Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[Ctownbulls]

If he deserved more and was that wanted wouldn't the Bulls have other teams trying to pry him away. To me, there is a big risk of not taking the $20M to $25M and waiting until next summer. There may not be a real market for him.

[dougthonus]

Not saying Giddey doesn't deserve more (I think he does), but just because they overpaid for PWill, doesn't mean that in other future negotiations they should keep making that mistake and paying every player who's better than PWill more money than him. Just seems like a logical fallacy.

Patrick Williams is also not any type of remote comparable for Giddey. If Patrick Williams has gone on the path they hoped, he'd be an elite role player as a good three point shooter and versatile defender, that could also attack the basket a bit. He didn't really end up doing those things, but the skills he was good at in theory are the "overpay" skills that fits into every team.

It's also one of the reasons why he isn't hopeless. If he can just get back into shape and do things he's already shown he could do in the past, then he is a viable role player that fits into any team in the league. Every team needs as many versatile shooting / wing defenders as they can get.

You know what almost no team needs? A ball dominant passer that can't defend or shoot or create their own shot against pressure. If Patrick Williams did what you would have hoped he'd do, he'd be desired by every team in the league. If Giddey becomes whatever you think he could be, probably 80% of the teams in the league still wouldn't be interested due to fit.

It's the classic problem of Giddey is a much better player than Patrick Williams, but he has much less useful strengths. Similar to Vuc, he's not good enough at the things he's good at to fit into very many different teams, but the counting stats make you think he is a top player. The problem is more about roles. They both play roles where you need to be elite because they lack complementary role player skills next to a different elite players, but neither of them are elite.

Doesn't make the guys worthless, but it depresses their value a lot relative to what the raw numbers look like, which is already apparent in the Bulls negotiations with Giddey.

[jnrjr79]

Not saying Giddey doesn't deserve more (I think he does), but just because they overpaid for PWill, doesn't mean that in other future negotiations they should keep making that mistake and paying every player who's better than PWill more money than him. Just seems like a logical fallacy.

Exactly. This is 1 of the 2 most annoying arguments re: the Giddey situation that pop up over and over on this board. “You made this huge mistake, now it must be the baseline for all your future contracts.” This is not a good argument!

The 2nd most annoying argument is that something has to happen “soon,” when neither party has any incentive to do that and the delay is virtually meaningless. There’s no real pressure here until the deadline to make the decision on the QO happens.

[Stratmaster]

Not saying Giddey doesn't deserve more (I think he does), but just because they overpaid for PWill, doesn't mean that in other future negotiations they should keep making that mistake and paying every player who's better than PWill more money than him. Just seems like a logical fallacy.

Patrick Williams is also not any type of remote comparable for Giddey. If Patrick Williams has gone on the path they hoped, he'd be an elite role player as a good three point shooter and versatile defender, that could also attack the basket a bit. He didn't really end up doing those things, but the skills he was good at in theory are the "overpay" skills that fits into every team.

It's also one of the reasons why he isn't hopeless. If he can just get back into shape and do things he's already shown he could do in the past, then he is a viable role player that fits into any team in the league. Every team needs as many versatile shooting / wing defenders as they can get.

You know what almost no team needs? A ball dominant passer that can't defend or shoot or create their own shot against pressure. If Patrick Williams did what you would have hoped he'd do, he'd be desired by every team in the league. If Giddey becomes whatever you think he could be, probably 80% of the teams in the league still wouldn't be interested due to fit.

It's the classic problem of Giddey is a much better player than Patrick Williams, but he has much less useful strengths. Similar to Vuc, he's not good enough at the things he's good at to fit into very many different teams, but the counting stats make you think he is a top player. The problem is more about roles. They both play roles where you need to be elite because they lack complementary role player skills next to a different elite players, but neither of them are elite.

Doesn't make the guys worthless, but it depresses their value a lot relative to what the raw numbers look like, which is already apparent in the Bulls negotiations with Giddey.

