler they always have the luxury of moving him over to the 5 spot and trading Hinrich for Wilcox or something along those lines.

Los Angeles is primarily a jump shooting team right now, they won't ever rise to prominence until they have a legit low post threat. Although rebounding is something the Lakers need, they can risk sacrificing that for the spacing Curry will create for Kobe on the offensive end.

I realize this is a bit of a stretch, but just thought I'd see what Laker fans think of it.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Lakers only have two players they can trade to fix their skill set holes. Those two players are Butler and Odom. Butler is too valuable to let go for a guy like Curry. He's the Lakers' most valuable trading piece. He's young (24), cheap ($2M per), locked in long term (2007), has some upside, and most importantly is already a good player to begin with. Only Odom can claim all those qualities, with the lone exception being his contract, and that exception is a big one. Odom’s contract severely limits the Lakers' flexibility to trade him for a legit PF/PG, the two positions the Lakers have skill set voids in. With Butler the Lakers are very flexible, they’d be able to package expiring contracts (Divac, Atkins, George, etc.) to a team looking for cap space who’d be willing to part with their budding PG or PF. Doing that with Odom would be extremely difficult, his contract is locked in until 2009 at nearly $10M more per year than Butler’s, whose contract is two years shorter. 

Besides, the Lakers would look at Chandler before they'd ever look at Curry. Curry plays the same position as Mihm, and he's not really that much better than Mihm. On top of that, the Lakers would have to worry about paying Curry, while Mihm is locked in until 2007 at $3.5M per. 

Chandler can play the 4 just fine and would improve the rebounding/shot blocking/defense tremendously, while also letting Odom slide back to his more natural position (SF). But I very much doubt the Bulls deal Chandler. Or Curry.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Butler will be an expiring contract NEXT year, looking for a lucrative extension. A team won't be able to win with him as their 1st or 2nd option, so lets not overestimate Butler's value right now. He came into the league with everyone thinking he was the next Paul Pierce and hasn't improved since his rookie year. 

Chandler would look nice on the Laker's roster, but I doubt Chicago is willing to deal him. Curry would be easier to trade for as he is useless when he isn't scoring. You have to look at how tough the West is going to be and make a gamble. The Lakers will never be able to get out of the 2nd round without a post presence. Phoenix has Amare. Houston has Yao. San Antonio has Duncan. Sacramento has Webber. Dallas has the depth to make up for whatever offensive firepower they lack in the paint.

Odom can shake and bake in the paint in the little bit but isn't a high % option in the post like you would want your big man to be.


----------



## Lakerman33 (Oct 16, 2004)

IM not to fond of this trade. I think Curry is overrated


----------



## JerryWest (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> Butler will be an expiring contract NEXT year, looking for a lucrative extension. A team won't be able to win with him as their 1st or 2nd option, so lets not overestimate Butler's value right now. He came into the league with everyone thinking he was the next Paul Pierce and hasn't improved since his rookie year.
> 
> Chandler would look nice on the Laker's roster, but I doubt Chicago is willing to deal him. Curry would be easier to trade for as he is useless when he isn't scoring. You have to look at how tough the West is going to be and make a gamble. The Lakers will never be able to get out of the 2nd round without a post presence. Phoenix has Amare. Houston has Yao. San Antonio has Duncan. Sacramento has Webber. Dallas has the depth to make up for whatever offensive firepower they lack in the paint.
> ...


And curry will be looking for the Max THIS SUMMER, besides showing no effort playing D. I'll take my chances w/ butler thank you


----------



## jazzy1 (Jul 16, 2002)

Lets not be blind here , Butler isn't that valuable when you have Kobe and Odom. Curry would fill our need as a low post scorer. We'd have a line-up similar to that of the Cavs with Big Z. Curry is just about as good offensively. 

We could slide Mihm to the 4 Odom to 3 and still keep it rolling. It would save Mihm some foul trouble as well. 

Butler is a luxury we can't afford to keep because his presemce keeps Odom at 4 and that won't ever be effective. 

Butler's contract isn't all that valuable . For his affect as a player it would be hard to find a player of like talents to fit our need positions. 

Butler must go its simple as that. He has value, some skills and could be intriguing for teams needing a slashing 3 man. 

Curry wouldn't be my 1st choice Magloire would with Chandler being 2nd but I'd take Curry he's better than Mihm is as a center in this league and still really young.


