Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[Red8911]

I’m at a point where I’m sick of hearing, talking and reading about Joshua Giddey. It’s been a whole month, just sign a damn contract already!

[League Circles]

I think defense is important. I think effort is a HUGE part of defense, and a lot of his defensive flaws have been magnified by him having to guard much smaller players. He looked better on defense, he was having a streak where he was getting 2 blocks and 2 steals a game for a minute. Ther's space on team's for defensive specialist's right? I see the hustle Giddey exhibits and I'm more comfortable with him being a constant, consistent irritant to whoever he's guarding than Pat Williams, who's considered a way better defender. The reverse is true too, there are a ton of outstanding athletes who are bad defenders. JR Smith. Ja Morant. I'd say Caruso is probably below average athleticism for NBA point guards. Great lateral quickness, lacks height, length, verticality. Average at best. He's not super long, huge hands, no outstanding physicals.

I mean let's be real. Outside Matas, who are the good two way starters on this team? We getting rid of everybody?

Effort is indeed a huge part of defense. But this is the critical point that tons of people overlook : everyone puts in huge effort IN THE PLAYOFFS. So in the playoffs, the good defenders are all great athletes. Giddey can certainly be a passable, maybe even average to slightly above average regular season defender at the forward position because of his consistent effort.

Giddey might be a more constant "irritant" than Patrick, but Patrick makes scoring WAY WAY harder for the guy he's guarding than Josh does. Come on man, there's a reason he guards Giannis and forces him into tough shots.

Caruso is a pretty great athlete. Also, like Josh, Luka, etc not a "point guard" lol (we're talking defense!) Caruso has outstanding strength and also very good hops combined with strong lateral quickness.

Defense in no particular order is:

Frame
Strength
Quickness
Instincts
Effort

Great defenders have all of those usually. Good ones have most, etc. Josh puts in good effort and has probably has above average instincts defensively IMO, but as a forward which is what he's always been and always will be defensively, his frame is below average to maybe average, strength is poor (though IMO he can and will improve on this), and quickness is possibly worst in the league for a 3.

Yes Matas projects IMO as a good two starter. IMO Coby is an adequate playoff defender at the 1 spot. Not good, probably no better than average in the future, but I think Bulls fans criticize his defense way too much. We're looking for a two-way C (Smith has a slight chance). And at the 2/3 to pair with Giddey, our main prospects right now are Okoro and Essengue. We would have hoped that Patrick or Ayo could be another two way guy like we hope Matas is and like Lonzo flashed, but most of us aren't very high on them anymore.

But yeah, of course we'll be getting rid of most of this team by the time we contend again, even if that's in 2 years way quicker than we think.

Oh yeah Jones is a two way guy now.

We shouldn't get rid of Giddey, we just shouldn't overpay him or proceed as if he's a lock to be the guy running our offense long term. If it doesn't work well, we'll of course have to look to trade or bench him in a couple years, which is a hell of a lot easier if he's paid less.

[WindyCityBorn]

Why would anyone think the same about Luka?

Luka and Giddey fall under the same player archetype IMO so they have similarities, but Luka is close to a 99th percentile outcome. I'm not sure what you consider successful here, but building around Luka doesn't have the same drawbacks.

We aren’t building around Giddey. We’re building with him. He’s great fit for the type offense we are looking to build. He looks like a 3rd or 4th option on offense. Which is fine because it looks he will actually be paid like that.

His realistic ceiling is probably around 20/8/8 instead 32/8/8 like Luka. That’s still a really good player as long he is efficient.

[Infinity2152]

Why would anyone think the same about Luka?

Luka and Giddey fall under the same player archetype IMO so they have similarities, but Luka is close to a 99th percentile outcome. I'm not sure what you consider successful here, but building around Luka doesn't have the same drawbacks.

We aren’t building around Giddey. We’re building with him. He’s great fit for the type offense we are looking to build. He looks like a 3rd or 4th option on offense. Which is fine because it looks he will actually be paid like that.

His realistic ceiling is probably around 20/8/8 instead 32/8/8 like Luka. That’s still a really good player as long he is efficient.

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Looking at our team, there are so many ways the defense should be better. Trade of Lavine. Vucevic may be gone. Added Okoro. Added Noa. Matas will get more minutes. Williams and Ayo are both good defenders and due for comebacks. Philips and Terry should get minutes.

We have to run something that looks like a team now. We have a lot of young guys. Think they could have and be a lot of fun this year. Okoro's only 24. Shot 37% from three last year, 39% the year before. Noa is good enough to start by mid season, like they gave minutes to Matas, and/or Pat Williams has a resurgence, Bulls could be running a very cheap, respectable lineup of Giddey, Okoro, Williams/Noa, Matas, Collins/Smith with Coby playing super sub scorer with Tre Jones and either Williams or Noa plus either Collins or Smith.