Respectfully, you simply have a lack of respect for Giddey's game. If you see " A ball dominant passer that can't defend or shoot or create their own shot against pressure" then of course you would have a low target number for his salary.

That is by no means the player I saw last season. He has above average size for his role. He has above average handles and quckness for his size. He shot well and shot great after the break. He showed an ability to get to the rim of the dribble. He is an elite rebounder for his position. He led the team in STOCK rate for the season. He led it by a HUGE margin after the all star break. I believe he was close to a 4.0 rate but that number is from memory and may be off in either direction. So while he isn't stopping any elite scorers at the point of attack (and shouldn't be expected to with his size) he can be disruptive defensively.

You simply don't see Giddey as having as high a floor or ceiling as many do, and that is fair. My "defense" of him isn't because I think he is going to be all-nba. But in a vacuum he is certainly worth 25m-30m a season. Obviously there are other factors that make the Bulls think they can get away with playing hardball. Sadly, AKME just can't get the whole contract negotiations thing right.

[dougthonus]

Respectfully, you simply have a lack of respect for Giddey's game. If you see " A ball dominant passer that can't defend or shoot or create their own shot against pressure" then of course you would have a low target number for his salary.

It has been true of him over his four year career. Granted, he's young, he may improve on these things. He showed improvement at the end of the season, I just don't buy it for a lot of reasons (looking at his shooting form, quality of opponents, tanking teams, etc..)

That is by no means the player I saw last season. He has above average size for his role. He has above average handles and quckness for his size. He shot well and shot great after the break. He showed an ability to get to the rim of the dribble. He is an elite rebounder for his position. He led the team in STOCK rate for the season. He led it by a HUGE margin after the all star break. I believe he was close to a 4.0 rate but that number is from memory and may be off in either direction. So while he isn't stopping any elite scorers at the point of attack (and shouldn't be expected to with his size) he can be disruptive defensively.

You simply don't see Giddey as having as high a floor or ceiling as many do, and that is fair. My "defense" of him isn't because I think he is going to be all-nba. But in a vacuum he is certainly worth 25m-30m a season. Obviously there are other factors that make the Bulls think they can get away with playing hardball. Sadly, AKME just can't get the whole contract negotiations thing right.

Most of these good things you have seen are things that existed in a super brief period of time that you previously described as beating up on sister mary's of the poor in a different post, but I agree that if that level of play was sustainable he'd be a bit better. I just don't trust him to do those things over a season. Nor do I trust the largely counting stats analysis of him, as I describe, if you look at the counting stats you will think he's much better.

Put him on a team with a star player, and all the counting stats drop, and all the weaknesses are amplified, which is the problem. Patrick Williams just sucks balls, but if he did the things AKME thought he would do, he would be useful everywhere.

[Stratmaster]

Respectfully, you simply have a lack of respect for Giddey's game. If you see " A ball dominant passer that can't defend or shoot or create their own shot against pressure" then of course you would have a low target number for his salary.

It has been true of him over his four year career. Granted, he's young, he may improve on these things. He showed improvement at the end of the season, I just don't buy it for a lot of reasons (looking at his shooting form, quality of opponents, tanking teams, etc..)

That is by no means the player I saw last season. He has above average size for his role. He has above average handles and quckness for his size. He shot well and shot great after the break. He showed an ability to get to the rim of the dribble. He is an elite rebounder for his position. He led the team in STOCK rate for the season. He led it by a HUGE margin after the all star break. I believe he was close to a 4.0 rate but that number is from memory and may be off in either direction. So while he isn't stopping any elite scorers at the point of attack (and shouldn't be expected to with his size) he can be disruptive defensively.

You simply don't see Giddey as having as high a floor or ceiling as many do, and that is fair. My "defense" of him isn't because I think he is going to be all-nba. But in a vacuum he is certainly worth 25m-30m a season. Obviously there are other factors that make the Bulls think they can get away with playing hardball. Sadly, AKME just can't get the whole contract negotiations thing right.

