Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[Infinity2152]

"This is more or less where OKC was at. They had unicorns around Giddey, including at the position he plays. But he wasn't good enough to have the ball relative to the best point guard on Earth, reigning MVP SGA who just had one of the most accomplished single seasons in basketball history. And with future first ballot HOFer SGA taking over Giddey's role on the team, Giddey's weaknesses were magnified."

I'm not sure why you think this same problem doesn't exist next to any other elite perimeter player. They all have the ball in their hands. You saw the same hints of the problem playing next to Zach LaVine.

Lets say the Blazers drafted MJ and then traded Drexler. It would be ridiculous to use that as a negative towards Clyde. It would simply be due to MJ being extremely unusually better at the same position.

I'm not an expert on Clyde Drexler, but I wouldn't expect any reason that Clyde Drexler would make Jordan's life harder if they were on the same team.

There are a ton of star players who play off ball a lot. Even perimeter players, like Klay Thompson, any perimeter player who uses screens a lot and like catch and shoots. Zach doesn't do that. Assuming your top player is a perimeter player anyway. Have to assume Wemby will be off ball a lot, Embid, etc.

By that same token, pretty much every top perimeter scorer who's played with Lebron numbers are lower, Wade, Kyrie, etc. Wade went from 27 to 26 to 22 to 21 to 19. He's a HOF player and it was his team. Now imagine Lebron was on the squad with 18 year old Wade. Only season Kyrie averaged less than 20pts besides his rookie at 19 was his second season with Lebron. Lebron and Luka take the ball out of players hands more than Giddey, no problem with that.

I would suspect Drexler's numbers and effectiveness would look hugely different if they were playing him at PF at 20 because Jordan's at SG, lol. And if he joined the team at 18 with Jordan playing his same position. What did Kobe do his first few years? He's better than Giddey, but Eddie Jones was in front of him. 71 games, 8pts game year 1. 79 games, 15, 3 and 2 year 2. Averaged 33% from 3 on 2 attempts his first 4 years declining almost every year (38, 34, 27, 32), vs Giddey at 33% on 4 attempts improving every year (26, 33, 34, 38).

Usually if there's a great player in a position already, an 18, 19-year-old player comes off the bench. Giddey started out of position.

[Tetlak]

"This is more or less where OKC was at. They had unicorns around Giddey, including at the position he plays. But he wasn't good enough to have the ball relative to the best point guard on Earth, reigning MVP SGA who just had one of the most accomplished single seasons in basketball history. And with future first ballot HOFer SGA taking over Giddey's role on the team, Giddey's weaknesses were magnified."

I'm not sure why you think this same problem doesn't exist next to any other elite perimeter player. They all have the ball in their hands. You saw the same hints of the problem playing next to Zach LaVine.

Lets say the Blazers drafted MJ and then traded Drexler. It would be ridiculous to use that as a negative towards Clyde. It would simply be due to MJ being extremely unusually better at the same position.

I'm not an expert on Clyde Drexler, but I wouldn't expect any reason that Clyde Drexler would make Jordan's life harder if they were on the same team.

There are a ton of star players who play off ball a lot. Even perimeter players, like Klay Thompson, any perimeter player who uses screens a lot and like catch and shoots. Zach doesn't do that. Assuming your top player is a perimeter player anyway. Have to assume Wemby will be off ball a lot, Embid, etc.

By that same token, pretty much every top perimeter scorer who's played with Lebron numbers are lower, Wade, Kyrie, etc. Wade went from 27 to 26 to 22 to 21 to 19. He's a HOF player and it was his team. Now imagine Lebron was on the squad with 18 year old Wade. Only season Kyrie averaged less than 20pts besides his rookie at 19 was his second season with Lebron. Lebron and Luka take the ball out of players hands more than Giddey, no problem with that.

I would suspect Drexler's numbers and effectiveness would look hugely different if they were playing him at PF because Jordan's at SG, lol. And if he joined the team at 18 with Jordan playing his same position. What did Kobe do his first few years? He's better than Giddey, but Eddie Jones was in front of him. 71 games, 8pts game year 1. 79 games, 15, 3 and 2 year 2. Averaged 33% from 3 on 2 attempts his first 4 years declining almost every year (38, 34, 27, 32), vs Giddey at 33% on 4 attempts improving every year (26, 33, 34, 38).