----------



## Bartholomew Hunt (Mar 4, 2003)

I think the deal is fair, but I really do not want Curry. We need guys with attitude. Plus, our defensive is already the worst in the league. Can you just imagine a front line of Curry and Mihm? We would get demolished nightly.


----------



## SoCalfan21 (Jul 19, 2004)

i dont like bringing in a guy that will replace mihm yet keep mihm if i were to fix this trade take out pike and put in like a point gaurd on the bulls


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

I think the deal is definetly worth looking at if you're Kupchak. Butler for Curry is essentially it, but I don't think the Bulls deal Curry. I think he's a bigger asset to them in the East then Butler would be, and I would not trade Hinrich, especially not for Wilcox. It's going to be hard to find a big man you could trade for Hinrich that is at least on an equal plain. 

Everybody mentions Wilcox, but the Clippers seem to have no thoughts about trading him right now, and they don't need Hinrich with Livingston coming along, unless you're going to try to put them in the backcourt together. It just doesn't work for the Bulls, they do need a bigger SG/SF, but I don't think they should do it at the expense of Curry. He's more valuable in the east than Caron Butler would be.

Come to think of it, the Lakers might not even want anything to do with Curry, given his coming contract and Mihm's development. Butler will probably be looking for an extention, but I don't see him getting anything other than an escalator starting at 4-5 and ending at 6-7. That's exponentially less than what Curry's going to fetch. And you never know if Kupchak is having any pipedreams of luring Yao or Amare to LA in 07, getting Curry could put a monkey wrench in that. 

I agree the Lakers do need a post presence if they expect to go anywhere, but he doesn't necessarily have to be for Butler, who looks like a big part of their future. There are some free agent options this summer and the following they could try the MLE for. 

Bottomline, I don't think Curry would benefit LA as much as Butler, especially with a surprising/improving Chris Mihm on the roster. That leaves the Lakers with a bigger hole at the 3 then they had at the Center position. And the Bulls I think are more likely to keep on to Curry, and build upon the talented starting 5 they have. I don't think they want to deal any of their young perimeter players, and that's what they'd have to do if they wanted a respectable player in the post along with Chandler.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> Butler will be an expiring contract NEXT year, looking for a lucrative extension.


No he won't, he'll take a qualifying offer because he won't be getting offers much higher than his qualifying year will pay. Playing another year will increase his value, similar to what Stromile Swift is doing this year. 



> A team won't be able to win with him as their 1st or 2nd option, so lets not overestimate Butler's value right now.


Who said he needed to be a 1st or 2nd option? 



> Chandler would look nice on the Laker's roster, but I doubt Chicago is willing to deal him. Curry would be easier to trade for as he is useless when he isn't scoring. You have to look at how tough the West is going to be and make a gamble. The Lakers will never be able to get out of the 2nd round without a post presence. Phoenix has Amare. Houston has Yao. San Antonio has Duncan. Sacramento has Webber. Dallas has the depth to make up for whatever offensive firepower they lack in the paint.


Curry isn't the answer as low post scorer. The Lakers need a real PF, not Curry and his 2 cent heart and brain. 



> Odom can shake and bake in the paint in the little bit but isn't a high % option in the post like you would want your big man to be.


The Lakers are looking at acquiring a PF who can score inside, defend, and rebound. Not Curry.


----------



## daniel80111 (Dec 29, 2004)

How bout we get a 7 foot 1 power forward, thats probably one of the best rebounders in the league, and can block shots and play very aggressive defense. I think his name is Tyson Chandler, do what you have to do to get him, butler, odom, I don't care, that guy brings nastiness that every team needs in the paint night in and night out. Just find a way to get him. 7 foot 1...biggest pf in the league and incredibly athletic!!!


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

I don't like Curry's game nor his demeanor on the court at all. He has no "presence" in the middle like a big should, but since there's such a shortage of centers who can walk and chew gum at the same time he thinks he deserves to be maxed out and will wind up signing with the first team desperate enough to offer it to him; and make no mistake about, someone out there will pay him what he wants. Forget him. I mean I'm not mad at him since he wants to be paid, but he hasn't shown squat to prove he is or ever will be worth all that money.


----------



## Spriggan (Mar 23, 2004)

Why would the Bulls even consider adding another swingman (much less two) when they've already got a plethora of them?


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

I wish we would have moved quicker when Dalembert was on the block. He'd fix alot of the problems we're having right now.


----------



## SPIN DOCTOR (Oct 31, 2002)

Guys its supply and demand. 