Not going to win titles, but should run well, defend pretty well, and the young guys can exhibit their skills. Having Giddey should make the game easier for Matas and Noa. Even Williams, who spots up in the corner.

[ShouldaPaidBG]

Coby is closer to being Luka than Giddey is.

I rest my case.

[Dez]

Coby is closer to being Luka than Giddey is.

I rest my case.

What?

[dougthonus]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

[sco]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I get your point, but you could add most 4's and 5's and get there, as well as, decent defending 2's. But the point remains that having your primary ball handler not be a great scorer or above average defender limits your team from a roster building perspective.

The whole 3rd best player thing is a little trickier to discuss because it is likely that none of our top 3 guys would be a top 3 guy on a contending team.

On the $20M vs. $30M thing, my issue is that we are following a path to team building that isn't often successful (i.e. trying to build around a core of above-average but not great players) because you end up using up your cap space on middling talent and don't have the room to add the real centerpiece player(s) or you need to sell your assets cheap to create that space. Moreover, when I think about most of the contracts where guys are making $30M, most of us would say those were overpays. At least if we sign him for $20M, if he regresses, we won't feel quite as bad...and as I noted before, regressing from a 29 game streak is much more likely than if he was great for a whole season.

[MGB8]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

Evan Mobley. Wemby. JJJ. Ant. Siakam. Anthony Davis. Suggs (assuming health and sustained or improving play on both ends and shooting returns to prior form). Bane. Jalen Williams. Chet Holmgren.

Basically any elite player who can coexist with another ball dominant player (who isn't or doesn't have to be a primary distributor to maximize). Pretty much need to be a 2-way player.

[sco]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

Evan Mobley. Wemby. JJJ. Ant. Siakam. Anthony Davis. Suggs (assuming health and sustained or improving play on both ends and shooting returns to prior form). Bane. Jalen Williams. Chet Holmgren.

Basically any elite player who can coexist with another ball dominant player (who isn't or doesn't have to be a primary distributor to maximize). Pretty much need to be a 2-way player.

Well said! But that 2-way part makes it tougher. If we could add AD and Derrick White for example to this roster, that team could be elite.

[Infinity2152]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

Maybe 70-80% of star forwards and centers? Most are not primary playmakers or on ball most of the game. Any guys who catch alley oops or rim runs or cuts a lot need a guy like Giddey. Guys who use screens a lot for catch and shoots. See a lot of names already mentioned, guys like KD, Kawhi Leonard, Klay Thompson, Khris Middleton (prime), Zion, JJJ, Gobert, Porzingas, even Tatum plays off ball most game.

Coby needs the ball, Matas and Noa should be effective off ball if we're looking at our current team.

If I could pick guys in the league now in their prime? Probably Klay Thompson and Kevin Durant. Or Thompson/Embid, Durant/Embid. Or either variation with a healthy Anthony Davis, as people mentioned. Or Wemby.

Klay is a great shooter who was a very good defender and loves coming off screens. Perfect better SG type to pair with Giddey. Or a defensive Rip Hamilton type.

[DuckIII]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I think one of them is going to be Buzelis. If he fulfills his archetype then you have two guys who fit excellently together and then you see what's available to get the third guy. But your challenge is really easy to satisfy. Its not hard to make a contender out of Josh Giddey plus any two star players in the NBA who aren't primary ballhandlers and distributors. I mean, you can just go team by team. I can go through nearly every contending team in the NBA - or probably every contending team - and swap out Giddey for a player making in the neighborhood of $25 million or more and that team would still be a contender.

A maxed out, absolutely best they could be, contender? No. But a contender nonetheless.

The whole idea that a player as good as Giddey, with his play style, warts and all, at $25 million per year (SGA and Book are just signed for 300% of that) is some sort of inherent contention-killer is just nonsensical to me. He'll be making 3rd-4th best player money. There was a time early in his tenure with Chicago when this was a tenable argument. To some extent I even shared the view and started a thread about it. But that time is ancient history. Arguments like this feel like a refusal to let go of an old view by disregarding or minimizing to irrelevance the most recent evidence and the reasons for that change.

[League Circles]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I mean anyone who is a better overall player primarily due to their pure shooting ability and/or defense. Whoever today's Ray Allen and Dikembe Mutumbo are.