Usually if there's a great player in a position already, an 18, 19-year-old player comes off the bench. Giddey started out of position.

Such as?

[Infinity2152]

I'm not sure why you think this same problem doesn't exist next to any other elite perimeter player. They all have the ball in their hands. You saw the same hints of the problem playing next to Zach LaVine.



I'm not an expert on Clyde Drexler, but I wouldn't expect any reason that Clyde Drexler would make Jordan's life harder if they were on the same team.

There are a ton of star players who play off ball a lot. Even perimeter players, like Klay Thompson, any perimeter player who uses screens a lot and like catch and shoots. Zach doesn't do that. Assuming your top player is a perimeter player anyway. Have to assume Wemby will be off ball a lot, Embid, etc.

By that same token, pretty much every top perimeter scorer who's played with Lebron numbers are lower, Wade, Kyrie, etc. Wade went from 27 to 26 to 22 to 21 to 19. He's a HOF player and it was his team. Now imagine Lebron was on the squad with 18 year old Wade. Only season Kyrie averaged less than 20pts besides his rookie at 19 was his second season with Lebron. Lebron and Luka take the ball out of players hands more than Giddey, no problem with that.

I would suspect Drexler's numbers and effectiveness would look hugely different if they were playing him at PF because Jordan's at SG, lol. And if he joined the team at 18 with Jordan playing his same position. What did Kobe do his first few years? He's better than Giddey, but Eddie Jones was in front of him. 71 games, 8pts game year 1. 79 games, 15, 3 and 2 year 2. Averaged 33% from 3 on 2 attempts his first 4 years declining almost every year (38, 34, 27, 32), vs Giddey at 33% on 4 attempts improving every year (26, 33, 34, 38).

Usually if there's a great player in a position already, an 18, 19-year-old player comes off the bench. Giddey started out of position.

Such as?

Are we talking about players who don't typically bring the ball up and run the offense the majority of the game? Wemby, Embid, Klay Thompson, Anthony Davis, Kevin durant, Porzingas, Kat, Evan Mobley, Jayson Tatum, Zion Williamson, Kawhi Leonard, Paul George, Siakam, Bam Adebayo are a few. Kyrie has played with Lebron and Luka, Luka has played with both, Lebron has played with both. Only one player could be on ball most of the game, all those teams won a lot of games, some champonships.

I mean, literally every player has to get the ball for SOME time to score points, plenty of top high usage guys who are not the primary ballhandlers/playmakers. Can't score without the ball.

[DuckIII]

Take $25 million off Minny’s roster and start Giddey at the 1 with Ant. Ant touches the ball, right?

That team is probably an improvement and certainly no worse. And this exercise can be performed with numerous real and imagined high quality contenders.

With LeBron? With Luka? With Kyrie? With Ja? With Bronson? No, of course not. But plenty of other permutations work.

This is just so weird.

P.S. The reason Giddey didn’t mesh with Zach is because of Zach. If he played the way he should play (off ball, fast paced up and down the court threat), he’d be a virtually ideal 2 guard next to Giddey (offensively).

[dougthonus]

There are a ton of star players who play off ball a lot. Even perimeter players, like Klay Thompson, any perimeter player who uses screens a lot and like catch and shoots. Zach doesn't do that. Assuming your top player is a perimeter player anyway. Have to assume Wemby will be off ball a lot, Embid, etc.

Klay Thompson isn't a superstar. Agree that Giddey's best complement would be a superstar big man.

I would suspect Drexler's numbers and effectiveness would look hugely different if they were playing him at PF at 20 because Jordan's at SG, lol. And if he joined the team at 18 with Jordan playing his same position.

Fundamentally a different argument, I said having Drexler on the team wouldn't draw double teams on to Jordan because they weren't worried about Clyde scoring. Not sure it would have been a big problem to play them both at 2 and 3, but kind of irrelevant.

SGA / Giddey aren't sized in some way you can't play them both on the floor. If you're saying simply that Giddey can't play next to a ball dominant guard that is my point exactly. It's hard to find tier 1 players who will not be ball dominant, but as noted above, best case is probably a PF / C. What made them not work wasn't about positions, it was about SGA having the ball and Giddey not having the ball.