Not only could you not get Eddy Curry for Caron Butler, but there is nobody on the team (not named Kobe), thats really going to get Paxons attention today. Curry has played real well this year, and the owner has declared his intention of matching any offer to keep him.

The Bulls would much rather have Deng at the 3 than Caron. Better upside, better size, better skills, better knees, better 5 year cheap rookie contract, just all-around better! 

I really doubt Tysons going anywhere either, according to Forbes they are either no 1 or 2 in team profitability today. Reinsdorf wants continuity, they could be a force in the near future.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SPIN DOCTOR</b>!
> Guys its supply and demand.
> 
> Not only could you not get Eddy Curry for Caron Butler, but there is nobody on the team (not named Kobe), thats really going to get Paxons attention today. Curry has played real well this year, and the owner has declared his intention of matching any offer to keep him.
> ...


It's true. The Bulls really are not a very good trading partner for LA because they're already set at our deepest position. Besides our glut of SFs, we have nothing to offer. Kobe isn't going anywhere. Neither is Odom. The Bulls don't need Mihm or Butler so I can't see any deals between the two teams.


----------



## Locke (Jun 16, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Pinball</b>!
> 
> 
> It's true. The Bulls really are not a very good trading partner for LA because they're already set at our deepest position. Besides our glut of SFs, we have nothing to offer. Kobe isn't going anywhere. Neither is Odom. The Bulls don't need Mihm or Butler so I can't see any deals between the two teams.


When you think about it though, there aren't that many teams out there that are in dire need of a small forward. Most teams have at least one that's as good if not better than the 5 we have. But there are plenty of teams (especially in the east) that lack good centers and power fowards.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> No he won't, he'll take a qualifying offer because he won't be getting offers much higher than his qualifying year will pay. Playing another year will increase his value, similar to what Stromile Swift is doing this year.


You do realize his qualifying offer is $3.3 million... Swift is a terrible example because his qualifying offer was $6 million, which is higher than what any team with a full MLE can offer him. There is absolutely no way Butler will take the Lakers qualifying offer.



> Curry isn't the answer as low post scorer. The Lakers need a real PF, not Curry and his 2 cent heart and brain.


I'm not a fan of Curry either, but he is a great option to have in the post. Having a legit post option not only opens up Kobe's game but also allows the Lakers to adopt a "dump it to the big man" and expect a 50% chance of scoring. Remember, Curry is the 3rd best offensive center in the paint (in terms of creating for himself), with plenty of potential still at age 22. The only problem with Curry right now is that he's useless if he isn't scoring. He needs to keep running the floor and scrapping for loose balls if he can't rebound, and get his hands up if nothing else on defense.



> The Lakers are looking at acquiring a PF who can score inside, defend, and rebound. Not Curry.


The only guy I can think of is Chris Wilcox. The Clippers will probably lose Simmons, and Butler would fill an empty roster spot. But I don't see Odom playing well alongside another PF who is capable of scoring.



> Originally posted by <b>Spriggan</b>!
> Why would the Bulls even consider adding another swingman (much less two) when they've already got a plethora of them?


Devean George makes it work salary cap wise, but he also brings much valued playoff experience to the team (which could go a long ways in the East). The Bulls desperately need some guards like Butler and George who are capable of guarding 2's and playing at SG for a while. That backcourt of Hinrich, Duhon and Gordon just doesn't cut it defensively.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> 
> 
> You do realize his qualifying offer is $3.3 million... Swift is a terrible example because his qualifying offer was $6 million, which is higher than what any team with a full MLE can offer him. There is absolutely no way Butler will take the Lakers qualifying offer.


Not sure what your point is here. Stro could have walked from Memphis and gotten paid more than $6M per on a horrible team that had cap space last summer. 



> I'm not a fan of Curry either, but he is a great option to have in the post. Having a legit post option not only opens up Kobe's game but also allows the Lakers to adopt a "dump it to the big man" and expect a 50% chance of scoring. Remember, Curry is the 3rd best offensive center in the paint (in terms of creating for himself), with plenty of potential still at age 22.


Really? He doesn't get to the line a lot and only scores 15.5 ppg on 53.5% FG. He also doesn't know how to pass out of a double team, and has a horrible A/TO ratio, 0.7 assists for every 2.89 TOpg. He'd need to be a 20 ppg scorer to be worth the Lakers most valuable trading piece, outside of Odom. 