[Infinity2152]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I think one of them is going to be Buzelis. If he fulfills his archetype then you have two guys who fit excellently together and then you see what's available to get the third guy. But your hypothetical is obviously really easy to satsify. Its not hard to make a contender out of Josh Giddey plus any two star players in the NBA who aren't primary ballhandlers and distributors. I mean, you can just go team by team. I can go through nearly every contending team in the NBA - or probably literally every contending team - and swap out Giddey for a player making in the neighborhood of $25 million or more and that team would still be a contender.

A maxed out, absolutely best they could be, contender? No. But a contender nonetheless.

The whole idea that a player as good as Giddey, with his play style, warts and all, at $25 million per year (SGA and Book are just signed for 300% of that) is some sort of inherent contention-killer is just nonsensical to me. He'll be making 3rd-4th best player money. There was a time early in his tenure with Chicago when this was a tenable argument. To some extent I even shared the view and started a thread about it. But that time is ancient history. Arguments like this feel like a refusal to let go of an old view by disregarding or minimizing to irrelevance the most recent evidence and the reasons for that change.

You mentioned a great point. If you can go thru almost every contending team and swap Giddey with a $25 mill or more player on that team and they're still contending, the argument a team can't contend with Giddey at $25-$30 mill really falls flat.

[dougthonus]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

Evan Mobley. Wemby. JJJ. Ant. Siakam. Anthony Davis. Suggs (assuming health and sustained or improving play on both ends and shooting returns to prior form). Bane. Jalen Williams. Chet Holmgren.

Basically any elite player who can coexist with another ball dominant player (who isn't or doesn't have to be a primary distributor to maximize). Pretty much need to be a 2-way player.

Not sure Ant works super well with Giddey at all. Ant seems like a pretty ball dominant player.

But let's say we have:
Wemby and Ant, an incredibly duo really, the best on that list possible.

Would you rather have Giddey or Coby White as your 3rd guy as an example?

Wemby probably is the prefect guy to play with someone like Giddey (though probably he's pretty perfect to play with anyone, but Giddey as a great passer would really help someone like Wemby a lot that could just lob dunk all over everyone with an elite vision guy at the helm).

[sco]

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I think one of them is going to be Buzelis. If he fulfills his archetype then you have two guys who fit excellently together and then you see what's available to get the third guy. But your hypothetical is obviously really easy to satsify. Its not hard to make a contender out of Josh Giddey plus any two star players in the NBA who aren't primary ballhandlers and distributors. I mean, you can just go team by team. I can go through nearly every contending team in the NBA - or probably literally every contending team - and swap out Giddey for a player making in the neighborhood of $25 million or more and that team would still be a contender.

A maxed out, absolutely best they could be, contender? No. But a contender nonetheless.

The whole idea that a player as good as Giddey, with his play style, warts and all, at $25 million per year (SGA and Book are just signed for 300% of that) is some sort of inherent contention-killer is just nonsensical to me. He'll be making 3rd-4th best player money. There was a time early in his tenure with Chicago when this was a tenable argument. To some extent I even shared the view and started a thread about it. But that time is ancient history. Arguments like this feel like a refusal to let go of an old view by disregarding or minimizing to irrelevance the most recent evidence and the reasons for that change.

You mentioned a great point. If you can go thru almost every contending team and swap Giddey with a $25 mill or more player on that team and they're still contending, the argument a team can't contend with Giddey at $25-$30 mill really falls flat.

That all presupposes that what we saw from Josh during a 1/3 of a season stretch (against probably lesser competition) is his go-forward level of play. IMO, that is a 50/50 proposition. Color me skeptical until I see it next season. Look, I'm not saying it was like playing against summer-league competition, but it sure wasn't playoff level competition for the most part.

[dougthonus]

I think one of them is going to be Buzelis. If he fulfills his archetype then you have two guys who fit excellently together and then you see what's available to get the third guy. But your challenge is really easy to satisfy. Its not hard to make a contender out of Josh Giddey plus any two star players in the NBA who aren't primary ballhandlers and distributors. I mean, you can just go team by team. I can go through nearly every contending team in the NBA - or probably every contending team - and swap out Giddey for a player making in the neighborhood of $25 million or more and that team would still be a contender.

A maxed out, absolutely best they could be, contender? No. But a contender nonetheless.

The whole idea that a player as good as Giddey, with his play style, warts and all, at $25 million per year (SGA and Book are just signed for 300% of that) is some sort of inherent contention-killer is just nonsensical to me. He'll be making 3rd-4th best player money. There was a time early in his tenure with Chicago when this was a tenable argument. To some extent I even shared the view and started a thread about it. But that time is ancient history. Arguments like this feel like a refusal to let go of an old view by disregarding or minimizing to irrelevance the most recent evidence and the reasons for that change.