Most of these good things you have seen are things that existed in a super brief period of time that you previously described as beating up on sister mary's of the poor in a different post, but I agree that if that level of play was sustainable he'd be a bit better. I just don't trust him to do those things over a season. Nor do I trust the largely counting stats analysis of him, as I describe, if you look at the counting stats you will think he's much better.

Put him on a team with a star player, and all the counting stats drop, and all the weaknesses are amplified, which is the problem. Patrick Williams just sucks balls, but if he did the things AKME thought he would do, he would be useful everywhere.

Why would the counting stats drop on a team with a star player? Usage? You don't think Coby White has a usage rate equal to most star players? You don't think Matas is getting shots? Would a star player mean less rebounds, blocked shots or steals? You think being on a team with an elite interior star or elite shooter would LIMIT his assists?

If it was a team with an elite scoring player running the point... sure. Which is why he was handcuffed before coming to the Bulls. If Bill Russell played beside or behind Wilt Chamberlain his counting stats would have gone down too.

But I am not predicting stardom for him. Just saying I see his floor and ceiling justifying 25-30 mil a season.

[jnrjr79]

Respectfully, you simply have a lack of respect for Giddey's game. If you see " A ball dominant passer that can't defend or shoot or create their own shot against pressure" then of course you would have a low target number for his salary.

It has been true of him over his four year career. Granted, he's young, he may improve on these things. He showed improvement at the end of the season, I just don't buy it for a lot of reasons (looking at his shooting form, quality of opponents, tanking teams, etc..)

That is by no means the player I saw last season. He has above average size for his role. He has above average handles and quckness for his size. He shot well and shot great after the break. He showed an ability to get to the rim of the dribble. He is an elite rebounder for his position. He led the team in STOCK rate for the season. He led it by a HUGE margin after the all star break. I believe he was close to a 4.0 rate but that number is from memory and may be off in either direction. So while he isn't stopping any elite scorers at the point of attack (and shouldn't be expected to with his size) he can be disruptive defensively.

You simply don't see Giddey as having as high a floor or ceiling as many do, and that is fair. My "defense" of him isn't because I think he is going to be all-nba. But in a vacuum he is certainly worth 25m-30m a season. Obviously there are other factors that make the Bulls think they can get away with playing hardball. Sadly, AKME just can't get the whole contract negotiations thing right.

Most of these good things you have seen are things that existed in a super brief period of time that you previously described as beating up on sister mary's of the poor in a different post, but I agree that if that level of play was sustainable he'd be a bit better. I just don't trust him to do those things over a season. Nor do I trust the largely counting stats analysis of him, as I describe, if you look at the counting stats you will think he's much better.

Put him on a team with a star player, and all the counting stats drop, and all the weaknesses are amplified, which is the problem. Patrick Williams just sucks balls, but if he did the things AKME thought he would do, he would be useful everywhere.

I take your broader points on Giddey, but I think you’re a little over the top with the whole “can’t shoot” narrative. his 3P% has gone from 26 to 32 to 34 to 38% in consecutive seasons. He does seem to be on an upward trajectory there, and if sustained, it would have a pretty material impact on his value to an NBA roster when combined with his elite passing and rebounding attributes. If he sustains competent shooting and plays adequate defense (which was also improving as the season progressed last year), then he becomes a valuable NBA player. Will he do those things? Beats me! But you seem to have a bit too much of a “he is what he is” view of it, in my book, when it comes to a guy who is only 22.

All that uncertainty makes his value hard to peg, IMO.

[Infinity2152]

Respectfully, you simply have a lack of respect for Giddey's game. If you see " A ball dominant passer that can't defend or shoot or create their own shot against pressure" then of course you would have a low target number for his salary.