> The only problem with Curry right now is that he's useless if he isn't scoring. He needs to keep running the floor and scrapping for loose balls if he can't rebound, and get his hands up if nothing else on defense.


He'd be worth it if he excelled at those things like Chandler does. Also, it doesn't help that Curry can't play more than 30 mpg. 



> The only guy I can think of is Chris Wilcox. The Clippers will probably lose Simmons, and Butler would fill an empty roster spot. But I don't see Odom playing well alongside another PF who is capable of scoring.


Odom would play the 3 and would be doing most of his damage on the perimeter via penetration and dish and, on certain set plays, in the low block. IF the right coach is in place, of course. Odom doesn't have to be a shooter to fit well with a Wilcox-type PF, especially if he is given more dribbling responsibilities next season. I view Odom as a facilitator more than anything else. He'd play the Pippen role, so to speak, to Kobe's "Jordan".

Though, come to think of it Wilcox really isn't a good mid-range shooter, that would definitely be a problem, you're right.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> Not sure what your point is here. Stro could have walked from Memphis and gotten paid more than $6M per on a horrible team that had cap space last summer.


Actually, the reason Stro resigned with Memphis was because he was not getting any decent offers, and his value at the time was definitely worth more than a MLE contract. Butler, on the other hand, would rather leave LA with a 6 year, $42 million MLE contract than get paid $3.3 million for the season.

I'll tell you what, if Butler does pick up that qualifying offer than I will personally send you a check for $50. However, if he doesn't, then I'll expect some small compensation... how about $10?



> Really? He doesn't get to the line a lot and only scores 15.5 ppg on 53.5% FG. He also doesn't know how to pass out of a double team, and has a horrible A/TO ratio, 0.7 assists for every 2.89 TOpg. He'd need to be a 20 ppg scorer to be worth the Lakers most valuable trading piece, outside of Odom.


Like I said, he's only 22. And you are overrating Butler, if you think the Lakers would hesitate to deal him for Curry.



> Odom would play the 3 and would be doing most of his damage on the perimeter via penetration and dish and, on certain set plays, in the low block. IF the right coach is in place, of course. Odom doesn't have to be a shooter to fit well with a Wilcox-type PF, especially if he is given more dribbling responsibilities next season. I view Odom as a facilitator more than anything else. He'd play the Pippen role, so to speak, to Kobe's "Jordan".
> 
> Though, come to think of it Wilcox really isn't a good mid-range shooter, that would definitely be a problem, you're right.


Exactly. Which is why you would want a PF capable of cleaning up the boards and finishing sweet dishes from Odom... not necessarily one who plays with his back to the basket.


----------



## SausageKingofChicago (Feb 14, 2005)

> Originally posted by <b>SPIN DOCTOR</b>!
> Guys its supply and demand.
> 
> Not only could you not get Eddy Curry for Caron Butler, but there is nobody on the team (not named Kobe), thats really going to get Paxons attention today. Curry has played real well this year, and the owner has declared his intention of matching any offer to keep him.
> ...


You guys should watch Curry before passing comment on him 

And the Bulls are a force right now

No 6 seed in the East right now and after going 0-9 to start the season against Western conference teams we are subsequently something like 13 and 3 against

Curry's D has really firmed up. He understands the rotational aspects of being a force at the back - granted rebounding still needs work but the boy is starting to develop some "tude

At 22 he is already one of the top half a dozen genuine Centers playing the game and is a league leader in FG%

In 3 years he and Chandler will be pretty hard to overcome 

Caron is a nice player but no thanks . If Mitch could pull this off and I bet he would not hesitate in an instant


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually, the reason Stro resigned with Memphis was because he was not getting any decent offers, and his value at the time was definitely worth more than a MLE contract.


I highly doubt it. Stro was getting better offers, it's probably just that those offers weren't what he was looking for and weren't worth much more than what he's now getting paid after taking his QO from Memphis. He needs this season to up his value. Remember, he wants something like $70M. He very likely wasn't getting offered that last summer, and decided that he'll try and prove he's worth that much this season. 



> Butler, on the other hand, would rather leave LA with a 6 year, $42 million MLE contract than get paid $3.3 million for the season.


Someone is going to offer Butler $7M a year for 6 years? I kind of doubt it. 



> I'll tell you what, if Butler does pick up that qualifying offer than I will personally send you a check for $50. However, if he doesn't, then I'll expect some small compensation... how about $10?