FWIW, a lot of the replies to my post have extended it way beyond what I've said.

I didn't comment on Giddey killing you or anything. Just that if you try to position guys it is interesting. I agree generally speaking that one of your players is a Forward or Center superstar that you don't want playing on the perimeter, but I'm not sure where the other guy is. From a practical sense, I agree the Bulls have to really hope Matas / Noa are really big hits. I'm not sure either are star guys, but it's not crazy to see it with Matas, Noa just has no evidence yet one way or the other really.

At 25M, I think you could live with the less than perfect fit, and in our particular state, I don't think it matters, we aren't going to magically get two guys better than Giddey within the length of Giddey's contract anyway, and if we do, we can rejoice then solve whatever problem exists then.

[League Circles]

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I think one of them is going to be Buzelis. If he fulfills his archetype then you have two guys who fit excellently together and then you see what's available to get the third guy. But your hypothetical is obviously really easy to satsify. Its not hard to make a contender out of Josh Giddey plus any two star players in the NBA who aren't primary ballhandlers and distributors. I mean, you can just go team by team. I can go through nearly every contending team in the NBA - or probably literally every contending team - and swap out Giddey for a player making in the neighborhood of $25 million or more and that team would still be a contender.

A maxed out, absolutely best they could be, contender? No. But a contender nonetheless.

The whole idea that a player as good as Giddey, with his play style, warts and all, at $25 million per year (SGA and Book are just signed for 300% of that) is some sort of inherent contention-killer is just nonsensical to me. He'll be making 3rd-4th best player money. There was a time early in his tenure with Chicago when this was a tenable argument. To some extent I even shared the view and started a thread about it. But that time is ancient history. Arguments like this feel like a refusal to let go of an old view by disregarding or minimizing to irrelevance the most recent evidence and the reasons for that change.

You mentioned a great point. If you can go thru almost every contending team and swap Giddey with a $25 mill or more player on that team and they're still contending, the argument a team can't contend with Giddey at $25-$30 mill really falls flat.

Well we should remember that the best and maybe second best players on most true contending teams may be of a caliber that we can't reasonably expect to get. It's not just that Giddey needs to be like the third or 4th best player (and thus theoretically paid as such) on the team, it's that you also then need a couple other guys that are nearly as good as him. I think you need at least 5 guys roughly his caliber on a team in order for them to have a strong chance to win big, and they must complement each other almost perfectly.

[dougthonus]

This right here. Let's say $25 mill is third, fourth best player money. If we have two players legitimately better than Giddey, and he's able to fit with them and remain primary ballhandler, I'd see that as a pretty strong 3 piece. Two $40-$60 mill players, legit 1 and 2 money? Lots of stars don't need to be on-ball or run an offense. Giddey looks to be a star level facilitator.

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I mean anyone who is a better overall player primarily due to their pure shooting ability and/or defense. Whoever today's Ray Allen and Dikembe Mutumbo are.

So you think prime Ray Allen, Motumbo, and Giddey playing at last year's level are a competing level big 3? That feels awfully far away to me still.

Maybe the next Steph Curry (arch type) and a star big would be the mold though which is what you're getting at, but you'd need to find better versions than Allen/Motumbo.

[League Circles]

Say you could recruit any two players in the NBA, what two players better than Giddey would you bring in that fit with Giddey and allow him to remain the primary ball handler and fit together where Giddey is highly valuable in that #3 role?

Maybe more importantly, how many players in the league would even qualify as a possibility?

I mean anyone who is a better overall player primarily due to their pure shooting ability and/or defense. Whoever today's Ray Allen and Dikembe Mutumbo are.

So you think prime Ray Allen, Motumbo, and Giddey playing at last year's level are a competing level big 3? That feels awfully far away to me still.

Maybe the next Steph Curry (arch type) and a star big would be the mold though which is what you're getting at, but you'd need to find better versions than Allen/Motumbo.

I mean prime mutombo made the NBA finals as the best or second best player on the team. Admittedly, from a week East. Ray Allen was better than Alan Iverson in my book. . Ray Allen was better than Alan Iverson in my book.

But to answer you're question about a "big 3", it all depends on who the 4th and 5th guys are, and to a significantly lesser extent who the bench guys are. My philosophy for many years now has been that unless a superstar falls into your lap, which you shouldn't plan for or rely on IMO, the best way to try to build a contending team is to build the best 5 man unit. This hypothetical big 3 only defines 60% of that.

If I had a Ray Allen, a Mutumbo and a Giddey, Matas and a bit better defending Coby White would be great 4th and 5th guys though (though I expect Matas will be better than Giddey, and Coby may be also).