Again, though, not a deal breaker for me, not at this pricetag. Also, there is the chance that Giddey becomes a much better three point shooter with time, and a lot of these concerns go away.

[dougthonus]

Take $25 million off Minny’s roster and start Giddey at the 1 with Ant. Ant touches the ball, right?

I have said at $25M these roster things aren't problems, because the contract accounts for the difficulty in fit. That said, I don't think Giddey would work well on the Timberwolves next to Ant, and they'd immediately be looking for a different 25M player other than Giddey.

I also am not worried about it, because like I said, if we do get such a player like the next SGA or Ant, then we can figure out what to do with Giddey later, and at 25M, it probably won't be hard to move him. Giddey may also do enough to become more of a threat off the ball over time in the future too.

It's incredibly strange to me that people even think it's up for debate that Giddey's inability to be a threat off ball combined with subpar defense isn't a problem. It doesn't mean it's the only thing that matters or that you can't construct a contract that works or that Giddey is now worthless, but it's pretty obviously a challenge that you will have to work around.

With LeBron? With Luka? With Kyrie? With Ja? With Bronson? No, of course not. But plenty of other permutations work.

I don't see any non-big man permutations really working where you aren't getting less than the sum of the parts, but again, that's all about pricing him right.

[nomorezorro]

i think the real problem is that basically every contending team with a star who could theoretically co-exist with giddey has at least one additional player who's better than giddey and who makes the fit way worse, and often there's a role player in the mix who might not be "better" in a vacuum but is adding more value than giddey as a third/fourth option

like, it's not impossible to build a great team where (pre-trade deadline) giddey fits in as a starter, but it's hard, and i am hard-pressed to think of an example of a very good team where he would displace their starting PG without issue. with minnesota, for example - can you win in the playoffs with giddey and gobert on the court at the same time? even if ant can play off-ball (and would probably benefit from not having the responsibility to carry the entire offense on his back the entire time he's in the game), how many possessions do you really want the ball in giddey's hands instead of his? would you be better off if you had a "worse" pg who was more of a shooting threat and/or less of a defensive weak point?

bad off-ball / not a plus scorer / not a shooting threat / exploitable on defense is just not a combination of attributes you usually see in an important player on a great team. (luckily we've got a long way to go to get to "great," so giddey has time to grow his game so that at least one or two of those attributes no longer apply to him! but until he does it, that's always going to be the big question that hangs over his head regarding his long-term value.)

[DuckIII]

That’s just way too rigid a view of roster construction for the game of basketball, Doug. It strikes me as purely data driven like we are talking about baseball or something.

Also, Giddey doesn’t have the “inability” to be a threat off the ball. He shot .378 on 3s last year on 5 attempts per 36 plus cutting off ball and attacking off the pass, rather than off the dribble, are quality areas of his game. It’s hyperbole and based on old data.

[dougthonus]

That’s just way too rigid a view of roster construction for the game of basketball, Doug. It strikes me as purely data driven like we are talking about baseball or something.

I don't think it's all that data driven really at all. I'm not mentioning any numbers. I'm saying generally speaking the ball is in the hands of the players whom can best create offense. If you aren't high in that pecking order you want to focus on off ball skills. I don't think Giddey can be high in that pecking order on a good team, and his off-ball skills are very poor.

Also, Giddey doesn’t have the “inability” to be a threat off the ball. He shot .378 on 3s last year on 5 attempts per 36 plus cutting off ball and attacking off the pass, rather than off the dribble, are quality areas of his game. It’s hyperbole and based on old data.

Certainly reasonable minds can disagree about what type of off-ball player Giddey is. I think he's actually really awful at it. I think there were definitely signs of improvement with his shot, but I don't think they are scalable or sustainable. I hope he proves me wrong. I don't look at it as a 100% confidence thing, but my best guess is that he's not good at this and also that he won't be good playing next to a different star.

Not really a short term problem though, we don't have another star, if Matas does become one then he has a far chance of being the type that would fit in better with Giddey than a lot of others, we don't really have anyone else with star potential right now anyway, and even if we draft the next superstar on ball player next year, by the time they develop into the point it's a problem, Giddey will probably be nearing the end of his deal or may have made improvements by that point.