OK, but I won't remember, you'll have to PM me. 



> Like I said, he's only 22. And you are overrating Butler, if you think the Lakers would hesitate to deal him for Curry.


I disagree, I think the Lakers know Curry isn't that good. Being 22 really doesn't take anything away from the fact that his stats and stamina aren't that impressive and that he may just be playing for a contract this year given his history of poor work ethic and motivation. Mihm has been quite the opposite and is locked in far more cheaply and longer than Curry. You forget that if the Lakers take on Curry that they'll have to pay him an obscene amount of money to keep him, and Buss doesn't like paying underachieving losers unless he has to.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

> Originally posted by <b>Spriggan</b>!
> Why would the Bulls even consider adding another swingman (much less two) when they've already got a plethora of them?


Exactly. This trade does little for the Bulls.


----------



## Wilt_The_Stilt (Jun 7, 2002)

I like Curry, but what would our lineup be after this trade?

Curry
Mihm
Odom
Kobe
Atkins

Too many guys in the paint.

Curry plays low post, Mihm can occasionally hit a mid-range jumper, but he mostly hangs around the hoop. Odom at sf would be working more out of the post, Kobe does a lot in the post. I don't know how good our spacing would be with that lineup. 

I still wish we had done Mihm and Rush for Curry back when the Bulls were struggling.


----------



## Pinball (Aug 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wilt_The_Stilt</b>!
> I like Curry, but what would our lineup be after this trade?
> 
> Curry
> ...


That's a really weak team defensively and on the glass. I want a guy that will push Mihm to the bench. I think he's much better suited as a backup at both the 4 and 5. Believe it or not, if we actually get a decent C that can block shots and board, I'd start Grant at PF and move Odom to SF. Grant is old and washed up but he'll provide toughness and rebounding for 25-30 mins per game. Mihm can spell him.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> I highly doubt it. Stro was getting better offers, it's probably just that those offers weren't what he was looking for and weren't worth much more than what he's now getting paid after taking his QO from Memphis. He needs this season to up his value. Remember, he wants something like $70M. He very likely wasn't getting offered that last summer, and decided that he'll try and prove he's worth that much this season.


Again, Stro is worth MORE than the MLE. Butler is NOT. Which is why he won't pick up that option. He'll pine for an extension or sign that 6 year, $40 million contract with someone.



> Someone is going to offer Butler $7M a year for 6 years? I kind of doubt it.


If Quentin Richardson and Brian Cardinal can get similar contracts, I don't see why not.



> You forget that if the Lakers take on Curry that they'll have to pay him an obscene amount of money to keep him, and Buss doesn't like paying underachieving losers unless he has to.


You've got to take some risks. It's better than giving Butler the ridiculous extension he'll get if he stays with the Lakers. Sure the Lakers will take a hit next year paying Curry, Odom, Bryant and Grant. But in the 2006-07 season, Grant will be an expiring contract and so will Mihm for that matter. And LA generates enough revenues as it is, they aren't going to be worried about paying $10 million in luxury tax if they have a shot at making the finals. Let's not forget the NBA will be renegotiating the CBA this offseason, so luxury tax may not even be an issue in the future.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> 
> 
> Again, Stro is worth MORE than the MLE. Butler is NOT. Which is why he won't pick up that option.


What? You just said someone will offer Butler a $7M per year deal. The MLE is roughly $5M per year. 

Plus that still doesn't answer why Stro took the QO. Unless you really think he didn't get better offers than what he's getting paid right now. 



> If Quentin Richardson and Brian Cardinal can get similar contracts, I don't see why not.


Cardinal is an odd case, not the norm. And Butler isn't as good as Richardson, or is just barely worse. 



> You've got to take some risks. It's better than giving Butler the ridiculous extension he'll get if he stays with the Lakers. Sure the Lakers will take a hit next year paying Curry, Odom, Bryant and Grant. But in the 2006-07 season, Grant will be an expiring contract and so will Mihm for that matter. And LA generates enough revenues as it is, they aren't going to be worried about paying $10 million in luxury tax if they have a shot at making the finals.


No team with Eddy Curry playing major minutes has a shot at the Finals. He'd be a great backup center, not a MAX-level starter. 

If the Lakers are going to take risks, it's better to do it for the right skill sets. Curry has proven for four seasons that he's not that good of a defender, shot blocker or rebounder, in a center-depleted league no less. Lakers can live without some inside scoring, they will be barbequed alive without shot blocking and rebounding in the front court. That goes for any team with title aspirations.