It has been true of him over his four year career. Granted, he's young, he may improve on these things. He showed improvement at the end of the season, I just don't buy it for a lot of reasons (looking at his shooting form, quality of opponents, tanking teams, etc..)

That is by no means the player I saw last season. He has above average size for his role. He has above average handles and quckness for his size. He shot well and shot great after the break. He showed an ability to get to the rim of the dribble. He is an elite rebounder for his position. He led the team in STOCK rate for the season. He led it by a HUGE margin after the all star break. I believe he was close to a 4.0 rate but that number is from memory and may be off in either direction. So while he isn't stopping any elite scorers at the point of attack (and shouldn't be expected to with his size) he can be disruptive defensively.

You simply don't see Giddey as having as high a floor or ceiling as many do, and that is fair. My "defense" of him isn't because I think he is going to be all-nba. But in a vacuum he is certainly worth 25m-30m a season. Obviously there are other factors that make the Bulls think they can get away with playing hardball. Sadly, AKME just can't get the whole contract negotiations thing right.

Most of these good things you have seen are things that existed in a super brief period of time that you previously described as beating up on sister mary's of the poor in a different post, but I agree that if that level of play was sustainable he'd be a bit better. I just don't trust him to do those things over a season. Nor do I trust the largely counting stats analysis of him, as I describe, if you look at the counting stats you will think he's much better.

Put him on a team with a star player, and all the counting stats drop, and all the weaknesses are amplified, which is the problem. Patrick Williams just sucks balls, but if he did the things AKME thought he would do, he would be useful everywhere.

So like he said, you have little to no respect for his game, don't buy that he will improve on these things by your own words, and don't trust his numbers, meaning there's little that would change that position. The player you're describing is not a player any team should want to start. That's fine, it just adds context to where you value Giddey. If I though he was as bad as you present, I'd want him traded, not signed here for any reason lmao! Can understand why you think the Bulls should maintain an extreme hard line if you don't think Giddey's very good.

Not a shot at you, Giddey's actual value should maybe be the main discussion, even before how much he gets paid.

A lot of us value Giddey SO differently, and that's cool. Probably more than any other Bull by a long shot. We all argue about how we think he should get paid, but we're really not even talking about paying the same guy. One guy thinks we're paying a non shooting, non defending, inefficient guy vs the other seeing super young All Star, top distributer, #1 or 2nd scorer, great rebounder, offensive engine, there's going to be a wide gap there.

[dougthonus]

Why would the counting stats drop on a team with a star player? Usage? You don't think Coby White has a usage rate equal to most star players? You don't think Matas is getting shots? Would a star player mean less rebounds, blocked shots or steals? You think being on a team with an elite interior star or elite shooter would LIMIT his assists?

If it was a team with an elite scoring player running the point... sure. Which is why he was handcuffed before coming to the Bulls. If Bill Russell played beside or behind Wilt Chamberlain his counting stats would have gone down too.

But I am not predicting stardom for him. Just saying I see his floor and ceiling justifying 25-30 mil a season.

Maybe just talking past each other, I've also said 25M is my cap, so maybe a bit away from you, but it's not much.

It's well covered ground, but I think he's very poor defensively despite the STOCKs number and is frequently targeted. On offense, once a star player has the ball, he's a guy every team will leave wide open, and put additional pressure on everyone else, and I don't trust him to punish a team for doing that. That's the gist of the argument about him being a bad fit with a lot of teams (whether you buy it or not).

At 25M none of that is a real huge problem though, so again, I don't think we're way off base. Prior to the ASB, I would have said he's an MLE player, so I have increased my view of him based on his end of season play, even though I'm suspicious of it holding.

[Infinity2152]

Why would the counting stats drop on a team with a star player? Usage? You don't think Coby White has a usage rate equal to most star players? You don't think Matas is getting shots? Would a star player mean less rebounds, blocked shots or steals? You think being on a team with an elite interior star or elite shooter would LIMIT his assists?