Feels like Giddey provokes a lot of "all or nothing" type views. As a 20-30M player, you'd expect a guy to have flaws / problems. Giddey's got some real max player level strengths. It's just the weaknesses are in really challenging areas that we're not talking about him as a 40M dollar guy.

[MGB8]

The issue is sustainability of percentages and speeding up his shot (and decisiveness) on off-ball shots. If he can do that, then his fit issue is substantially reduced. Ditto if his defense improves - in particular just not basically giving up - staying with a guy with lateral movement to at least have some contest of a shot (if only positionally) rather than being a matador.

Anyway, the only somewhat similar archetype of a successful player I could find was Deron Williams. Excellent passer. Solid but not exceptional shooter and scorer. Mid defender. His passing powered a very good but not elite Utah team for a good number of years. But that team was loaded with talent around Williams. And it was a different era.

But the best outcome would be that Giddey becomes the point forward version of Deron Williams. That is the upside.

The downside is that he regresses to something more like his season averages from last year, with no improvement on defense nor on his shot (where even if % dipped a bit, if volume and speed went up would offset, a la Coby, otherwise needs to at min equal percentage and volume from last year). If he regresses, then fitting him as a starter with better players becomes kind of hard.

[sco]

The issue is sustainability of percentages and speeding up his shot (and decisiveness) on off-ball shots. If he can do that, then his fit issue is substantially reduced. Ditto if his defense improves - in particular just not basically giving up - staying with a guy with lateral movement to at least have some contest of a shot (if only positionally) rather than being a matador.

Anyway, the only somewhat similar archetype of a successful player I could find was Deron Williams. Excellent passer. Solid but not exceptional shooter and scorer. Mid defender. His passing powered a very good but not elite Utah team for a good number of years. But that team was loaded with talent around Williams. And it was a different era.

But the best outcome would be that Giddey becomes the point forward version of Deron Williams. That is the upside.

The downside is that he regresses to something more like his season averages from last year, with no improvement on defense nor on his shot (where even if % dipped a bit, if volume and speed went up would offset, a la Coby, otherwise needs to at min equal percentage and volume from last year). If he regresses, then fitting him as a starter with better players becomes kind of hard.

IIRC, Deron had a better than mid defensive rep early in his career...which matters.

[ScrantonBulls]

I'm completely on board with playing hardball with Giddey. Force his ass the take the QO if needed. He had a nice little run towards the end of the season but he just has too many question marks. Him being a complete sieve defensively is one of the biggest in my opinion. The guy will be getting hunted on defense.

I don't want the Bulls going above 25m for the first year. 20m would be ideal.

[Red Larrivee]

I'm completely on board with playing hardball with Giddey. Force his ass the take the QO if needed. He had a nice little run towards the end of the season but he just has too many question marks. Him being a complete sieve defensively is one of the biggest in my opinion. The guy will be getting hunted on defense.

I don't want the Bulls going above 25m for the first year. 20m would be ideal.

That would be the worst outcome.

[WesPeace]

I'm completely on board with playing hardball with Giddey. Force his ass the take the QO if needed. He had a nice little run towards the end of the season but he just has too many question marks. Him being a complete sieve defensively is one of the biggest in my opinion. The guy will be getting hunted on defense.

I don't want the Bulls going above 25m for the first year. 20m would be ideal.

Thats just dumb.. he is still too good to play that **** childrens game

[dougthonus]

I'm completely on board with playing hardball with Giddey. Force his ass the take the QO if needed. He had a nice little run towards the end of the season but he just has too many question marks. Him being a complete sieve defensively is one of the biggest in my opinion. The guy will be getting hunted on defense.

I don't want the Bulls going above 25m for the first year. 20m would be ideal.

Thats just dumb.. he is still too good to play that **** childrens game

If by "play that *** childrens game" you mean negotiate, he really isn't too good to pass on negotiating.

The player's whom are too good to negotiate with are max players, you just pay them and move on. Giddey is not such a player, he is absolutely in the tier you should negotiate with. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that they'll also end the negotiation in a reasonable place.

You may not like the aggressive tone he had, but suggesting 25M as "peak" starting first year would give you 28M AAV which is 3M above the peak AAV the Athletic reported any team would offer him.