> Let's not forget the NBA will be renegotiating the CBA this offseason, so luxury tax may not even be an issue in the future.


I don't see your point, there's no indication the luxury tax will be abolished in the next CBA.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> What? You just said someone will offer Butler a $7M per year deal. The MLE is roughly $5M per year.


The initial year is worth $5 million, and each year after that can increase by 10%. If he signs a max MLE contract over 6 years, it will average out to about $6.5 million a year. $7 million was a bit of a fabrication on my part.



> Plus that still doesn't answer why Stro took the QO. Unless you really think he didn't get better offers than what he's getting paid right now.


Yes, if you look at what players like Adonal Foyle, Derek Fisher and Brian Cardinal got this summer, you would agree too.



> No team with Eddy Curry playing major minutes has a shot at the Finals. He'd be a great backup center, not a MAX-level starter.
> 
> If the Lakers are going to take risks, it's better to do it for the right skill sets. Curry has proven for four seasons that he's not that good of a defender, shot blocker or rebounder, in a center-depleted league no less. Lakers can live without some inside scoring, they will be barbequed alive without shot blocking and rebounding in the front court. That goes for any team with title aspirations.


I don't think Curry is going to get the max. He'll probably get a little less than what Denver gave Martin, mainly because his game is so one-dimensional right now. But the guy is young and strong, he may never be a defensive stud but he can definitely improve on the boards.



> I don't see your point, there's no indication the luxury tax will be abolished in the next CBA.


I don't have a link, but there was an article by Dan Rosenbaum suggesting it was possible that luxury tax could be abolished in the future.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> 
> 
> The initial year is worth $5 million, and each year after that can increase by 10%. If he signs a max MLE contract over 6 years, it will average out to about $6.5 million a year. $7 million was a bit of a fabrication on my part.


Really, 10% increase? OK then, you're right. I guess I was thinking based on past CBA rules. In that case, that might push Butler to sign a MAX MLE. 



> Yes, if you look at what players like Adonal Foyle, Derek Fisher and Brian Cardinal got this summer, you would agree too.


Foyle is averaging 16 and 11 and can stretch the defense, also clogs the lane pretty well. He may be worth his contract. Janitor is too injury prone, big mistake by West. Fisher, well, what can I say, you're right about that. Then again, last summer was one of the worst overpaying of FAs I've ever seen, so maybe it was a fluke? That's what I'm guessing. 



> I don't think Curry is going to get the max. He'll probably get a little less than what Denver gave Martin, mainly because his game is so one-dimensional right now. But the guy is young and strong, he may never be a defensive stud but he can definitely improve on the boards.


If he improves on the boards to near 10 or so consistently and is able to play 35 mpg instead of 29 (assuming that increases his scoring proportionally), he'd be a lot more valuable. As is, taking a risk on his potential based mostly on his progress in his contract year this season, is simply much too risky in my book. 



> I don't have a link, but there was an article by Dan Rosenbaum suggesting it was possible that luxury tax could be abolished in the future.


Interesting. I, for one, hope not.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> Foyle is averaging 16 and 11 and can stretch the defense, also clogs the lane pretty well. He may be worth his contract.


That's Troy Murphy you're talking about. Adonal Foyle is averaging 3.6 and 4.4. Even Curry can "clog" the lane with his big body.



> Then again, last summer was one of the worst overpaying of FAs I've ever seen, so maybe it was a fluke? That's what I'm guessing.


Or maybe Chris Mullin is an idiot. Whatever the case, no matter where the market gravitates to next season with the new CBA agreement, Butler will get offers.



> If he improves on the boards to near 10 or so consistently and is able to play 35 mpg instead of 29 (assuming that increases his scoring proportionally), he'd be a lot more valuable. As is, taking a risk on his potential based mostly on his progress in his contract year this season, is simply much too risky in my
> book.


You won't be saying this 2 years from now when Kobe is playing like a man posessed but LA can't get out of the 2nd round.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> 
> 
> That's Troy Murphy you're talking about. Adonal Foyle is averaging 3.6 and 4.4. Even Curry can "clog" the lane with his big body.


Damn, I always get those two confused. 



> Or maybe Chris Mullin is an idiot. Whatever the case, no matter where the market gravitates to next season with the new CBA agreement, Butler will get offers.


Mullin is pretty bad, that certainly has something to do with it. Not sure if Butler will get too many offers, SF is the most loaded position in the NBA. 