If it was a team with an elite scoring player running the point... sure. Which is why he was handcuffed before coming to the Bulls. If Bill Russell played beside or behind Wilt Chamberlain his counting stats would have gone down too.

But I am not predicting stardom for him. Just saying I see his floor and ceiling justifying 25-30 mil a season.

Maybe just talking past each other, I've also said 25M is my cap, so maybe a bit away from you, but it's not much.

It's well covered ground, but I think he's very poor defensively despite the STOCKs number and is frequently targeted. On offense, once a star player has the ball, he's a guy every team will leave wide open, and put additional pressure on everyone else, and I don't trust him to punish a team for doing that. That's the gist of the argument about him being a bad fit with a lot of teams (whether you buy it or not).

At 25M none of that is a real huge problem though, so again, I don't think we're way off base. Prior to the ASB, I would have said he's an MLE player, so I have increased my view of him based on his end of season play, even though I'm suspicious of it holding.

Do you want Josh Giddey as the Bulls starting point guard next year? If not, who do you want as our starting PG and how should we get them? Genuine question. Are there better, lower cost, lower risks alternatives you're looking at? Would think they should fit our age window, which eliminates most top PG's.

[jnrjr79]

Why would the counting stats drop on a team with a star player? Usage? You don't think Coby White has a usage rate equal to most star players? You don't think Matas is getting shots? Would a star player mean less rebounds, blocked shots or steals? You think being on a team with an elite interior star or elite shooter would LIMIT his assists?

If it was a team with an elite scoring player running the point... sure. Which is why he was handcuffed before coming to the Bulls. If Bill Russell played beside or behind Wilt Chamberlain his counting stats would have gone down too.

But I am not predicting stardom for him. Just saying I see his floor and ceiling justifying 25-30 mil a season.

Maybe just talking past each other, I've also said 25M is my cap, so maybe a bit away from you, but it's not much.

It's well covered ground, but I think he's very poor defensively despite the STOCKs number and is frequently targeted. On offense, once a star player has the ball, he's a guy every team will leave wide open, and put additional pressure on everyone else, and I don't trust him to punish a team for doing that. That's the gist of the argument about him being a bad fit with a lot of teams (whether you buy it or not). If the Bulls wanted to let Tre Jones run the show at PG next year, that’s totally fine.

Re: Giddey, the question is what you want in the long-term, not next season.

At 25M none of that is a real huge problem though, so again, I don't think we're way off base. Prior to the ASB, I would have said he's an MLE player, so I have increased my view of him based on his end of season play, even though I'm suspicious of it holding.

Do you want Josh Giddey as the Bulls starting point guard next year? If not, who do you want as our starting PG and how should we get them? Genuine question.

I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook.

[Stratmaster]

Maybe just talking past each other, I've also said 25M is my cap, so maybe a bit away from you, but it's not much.

It's well covered ground, but I think he's very poor defensively despite the STOCKs number and is frequently targeted. On offense, once a star player has the ball, he's a guy every team will leave wide open, and put additional pressure on everyone else, and I don't trust him to punish a team for doing that. That's the gist of the argument about him being a bad fit with a lot of teams (whether you buy it or not). If the Bulls wanted to let Tre Jones run the show at PG next year, that’s totally fine.

Re: Giddey, the question is what you want in the long-term, not next season.

At 25M none of that is a real huge problem though, so again, I don't think we're way off base. Prior to the ASB, I would have said he's an MLE player, so I have increased my view of him based on his end of season play, even though I'm suspicious of it holding.

Do you want Josh Giddey as the Bulls starting point guard next year? If not, who do you want as our starting PG and how should we get them? Genuine question.

I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook.

You are purposely avoiding the point of his question.

Do you want Giddey as the starting PG 3 years from now?

If your answer is you aren't sure, how are you going to find out?