[Infinity2152]

I'm completely on board with playing hardball with Giddey. Force his ass the take the QO if needed. He had a nice little run towards the end of the season but he just has too many question marks. Him being a complete sieve defensively is one of the biggest in my opinion. The guy will be getting hunted on defense.

I don't want the Bulls going above 25m for the first year. 20m would be ideal.

Thats just dumb.. he is still too good to play that **** childrens game

If by "play that *** childrens game" you mean negotiate, he really isn't too good to pass on negotiating.

The player's whom are too good to negotiate with are max players, you just pay them and move on. Giddey is not such a player, he is absolutely in the tier you should negotiate with. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that they'll also end the negotiation in a reasonable place.

You may not like the aggressive tone he had, but suggesting 25M as "peak" starting first year would give you 28M AAV which is 3M above the peak AAV the Athletic reported any team would offer him.

The Athletic reported that the max that teams who have zero cap space would give him is $25 mill AAV? Which teams said that, exactly? Why would their opinions even matter if they have absolutely no ability to bid on him? The only offer I've seen with a $25 mill salary year one is the flat 5yr/$125 mill. Not one where his contract increases.

Think the starting at 4yrs/$80 mill was the childish game. For some reason, people saying the Bulls should offer him more is the same as people saying they shouldn't negotiate. Haven't seen a single person in here saying they shouldn't negotiate.

Haven't seen anywhere a team wouldn't offer him $28 mill if they could, AND they thought the Bulls wouldn't match. What would be the point of a team offering him $28 mill? The Bulls will match that. Can just see the Jazz clearing cap for an offer, but announcing to reporters and the league ahead of time they plan to offer Giddey $30 mill when they get there, putting the Bulls on a clock. How do they benefit from doing that?

[jnrjr79]

Thats just dumb.. he is still too good to play that **** childrens game

If by "play that *** childrens game" you mean negotiate, he really isn't too good to pass on negotiating.

The player's whom are too good to negotiate with are max players, you just pay them and move on. Giddey is not such a player, he is absolutely in the tier you should negotiate with. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that they'll also end the negotiation in a reasonable place.

You may not like the aggressive tone he had, but suggesting 25M as "peak" starting first year would give you 28M AAV which is 3M above the peak AAV the Athletic reported any team would offer him.

The Athletic reported that the max that teams who have zero cap space would give him is $25 mill AAV? Which teams said that, exactly? Why would their opinions even matter if they have absolutely no ability to bid on him? The only offer I've seen with a $25 mill salary year one is the flat 5yr/$125 mill. Not one where his contract increases.

Think the starting at 4yrs/$80 mill was the childish game. For some reason, people saying the Bulls should offer him more is the same as people saying they shouldn't negotiate. Haven't seen a single person in here saying they shouldn't negotiate.

Haven't seen anywhere a team wouldn't offer him $28 mill if they could, AND they thought the Bulls wouldn't match. What would be the point of a team offering him $28 mill? The Bulls will match that. Can just see the Jazz clearing cap for an offer, but announcing to reporters and the league ahead of time they plan to offer Giddey $30 mill when they get there, putting the Bulls on a clock. How do they benefit from doing that?

The Athletic recently polled 16 people who work in NBA front offices (including no one from Giddey’s incumbent Chicago Bulls), asking what they would deem a “fair” contract for each member of the restricted quartet: Giddey, Jonathan Kuminga, Quentin Grimes and Cam Thomas. They were granted anonymity in exchange for their candor.

The results of the Kuminga poll were published on Friday. Now it is on to Giddey, the 22-year-old point guard whom executives were willing to commit to for four or five years.

Of the four remaining restricted players, Giddey inspired the most consistent contract suggestions. Respondents were most comfortable giving him money.

Fourteen of the 16 participants proposed an average annual salary between $20 million and $25 million. (His mean average yearly value in the poll came to $22.3 million a year.) One executive pinned him as an $18 million player. Another, a front-office staffer who admitted he would be far lower than the consensus because he wasn’t a fan of Giddey’s game, suggested $50 million over four years, $12.5 million a year — less than the midlevel exception for a player who put up 14.6 points, 8.1 rebounds and 7.2 assists in 2024-25 and who averaged nearly a 20-point triple-double over his final 19 games.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6519192/2025/07/28/josh-giddey-nba-free-agency-bulls/#:~:text=The%20highest%20average%20annual%20value,luxury%20tax%20at%20the%20moment.

