Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[DuckIII]

Franchise player? What kind of picks do you think a 32 year old, frequently injured, bench defense specialist you have to sign to a new contract is worth?

Giddey is young and when handed the reigns played like an Allstar for 2 months. If you think Caruso was going to land us lottery picks, I just don’t see that man. Not even remotely. Couple of late firsts in consecutive years? Sure. It’s conceivable. What are the odds those get you a guy even close to what Giddey just did, let alone a franchise player.

The only reason we were able to steal Giddey from OKC is because:

1. We were the only team with Caruso’s rights.
2. Giddey was going to expire and be extended.
3. Presti respected Giddey and worked to find him a landing spot where he could play the role he wanted.

The only things that give even a shred of hope that this grossly mismanaged franchise might have something unique to work with are the ways Giddey and Matas looked once given major roles.

I just don’t get the Giddey issue here anymore. He’s been a godsend as far as I’m concerned. Exactly the type of lucky break (or shrewd move, whatever you want to label it) we need to offset all the horror.

If we were looking at maxing him I would get the hand wringing. But as it stands, I don’t. You have to have guys in addition to franchise players too. Giddey looks to me like a really good one of those to have.

[Dan Z]

Franchise player? What kind of picks do you think a 32 year old, frequently injured, bench defense specialist you have to sign to a new contract is worth?

Giddey is young and when handed the reigns played like an Allstar for 2 months. If you think Caruso was going to land us lottery picks, I just don’t see that man. Not even remotely. Couple of late firsts in consecutive years? Sure. It’s conceivable. What are the odds those get you a guy even close to what Giddey just did, let alone a franchise player.

The only reason we were able to steal Giddey from OKC is because:

1. We were the only team with Caruso’s rights.
2. Giddey was going to expire and be extended.
3. Presti respected Giddey and worked to find him a landing spot where he could play the role he wanted.

The only things that give even a shred of hope that this grossly mismanaged franchise might have something unique to work with are the ways Giddey and Matas looked once given major roles.

I just don’t get the Giddey issue here anymore. He’s been a godsend as far as I’m concerned. Exactly the type of lucky break (or shrewd move, whatever you want to label it) we need to offset all the horror.

If we were looking at maxing him I would get the hand wringing. But as it stands, I don’t. You have to have guys in addition to franchise players too. Giddey looks to me like a really good one of those to have.

I never said that Caruso would get the Bulls a franchise player. I just said that AK should "continue looking for a franchise player".

That means get as many picks as you can to give yourself as many chances as you can to find said player.

If AK asked for picks instead of Giddey do you think OKC would give up the #12 pick in 2024? I don't think that's out of the realm of possibilities. Maybe they give up #24 in this draft too? If not, maybe 2nds? Or a player such as Dieng? Maybe it's a three team deal where Giddey goes somewhere and the Bulls get picks?

The reason why I bring that up is because let's say they got the #12 pick in last year's draft. They could pick Ware and then the Bulls have their center of the future. Then they continue losing games and now the 2025 pick is higher than #12. At one point the Bulls record wasn't far off from the Sixers. Maybe the Bulls end up at 5? 6?

Tre Johnson, Matas, Ware and Coby (at that point they should trade Coby) is a start at building something.

I don't hate Giddey or the trade, but it's not a direction I would've gone in. Giddey will get paid and that changes his value. AK will continue to win as much as possible, which means the Bulls might not have a top pick for a long time (unless they get lucky in the lottery). It also means that they'll be limited in how they can find an all-star level player to add to this roster.

Maybe Matas takes a step forward next year and the team is a surprise, but I also wouldn't be surprised if they end up losing in the play-in yet again.

[Wingy]

The way you win is to have Aaron Nesmith, and Andrew Nembhard making a combined ~$30MM, and obviously having some skill and certainly luck to navigate getting your high-end all stars.

Sinking ~$30MM into a single guy who has real potential to be played off the floor during the playoffs…when you don’t have even a single star building block makes progress toward an insanely difficult pursuit even harder.

Maybe he’ll take way less. Maybe March/April will translate to November/December. Maybe the skepticism of game translating to playoffs will be unfounded. If all that happens then it’s much ado about nothing, and AK will have for once made a great move. Until I see it, I’ll be highly skeptical.

Who knows. Sometimes guys take less than expected. Lauri’s Cavs contract is a great example.