[Infinity2152]

Maybe just talking past each other, I've also said 25M is my cap, so maybe a bit away from you, but it's not much.

It's well covered ground, but I think he's very poor defensively despite the STOCKs number and is frequently targeted. On offense, once a star player has the ball, he's a guy every team will leave wide open, and put additional pressure on everyone else, and I don't trust him to punish a team for doing that. That's the gist of the argument about him being a bad fit with a lot of teams (whether you buy it or not). If the Bulls wanted to let Tre Jones run the show at PG next year, that’s totally fine.

Re: Giddey, the question is what you want in the long-term, not next season.

At 25M none of that is a real huge problem though, so again, I don't think we're way off base. Prior to the ASB, I would have said he's an MLE player, so I have increased my view of him based on his end of season play, even though I'm suspicious of it holding.

Do you want Josh Giddey as the Bulls starting point guard next year? If not, who do you want as our starting PG and how should we get them? Genuine question.

I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook.

I was asking Doug a genuine question. Wasn't really about it being relevant, wanted to know if he wants Giddey as the starting point guard. You can not care about how the Bulls record is and still have an opinion on whether you want a player on your team. For instance, many don't care about our record and still want Vucevic gone for various reasons. If he thinks Giddey is a bad or detrimental player that he doesn't want on the team, how would that not be relevant in a discussion about his value? You can not care about the record and still care about the roster.

Maybe Doug has specific guys he's targeting or would like to run PG. Does it hurt to ask? Maybe he views Giddey as a great placeholder until we get better. Again, don't know without asking. Maybe he views him like Russell westbrook and doesn't want him regardless of talent, that would be reasonable.

This is the Josh Giddy thread. I think whether people want Giddey here in the first place is pretty relevant. Would ask you who you want to start at PG, but clearly you don't care. Some people do.

From your answer, sounds like you don't want Giddey here. Losing him for nothing or little right now undoubtedly helps that "perfect opportunity to tank." Of course, all tanking does is give us a slightly higher chance of getting a top 5 pick, not an actual extra pick, and that pick outside the top 5 has a very high chance of being worse than Giddey.

[jnrjr79]

Do you want Josh Giddey as the Bulls starting point guard next year? If not, who do you want as our starting PG and how should we get them? Genuine question.

I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook.

You are purposely avoiding the point of his question.

Do you want Giddey as the starting PG 3 years from now?

This is a weird way to frame your response, because you’re agreeing with me. “Do you want Giddey to be the starting PG 3 years from now” is a relevant question. Next year? Who cares?

The answer is yes, but only up to a certain dollar value, at which point the answer becomes no. I’m also open to a S&T option if there is actually legitimate interest from other teams, but I’m skeptical there is.

If your answer is you aren't sure, how are you going to find out?

See above. I would not sign Josh Giddey to any number under the sun simply to “find out” if he might become a good fit as the long-term PG.

In any event, at any number it appears the Bulls would indulge, I’ll be happy to see him re-signed. I am glad, though, they seem to have learned from their mistake with Pat and aren’t simply giving him what he wants just because he wants it.

[jnrjr79]

Do you want Josh Giddey as the Bulls starting point guard next year? If not, who do you want as our starting PG and how should we get them? Genuine question.

I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook.

I was asking Doug a genuine question. Wasn't really about it being relevant, wanted to know if he wants Giddey as the starting point guard. You can not care about how the Bulls record is and still have an opinion on whether you want a player on your team. For instance, many don't care about our record and still want Vucevic gone for various reasons. If he thinks Giddey is a bad or detrimental player that he doesn't want on the team, how would that not be relevant in a discussion about his value? You can not care about the record and still care about the roster.

Maybe Doug has specific guys he's targeting or would like to run PG. Does it hurt to ask? Maybe he views Giddey as a great placeholder until we get better. Again, don't know without asking. Maybe he views him like Russell westbrook and doesn't want him regardless of talent, that would be reasonable.

