Q: Loved the Jimmy Butler years, but now I am ready to move on. Erik Spoelstra and his staff are great at developing players. Would love to see Spo and his guys get to work with a young, long, athletic team. Move Jimmy, get some picks. Bam Adebayo, Tyler Herro, Jaime Jaquez Jr., Nikola Jovic, more young studs, a few solid veterans. – Mark.

A: I’ve received several missives of this ilk since Pat Riley offered his postseason comments last week and issued his challenges to Jimmy Butler. So the question in response from here is simple: Would Heat fans, for all of these such suggestions, be OK with the potential step back resulting from a move toward developing youth and eschewing a star system? This Heat core without Jimmy Butler well could continue to contend for a No. 8 seed, as has been the result of the past two regular seasons, but would be far less likely to be considered a contender. So, would, say, 41-41 and a team that pushes to maximize the roster on a nightly basis be enough to appease in the short term? In other words, would trading for heart and hustle be an acceptable short-term compromise?

Ira gets the best questions and asks the best questions. These questions are directed to the fans. I particularly appreciate that as we fans have been disrespected during the Jimmy years.  

This fan has already posted a few times his agreement with Ira's statement that the team without Jimmy would still contend for the playoffs. Hell, the team with Jimmy has finished eighth and had to win two play-in games to get in the playoffs the last two years! So my answer is “Yes.” Trading Jimmy would liberate this roster. It's tethered to Jimmy. All revolves around Jimmy. It would settle the team from the chaos of 34 (or was it 35?) different starting lineups; from demoralizing, day-to-day minutes uncertainty in the players. And trading Jimmy for picks would free up ginormous salary cap room to land another "whale". For a “short-term” regress from 45-37 every damn year to 41-41? Yes, and hell yes.