[DuckIII]

It’s just hard to understand all the reaches being made by some of you to continue to criticize a move you obviously hated from go. Adapt to the evidence.

Presti didn’t want him? False.

$30 million is some terrifying number after the season he had? Very clearly false looking at current league contracts and the upcoming rise in salaries. It’s what Jordan Poole and Jerami Grant make. It would, today make him the 48th highest paid player in the NBA and that rank will go down considerably during the life of the deal.

He’ll get “played out of the postseason?” That kind of happened in one series. Because his team had SGA. The MVP.

Here’s Giddey’s per 36 numbers in 8 playoff games: 17/7/4 on .554 TS and .353 from 3 on 7 attempts per game. His playing time was reduced because they could not defend the way they wanted with both SGA and Giddey on the floor while offensively SGA negated Giddey’s strengths through superiority and redundancy. Hardly because he “played himself off the floor.”

Plus he was effectively the only Bull who didn’t choke the play in game, putting up 25/10/4.

It’s all just like some scramble to keep a clearly dead conversation alive in the hope something will change to save what has otherwise become an untenable position. Or maybe this is still some sort of obsession with the story about the girl? It’s certainly not based on how Giddey has played.

I don’t get it.

[jnrjr79]

Not to mention that the idea that Presti “didn’t want him” is not true. Presti asked Giddey if he would be okay with moving to a bench role or would prefer to be traded, and Giddey asked for the trade. It has been widely reported by both of them.

More importantly, it ignores the Thunder’s future financial condition and obligations. They are currently paying Williams and Chet a COMBINED $20 million per year. In the next two years the Thunder will have to extend:

Williams
Chet
Harty
Dortz
SGA

All of them. While paying AC $20 mil per. The Thunder are going to have to make hard choices and sacrifices. Giddey was one of them. The idea that they realized he couldn’t be a “champion” is hogwash.

They internally replaced him with the MVP and a top 5 player in the human race, had other needs, and knew they couldn’t pay everyone coming due. And he was the first one coming due.

It’s a confluence of events. It’s not a judgment of Josh Giddey any more meaningful than “he’s not as good as SGA.”

All the more reason why the Bulls should've asked for more. OKC had fit and financial concerns to think about and the Bulls did not.

That’s not relevant to what I was responding to. I hate AK as much or more than any Bulls fan alive. I think he’s one of the worst things to ever happen to any team I root for. Really.

But the Bulls got great value in the AC trade. Really excellent value. I’m not going to crap on it with rank speculation that it could have been even better. None of us have even a tiny shred of a clue otherwise. It’s just being said because reasons.

Yeah, I feel like most of the discussion about this boils down to “OKC has a lot of picks, so they would not have cared about throwing one in.” Maybe, but who knows?

[kodo]

Yeah, I feel like most of the discussion about this boils down to “OKC has a lot of picks, so they would not have cared about throwing one in.” Maybe, but who knows?

Sure, but that would mean we have a great GM. We don't.
Both of these cannot be true:
- AK is a terrible GM
- AK should have gotten even more value for an expiring contract would have had zero value at this point in time

Everyone has to pick a lane. AK sucks, and we got what we got. Or AK is a GM genius so it was disappointing a pick wasn't thrown in.
This is like having a kid who's flunked every class in his entire life, comes home with a B+ in an AP Calc test and being disappointed it wasn't an A.

[jnrjr79]

Yeah, I feel like most of the discussion about this boils down to “OKC has a lot of picks, so they would not have cared about throwing one in.” Maybe, but who knows?

Sure, but that would mean we have a great GM. We don't.
Both of these cannot be true:
- AK is a terrible GM
- AK should have gotten even more value for an expiring contract would have had zero value at this point in time

Everyone has to pick a lane. AK sucks, and we got what we got.
Or AK is a GM genius so it was disappointing a pick wasn't thrown in.

My thinking is more “even a bad GM can make a good move” kind of thing.

[kodo]

Yeah, I feel like most of the discussion about this boils down to “OKC has a lot of picks, so they would not have cared about throwing one in.” Maybe, but who knows?

Sure, but that would mean we have a great GM. We don't.
Both of these cannot be true:
- AK is a terrible GM
- AK should have gotten even more value for an expiring contract would have had zero value at this point in time

Everyone has to pick a lane. AK sucks, and we got what we got.
Or AK is a GM genius so it was disappointing a pick wasn't thrown in.