This is the Josh Giddy thread. I think whether people want Giddey here in the first place is pretty relevant. Would ask you who you want to start at PG, but clearly you don't care. Some people do.

From your answer, sounds like you don't want Giddey here. Losing him for nothing or little right now undoubtedly helps that "perfect opportunity to tank." Of course, all tanking does is give us a slightly higher chance of getting a top 5 pick, not an actual extra pick, and that pick outside the top 5 has a very high chance of being worse than Giddey.

I have no idea how you reached this conclusion from the post you quoted or my other posts in this thread. I interpreted your question as meaning “if we don’t have Giddey next year, what are the Bulls going to do at PG,” as if next year matters from a competitive standpoint. But I see in your clarification here that’s not really what you were getting at.

This reminds me of what happens a lot when I’m a mediation. A mediator will often say to me “well, do you want to settle this case today or not?” And my typical response is “I’m not here to settle the case, I’m here to make a good decision.”

I can’t say in the abstract whether I want the Bulls to re-sign Giddey. Under certain terms, yes, I do. At a certain financial threshold, no, I don’t. I can also see the appeal of a S&T + mini-tank, though I highly doubt the Bulls want to do this. I just want the Bulls to make a god decision based on the options available to them.

[dougthonus]

Do you want Josh Giddey as the Bulls starting point guard next year? If not, who do you want as our starting PG and how should we get them? Genuine question. Are there better, lower cost, lower risks alternatives you're looking at? Would think they should fit our age window, which eliminates most top PG's.

If you replace Josh Giddey with Coby, Ayo, or Tre, I feel about the same level of excitement. I don't think Josh is the piece that makes a difference to anything in any meaningful way, and so my view on him on the team or not on the team is having him on the team at a contract I like. The max contract value where I choose on the team for me is 25M.

The rest of the questions aren't really relevant to me because they get into questions that bleed into too many complicated issues around everything else you are doing with the team and the holistic strategy (which I disagree with relative to AKME historically and likely still do today, though it's hard to say what he thinks today as he doesn't spell it out, so I am only inferring what I think his strategy is).

Maybe more broadly speaking to your point, if you ask the question "Do you want player X on your team next year?", the answer is almost always it depends on the contract. The only time it doesn't depend on the contract is when you have a clear max level guy. Any guy who is sub-max level, it depends on the contract. Giddey is obviously sub-max level, so the answer to the question can never be a straight yes/no if you are really thinking about the problem thoroughly.

To take it to extremes as a point of illustration, my guess is:
1: No one would want Giddey on a 5 year max deal.
2: No one would refuse Giddey on a 5 year vet min deal.

Fundamentally, everyone's answer is "it depends", whether you say it that way or not.

[dougthonus]

You are purposely avoiding the point of his question.

Do you want Giddey as the starting PG 3 years from now?

If your answer is you aren't sure, how are you going to find out?

My answer is the odds of this being yes are low enough that the risk of paying him a lot and the answer being no far outweigh the risks of him leaving. Which then gets back to, as long as the contract is at the right point, then it's fine to keep him. For me that point is 25M or less.

[Infinity2152]

I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook.

I was asking Doug a genuine question. Wasn't really about it being relevant, wanted to know if he wants Giddey as the starting point guard. You can not care about how the Bulls record is and still have an opinion on whether you want a player on your team. For instance, many don't care about our record and still want Vucevic gone for various reasons. If he thinks Giddey is a bad or detrimental player that he doesn't want on the team, how would that not be relevant in a discussion about his value? You can not care about the record and still care about the roster.

Maybe Doug has specific guys he's targeting or would like to run PG. Does it hurt to ask? Maybe he views Giddey as a great placeholder until we get better. Again, don't know without asking. Maybe he views him like Russell westbrook and doesn't want him regardless of talent, that would be reasonable.

