Bulls Q&A: Will the Bulls trade Jimmy Butler? Should the Bulls trade Jimmy Butler?

The Tribune's K.C. Johnson answers your Bulls questions — so many Jimmy Butler questions, so little time.

Everyone knows the Celtics have the No. 1 pick in this year's draft. Us Bulls fans also know that the Celtics have shown interest in Jimmy Butler. Is Butler worth the No. 1 pick? For the Celtics? For the Bulls? — Jake, Sugar Grove, Ill.


Nobody I've talked to expect the Celtics to trade the No. 1 pick. Beyond the fact they reportedly love Markelle Fultz, using the No. 1 pick builds them for the future. Don't forget: They have the right to swap first-round picks with the Nets again next year. Why not keep drafting for the future, for when the LeBron James reign ends. (It will end sometime, right?) The talks between the teams centered on Butler were serious last June. In February, not so much. In fact, it's very noteworthy to me that whenever this year's Nets pick came into conversation leading up to the February trade deadline, the Celtics wouldn't engage on it without protections. So it stands to reason that now that they have the No. 1 pick, they're keeping it.

Everyone seems to be focused on the Lakers and Celtics for a potential Jimmy Butler trade. But what about Philadelphia or Phoenix? Both have the assets and the high pick that could be palatable to GarPax. The time seems to be now or never for a trade so what do you think the chances are that the Bulls pull the trigger? — Nate, Denver

I think a Butler trade this summer is unlikely. I think you focusing on other teams as possibilities is the correct take, though. If one does happen, it likely will come with a team other than the Celtics and with a top-five pick. Maybe the Kings are in this list too. The problem remains, I don't see enough on any roster to interest the Bulls in cutting ties with a three-time All-Star.

Don't the Bulls have a responsibility to not only evaluate this team going into 2017, but to evaluate it two years down the line when Jimmy Butler can opt out? At that time, Butler could qualify for a super max deal. As such, shouldn't they already be in the process of deciding if they're willing to pay it? And, if not, isn't the smart thing to trade him while his value is highest? — Adawale, Chicago

This question is spot on and I've written about this several times. Butler very well could be eligible for a designated player exception, which would be north of $200 million at a time he's nearing 30 with a lot of mileage on his body. That's not to say Butler can't continue to play at an All-Star level for years. It is to say it has to be a factor the Bulls consider when they decide Butler's future. If you choose to keep and build with Butler, you better have player development from within and a plan to surround him with enough talent for when the reign of James ends (it will end sometime, right?).

Obviously this summer will revolve around what the Bulls do with Butler. So my question is, what would be the effect that a Butler trade would have on the front office? Would that prolong the tenure of GarPax since they'd have a new challenge in having to rebuild the organization? — Omar, Chicago

This is the fourth of four questions and answers on Butler's future, all of them good (well, at least the questions). This wouldn't be why management would trade Butler if they go that route, which, again, I don't see happening. But, yes, there would be some truth to that on the surface. When the Tribune back in February reported that Paxson and Forman would be retained regardless of whether the Bulls make the playoffs, ownership's confidence in the pair's roster-building ability was cited as one reason. Ownership viewed last season as the first season in the post-Derrick Rose era. Obviously, trading Butler on top of Rose would add another rebuilding wrinkle.

Is a teardown/rebuild completely out of the question? If so, why and who do we blame? — Joe C., Oak Lawn

This made me laugh. Blame Corey Benjamin? Bryce Drew? Just kidding. But if the Bulls don't choose to rebuild completely, the disastrous post-dynasty era would be a big reason why. The Reinsdorfs lived it and didn't like it.

How do you think the Bulls will handle the power forward position going forward? Draft one and develop, invest in Nikola Mirotic and live with the inconsistency, look for a free agent or put your cards on Portis taking another step? How does letting Taj Gibson go midseason play into this? — Rene, Austria

The Bulls hoping Portis develops is the surest of these scenarios. Management has publicly said it hopes to retain Mirotic. So there's a very good chance they run back the power forward rotation from last season. If Mirotic leaves via restricted free agency, they'd have money to spend on a replacement. As for Gibson, the Bulls quietly held extension talks with him before trading him. When it became clear he'd test free agency and likely be too rich for the Bulls' blood, they traded him. That freed up more minutes for Portis in the process. Whether any of that is a good thing is in the eye of the beholder.

Since I don't see Dwyane Wade opting out, I believe Chicago hangs onto Butler and brings back Rajon Rondo. In that scenario, is there any room left to sign a difference maker that plays next to Lopez? Or should I just hope T.J. Leaf falls to them at 16? — Jason, Millsboro, DE

It depends on restricted free agency. If the Bulls bring the 3 Alphas back and re-sign both Mirotic and Felicio in restricted free agency, you're talking minimum salary cap space left to merely fill in around the edges. If Mirotic signs elsewhere, they'd have more money to spend. But it's not like they'd be landing Blake Griffin on Paul Millsap. More maybe someone like Ersan Ilyasova. You tell me if that qualifies as difference maker.

Thanks for your questions.