My thinking is more “even a bad GM can make a good move” kind of thing.

There's two GMs at work here. Many consider one the best GM in the league. Many consider the other the worst.
We're lucky not to have been fleeced by adding multiple picks to OKC's stash.

[dougthonus]

Franchise player? What kind of picks do you think a 32 year old, frequently injured, bench defense specialist you have to sign to a new contract is worth?

Giddey is young and when handed the reigns played like an Allstar for 2 months. If you think Caruso was going to land us lottery picks, I just don’t see that man. Not even remotely. Couple of late firsts in consecutive years? Sure. It’s conceivable. What are the odds those get you a guy even close to what Giddey just did, let alone a franchise player.

Generally agree with all this except that it was reported Sacramento would give us pick #13, so we do know we had a lotto pick option.

According to someone else I know we also had the option to trade him him for two firsts at the deadline in 2024, one landed in the lottery, but caveat that it may not have landed in the lottery if they had Caruso and no one told me what protection was on it (ie, the details of the negotiation may be that we wouldn't have gotten the pick if it were in the lottery).

The only reason we were able to steal Giddey from OKC is because:

1. We were the only team with Caruso’s rights.
2. Giddey was going to expire and be extended.
3. Presti respected Giddey and worked to find him a landing spot where he could play the role he wanted.

The only things that give even a shred of hope that this grossly mismanaged franchise might have something unique to work with are the ways Giddey and Matas looked once given major roles.

I just don’t get the Giddey issue here anymore. He’s been a godsend as far as I’m concerned. Exactly the type of lucky break (or shrewd move, whatever you want to label it) we need to offset all the horror.

If we were looking at maxing him I would get the hand wringing. But as it stands, I don’t. You have to have guys in addition to franchise players too. Giddey looks to me like a really good one of those to have.

We'll see on Giddey, I generally viewed the trade similarly to you (high upside, high risk, but the kind of swing you take on Giddey potentially getting a lot better). I also think the way Giddey played post-deadline was highly encouraging towards getting better, but he was pretty awful for 50 games before that in a lot of ways, and the good games came largely against awful competition, so I'm not sold really on it working out, and would probably hard ball Giddey more than a lot of people.

Even with my statements above and the risks in this situation though, I don't mind it as a decision. The odds of that 13th pick from the Kings turning into a franchise player were basically none.

My overall view of wanting to do a holistic rebuild doesn't really fit in with Giddey, but the odds to juice that generally walked out the door when they waited too long to trade Zach, DeMar, Vuc, and Caruso.

[ozbull]

Best guess on when we're getting an announcement?

I have some big real salary dynasty fantasy league decisions to make on this guy!

[sco]

Best guess on when we're getting an announcement?

I have some big real salary dynasty fantasy league decisions to make on this guy!

IIRC teams can start negotiating with their own FA's the day after the finals, so maybe tomorrow...

[Jcool0]

We'll see on Giddey, I generally viewed the trade similarly to you (high upside, high risk, but the kind of swing you take on Giddey potentially getting a lot better). I also think the way Giddey played post-deadline was highly encouraging towards getting better, but he was pretty awful for 50 games before that in a lot of ways, and the good games came largely against awful competition, so I'm not sold really on it working out, and would probably hard ball Giddey more than a lot of people.

He wasn't awful for 50 games. He just wasn't scoring which he said was because he was deferring to Zach sine it was "his team".

[Ice Man]

Generally agree with all this except that it was reported Sacramento would give us pick #13, so we do know we had a lotto pick option.

There are two valid reasons to criticize AKME for the Caruso deal -

1) People detest AKME and attack them for everything.
2) People would rather have a #13 pick than Giddey.

The first is fine, it's fandom. The second is not how I roll, because Giddy has a very high chance of being better than a #13 pick, but Booker, LaVine, and Mitchell were #13 picks this century, plus there have been a couple of other solid players who are maybe Giddey's equal (Herro, Richard Jefferson). So, the argument can be made.

But while one could prefer the 2nd option, I don't think that one could rationally say that the deal was objectively terrible. That claim strikes me as fandom.

[DropStep]

I would also suggest that maybe the ultimate worth of a player in his prime shouldn't be judged by a few NBA playoff games he didn't start when he was 21 - games where a guy who would win MVP eleven months later was excelling in many of the same roles that our guy is also suited to fill... but maybe that's crazy talk.