This is the Josh Giddy thread. I think whether people want Giddey here in the first place is pretty relevant. Would ask you who you want to start at PG, but clearly you don't care. Some people do.

From your answer, sounds like you don't want Giddey here. Losing him for nothing or little right now undoubtedly helps that "perfect opportunity to tank." Of course, all tanking does is give us a slightly higher chance of getting a top 5 pick, not an actual extra pick, and that pick outside the top 5 has a very high chance of being worse than Giddey.

I have no idea how you reached this conclusion from the post you quoted or my other posts in this thread. I interpreted your question as meaning “if we don’t have Giddey next year, what are the Bulls going to do at PG,” as if next year matters from a competitive standpoint. But I see in your clarification here that’s not really what you were getting at.

This reminds me of what happens a lot when I’m a mediation. A mediator will often say to me “well, do you want to settle this case today or not?” And my typical response is “I’m not here to settle the case, I’m here to make a good decision.”

I can’t say in the abstract whether I want the Bulls to re-sign Giddey. Under certain terms, yes, I do. At a certain financial threshold, no, I don’t. I can also see the appeal of a S&T + mini-tank, though I highly doubt the Bulls want to do this. I just want the Bulls to make a god decision based on the options available to them.

"I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook."

This is what you said. Two sentences. First had nothing to do with the topic. Second, the main point was "I don't care about record" and perfect opportunity for tanking."

So from that, I draw the conclusion is tanking what you would like, and is more important than this question, which you called irrelevant. The way you phrased it, bringing up a mini-tank, indicates to me that whether or not Giddey is here has something to do with that tank. As in, "If we lose Giddey, so what, I'd prefer to tank anyway." I may have misunderstood you, but that is how I reached that conclusion, since you have no idea.

We do a lot of talking about players we DON'T want on this squad for various reasons. I look around the league at available PG options, prices, potentials, etc, and I do want Giddey starting here at PG. Everybody has an opinion. The games are played by players. Guys keep focusing on statistics like these aren't real players, ALL with flaws. There are guys I wouldn't want on the Bulls for reasons that have nothing to do with their overall talent. Isaiah Stewart, etc. Guys I'd overpay a little for their intangibles like Jimmy Butler and Jrue Holiday. People will point out individual advanced statistics, those guys are dogs, and their teams win. Don't see why liking or wanting individual players rather than a theoretically perfect fit at a position is a problem.

I notice when I ask for alternatives, crickets. Some future draft prospect. We'll find a guy later.

[Stratmaster]

I won’t speak for Doug here, but IMO the answer to this is “this question is irrelevant.” I do not care how the Bulls fare in terms of wins and losses next year, and with it being a strong draft, this would be the perfect opportunity for a one-year mini-tank while letting Matas cook.

You are purposely avoiding the point of his question.

Do you want Giddey as the starting PG 3 years from now?

This is a weird way to frame your response, because you’re agreeing with me. “Do you want Giddey to be the starting PG 3 years from now” is a relevant question. Next year? Who cares?

The answer is yes, but only up to a certain dollar value, at which point the answer becomes no. I’m also open to a S&T option if there is actually legitimate interest from other teams, but I’m skeptical there is.

If your answer is you aren't sure, how are you going to find out?

See above. I would not sign Josh Giddey to any number under the sun simply to “find out” if he might become a good fit as the long-term PG.

In any event, at any number it appears the Bulls would indulge, I’ll be happy to see him re-signed. I am glad, though, they seem to have learned from their mistake with Pat and aren’t simply giving him what he wants just because he wants it.

So....what is your number? My max is 30mil and my expectation is 25mil. And what way did I frame my response that was weird? lol

[Ice Man]

I feel as if Giddey is being penalized because the Bulls overpaid Pat, so now they are leaning in the other direction. Perhaps I am wrong ... but I'm quite wiling to bet that is how Josh & his agent feel, so I can understand if they are digging their heels in.