[dougthonus]

The Athletic reported that the max that teams who have zero cap space would give him is $25 mill AAV? Which teams said that, exactly? Why would their opinions even matter if they have absolutely no ability to bid on him? The only offer I've seen with a $25 mill salary year one is the flat 5yr/$125 mill. Not one where his contract increases.

Yes, the Athletic interviewed reps from 16 teams and said the average view those teams thought his value was was ~23M a year and the peak was 25M AAV, and the floor was 12.5M AAV. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6519192/2025/07/28/josh-giddey-nba-free-agency-bulls/

Fourteen of the 16 participants proposed an average annual salary between $20 million and $25 million. (His mean average yearly value in the poll came to $22.3 million a year.) One executive pinned him as an $18 million player. Another, a front-office staffer who admitted he would be far lower than the consensus because he wasn’t a fan of Giddey’s game, suggested $50 million over four years, $12.5 million a year — less than the midlevel exception for a player who put up 14.6 points, 8.1 rebounds and 7.2 assists in 2024-25 and who averaged nearly a 20-point triple-double over his final 19 games.

The majority of those polled agreed that Giddey was worth a commitment. Seven of the 16 participants proposed four-year deals for him: one for $50 million, one for $80 million, one for $88 million and four for $100 million.

Three more respondents suggested five-year contracts: one for $112.5 million, one for $115 million and the largest one (both in money and average annual value) for $125 million.

Think the starting at 4yrs/$80 mill was the childish game. For some reason, people saying the Bulls should offer him more is the same as people saying they shouldn't negotiate. Haven't seen a single person in here saying they shouldn't negotiate.

The Bulls offer is much closer to the median value that GMs see him at than Giddey's request is. I don't view either side as childish, it's just negotiation, but the Bulls are 2.3M off the average, Giddey is 6.7M off the average, both are 5M off the peak. The peak is probably a better representation of FMV, so using that number, both sides are equally "childish".

Haven't seen anywhere a team wouldn't offer him $28 mill if they could

Well just quoted an article showing you that 100% of the 16 teams contacted wouldn't offer him that much money, so now you have.

Ironically, even though I'm by reputation a peak Josh Giddey hater, my offer to Josh would match the highest offer of any team the Athletic interviewed.

[ScrantonBulls]

I'm completely on board with playing hardball with Giddey. Force his ass the take the QO if needed. He had a nice little run towards the end of the season but he just has too many question marks. Him being a complete sieve defensively is one of the biggest in my opinion. The guy will be getting hunted on defense.

I don't want the Bulls going above 25m for the first year. 20m would be ideal.

Thats just dumb.. he is still too good to play that **** childrens game

Negotiating a contract is "childish"? This makes no sense to me. The QO is literally THE bargaining chip for both sides. Giddey can threaten to take the QO if he doesn't like the Bulls offer. The Bulls can tell him to take the QO if he doesn't want the guaranteed money and security they are offering.

Would you rather the Bulls just give him the max to avoid any negotiation, since you think it is childish? Giddey is far from a proven commodity. He had a hot streak, but nobody knows if it will last going into the next season. He also has holes in his game. A glaring hole is his defense at a very important position. Nobody else can offer him money either. The Bulls hold the cards. If Giddey is so confident that he is with 30m per year, he should take a risk and take the QO. Otherwise he can take the guaranteed generational wealth of 4/80m with a player option on the last year.

[ScrantonBulls]

I'm completely on board with playing hardball with Giddey. Force his ass the take the QO if needed. He had a nice little run towards the end of the season but he just has too many question marks. Him being a complete sieve defensively is one of the biggest in my opinion. The guy will be getting hunted on defense.

I don't want the Bulls going above 25m for the first year. 20m would be ideal.

That would be the worst outcome.

The worst outcome is overpaying Giddey and him underperforming and becoming a bad contract. If the Bulls give him 30m AAV and he regresses to his typical level of play, it would be awful.