[dougthonus]

He wasn't awful for 50 games. He just wasn't scoring which he said was because he was deferring to Zach sine it was "his team".

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/giddejo01/splits/2025

If you don't think he was playing awful, be my guest. I wouldn't even give him the MLE if his pre-all-star game performance was his norm.

[dougthonus]

Generally agree with all this except that it was reported Sacramento would give us pick #13, so we do know we had a lotto pick option.

There are two valid reasons to criticize AKME for the Caruso deal -

1) People detest AKME and attack them for everything.
2) People would rather have a #13 pick than Giddey.

The first is fine, it's fandom. The second is not how I roll, because Giddy has a very high chance of being better than a #13 pick, but Booker, LaVine, and Mitchell were #13 picks this century, plus there have been a couple of other solid players who are maybe Giddey's equal (Herro, Richard Jefferson). So, the argument can be made.

But while one could prefer the 2nd option, I don't think that one could rationally say that the deal was objectively terrible. That claim strikes me as fandom.

I generally agree with this, my only real criticism of this deal is overarching desire to try to continue to chase ways to win now when the odds of landing at anything other than thoroughly mediocre with no room to grow are extraordinarily low. But this was a terrible draft on top of the fact that #13 projects into a fringe starter.

[Jcool0]

He wasn't awful for 50 games. He just wasn't scoring which he said was because he was deferring to Zach sine it was "his team".

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/giddejo01/splits/2025

If you don't think he was playing awful, be my guest. I wouldn't even give him the MLE if his pre-all-star game performance was his norm.

He was contributing just not scoring:

Nov. - Jan: 7.2 rebounds, 6.8 assists, 1.2 steals

Feb. - April: 9.5 rebounds, 8.1 assists, 1.4 steals

PPG Nov - Jan: 11

PPG Feb - April: 20.2

[nomorezorro]

i think part of the disconnect around the giddey discourse is that he is capable of playing "okay" while simultaneously being not good enough to fill the only role he seems to be capable of filling, which is lead ballhandler

like, in 2025 your primary offensive initiator isn't making up for a lack of scoring by being a plus rebounder. if he's not at least adequate as a scorer, he's a fungible piece of the back end of your rotation. if he's a good scorer, he might be worth $30+ million a year. the fact that we just had 50 games of him looking like the first guy and 20 games of him looking like the second guy makes it perfectly natural that people would still have questions about whether he's worth investing in long-term.

[sco]

He wasn't awful for 50 games. He just wasn't scoring which he said was because he was deferring to Zach sine it was "his team".

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/giddejo01/splits/2025

If you don't think he was playing awful, be my guest. I wouldn't even give him the MLE if his pre-all-star game performance was his norm.

He was contributing just not scoring:

Nov. - Jan: 7.2 rebounds, 6.8 assists, 1.2 steals

Feb. - April: 9.5 rebounds, 8.1 assists, 1.4 steals

PPG Nov - Jan: 11

PPG Feb - April: 20.2

It wasn't until Zach left that Giddey started really attacking the paint looking to score or draw contact. Then there was my favorite stretch of the season when Zach was gone and Vuc was out...oh for those days. It was the most fun I can remember watching Bulls basketball since we added those dudes.

[dougthonus]

He wasn't awful for 50 games. He just wasn't scoring which he said was because he was deferring to Zach sine it was "his team".

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/giddejo01/splits/2025

If you don't think he was playing awful, be my guest. I wouldn't even give him the MLE if his pre-all-star game performance was his norm.

He was contributing just not scoring:

Nov. - Jan: 7.2 rebounds, 6.8 assists, 1.2 steals

Feb. - April: 9.5 rebounds, 8.1 assists, 1.4 steals

PPG Nov - Jan: 11

PPG Feb - April: 20.2

Also:
Defending at a near bottom of league level
Well below average offensive efficiency
Low volume for a primary ball handler
Poor shooter
Poor at drawing fouls
Worse A/TO ratio

Yeah, he wasn't scoring, but things like his foul draw rate and three point percentage were much worse, so even in lower volume he was also much worse at everything he was trying to do. He was also defending much worse. If we get that version of Giddey after his new contract, it will be an albatross.

I'm not suggesting that Giddey is necessarily going to go back in time to the pre-Zach trade version of himself, but if he did it would be a disaster. It's certainly not a zero risk given the good version of Giddey was a remarkably short period of time against largely teams that were tanking.