> You won't be saying this 2 years from now when Kobe is playing like a man posessed but LA can't get out of the 2nd round.


That's assuming the Lakers do nothing about the roster the next two years, which I severely doubt. Curry as is, doesn't solve a damn thing for the Lakers. His minimal impact as an inside scorer is hardly enough. The Lakers' problems have nothing to do with the offense, even though Laker fans have *****ed about the offense a lot this season.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> That's assuming the Lakers do nothing about the roster the next two years, which I severely doubt. Curry as is, doesn't solve a damn thing for the Lakers. His minimal impact as an inside scorer is hardly enough. The Lakers' problems have nothing to do with the offense, even though Laker fans have *****ed about the offense a lot this season.


Minimal impact? Now you're just being anti-Curry. Laker fans, of all people, should know what having a post presence does for a team.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> 
> 
> Minimal impact? Now you're just being anti-Curry. Laker fans, of all people, should know what having a post presence does for a team.


Please, comparing Curry to Shaq is the ultimate insult. One of those players gets consistent double and triple teams, opening up the floor for jump shooters. One of them is a very good passer for his position and gets his teammates involved beautifully with all the attention he receives, which enables him to hit back cutters. One of them is far more physically intimidating. And of course, one of them scores a ton more PPG on a much higher FG%. Shaq and Curry are no where near comparable. 

And you still ignore the fact that if a team must choose, that they will choose elite defense/rebounding ability over elite inside scoring ability any day of the week. And again, there are a lot of PFs out there that can score on the inside.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>EHL</b>!
> And you still ignore the fact that if a team must choose, that they will choose elite defense/rebounding ability over elite inside scoring ability any day of the week. And again, there are a lot of PFs out there that can score on the inside.


I'm not ignoring this, but where will this defense and rebounding ability come from? By crossing your fingers and hoping for Dalembert to sign with you for the MLE? Or finding a gem with a mid to late first rounder?


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mr. Roger's Cardigan</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm not ignoring this, but where will this defense and rebounding ability come from? By crossing your fingers and hoping for Dalembert to sign with you for the MLE? Or finding a gem with a mid to late first rounder?


Through trade, like most teams. Just because it's hard to find a PF like that doesn't mean they should settle for Curry _now_. If the Lakers can't find a real PF by the summer of 06, then sure, go to plan B.


----------



## SPIN DOCTOR (Oct 31, 2002)

EHL

How many games have you seen Curry play THIS season? Sorry to ask, but your take on his attitude and performance seems to be a couple of years old. Almost ghost-like, and definately not the player I've watched all year.

Or have you just have made up your mind that he truly blows, and has not / will not improved? Seems a little closed-minded, because most GM's would not share your view, especially given his floor play this year. I am not a huge fan of his, but he has played FAR better than you give him credit for. He played Brad Miller to a standstill last night, which has been pretty typical of his effort this year.


----------



## The_Franchise (Mar 30, 2003)

Well the overrated Caron Butler is going to the Wizards for Kwame Brown. I'd rather have Eddy Curry.

Both players (Brown, Butler) don't have a particular interest in the game, but atleast the Lakers are building up on potential like we expected them to. I thought the Lakers would have been fine making this trade if they had drafted Granger or Graham, giving them some stifling perimeter defense. Not sure how putting Odom at the 3 will work out for them, and with a very questionable interior we'll see how well they can develop young stars.

Imagine this starting lineup, though:

Antonio Daniels (FA)
Bryant
Granger
Odom / Turiaf
Curry

As opposed to an inexperienced Brown, Bynum and Mihm in the post.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Mr. Roger's Cardigan said:


> Well the overrated Caron Butler is going to the Wizards for Kwame Brown. I'd rather have Eddy Curry.
> 
> Both players (Brown, Butler) don't have a particular interest in the game, but atleast the Lakers are building up on potential like we expected them to. I thought the Lakers would have been fine making this trade if they had drafted Granger or Graham, giving them some stifling perimeter defense. Not sure how putting Odom at the 3 will work out for them, and with a very questionable interior we'll see how well they can develop young stars.
> 
> ...


Yuck, I'd rather start Daniels/Kobe/Odom/Kwame/Mihm than that crap. Odom and Curry at the 4/5 is far softer than Kwame and Mihm. Granger is overrated, and may have injury issues (pulled out of SPL due to old knee injury).


----------

