Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[dougthonus]

I mean at some point, if you have a large group of players you think are all "bad contracts," then.....those aren't bad contracts, they're market rate?
$30M makes Josh the 60th highest paid player in the league for 2025-26 per hoopshype (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/).

So about the level of 3d man on a good team or 2d on a mediocre team. That seems.....right to me? Give what he's demonstrated and that he's 23 which suggests there's additional development there to be had (whether the Bulls can achieve that being debatable)?

I wouldn't go much higher, and I'd love him at $25-$28, but I'm not considering $30M as an albatross. But I've been wrong before.

EDIT: I'll also add that signing Josh to $30M now doesn't really kill the Bulls near term because they don't have great use for that cap space in the next 1-2 years. FAs aren't flocking here, and if a star wants a trade, hard to believe they're angling for Bulls (and if they are, likely Josh is in the deal for salaries). If you do a 4 yr deal, then you're really looking at the team considering potential use of those cap resources in yrs 3/4, at which point cap has gone up and he's more affordable.

The opportunity cost is simply move Giddey in a S&T or let him take the QO, move Coby/Ayo for picks, be really bad in 2026 where there are maybe 4 superstar quality prospects (like we should have done in 2025 and 2026) and then rebuild with 120M in cap room, some high upside draft picks, and some additional filler draft picks for role players.

Worst case, I think you end up with the same team simply paying a different guy other than Giddey market rate next year.

[MrSparkle]

Personally, I see Utah going for Giddey now that they cleared cap.

[League Circles]

I think it's very difficult to play Giddey-ball on a championship contender, but I think you can be a winning team and win a playoff series with him as your primary distributor. I have the opinion that you shouldn't make choices around players solely based on the criteria on whether or not their roles project cleanly to a championship contender. I'm okay with paying Giddey as someone who gets us from point A to point B for where the team is currently at.

I am okay with that, but I see no reason to pay him more than the offers I stated. I don't think he meaningfully moves wins. If he leaves next year, it opens 30M in extra cap room we won't be paying him to get a replacement, and I think we can get a viable replacement instead.

Vuc had an active trade market that deadline. We had to include Wendell Carter Jr as the cherry on top to get the deal done. Even if we hadn't made the trade, someone would have put together a palatable offer for him.

Vuc made an All-Star game that year and the team was well positioned to maximize his success. We're in the same position as Giddey.

FWIW, I understand people who think Giddey is just going to be really good and want to gamble on his continued improvement. I don't believe in it, but I acknowledge the possibility that I could be dead wrong on this one.

I would not go down this path of thinking "well maybe he can play us into mediocre then we can trade him later", we could just not sign him, compete for a lotto pick in an absolutely stacked draft class, move Coby/Ayo now, and rebuild around Matas, Noah, hopefully an elite prospect in 2026, whatever picks we can get for Coby/Ayo (possibly Giddey in a S&T) and then also have 120M in cap room next year to bring in other players.

The big swing factor here is that you will be able to literally take Giddey's market value deal and turn it into any market value player you want next year. This isn't a bird rights trap where if you don't sign Giddey you don't have a meaningful way to reallocate the money.

I wouldn't assume that. We can always go the 5th year and higher raises, plus this is a good fit for Giddey which should appeal to him. There's also the notable chance that Giddey's market value deal in a year is 10+ mil higher per year than it will be now.

[DuckIII]

I'm cool with hardballing him. The Thunder benched him in the playoffs. When we needed him the most in our play-in game, he couldn't deliver. I'm not paying a guy 30-40 million to be a regular season warrior. Giddey needs to prove he is effective in the games that matter.

1. He was “benched” in the playoffs because they have the MVP playing his position.

2. He’s the only guy on the Bulls who did not completely **** the bed during the play-in game. I have no idea where you got that. Did you mean Coby White couldn’t deliver? Because he had arguably the worst game of his entire career and choked epically?

[Red Larrivee]

giddey as a passer/rebounder who makes $25-30m aav for five years is absolutely a pumpkin

part of the reason he's such a divisive player is because his skillset makes it very hard for him to occupy a "middle ground" as a role player. either he's good enough to be a lead ballhandler or he's a niche role player

Overpaid and pumpkin aren't the same thing. Pat is a pumpkin. There are many games where his contribution is zero. If you're wrong about Giddey, he is still going to be productive. Giddey, the role player, was basically operating at a 6th man level in terms of impact on a 57-win team. At 21.

But $25-30M for that kind of guy is crazy, though, if he reverts back to that. It would be really ugly.

If he's the player he was after the LaVine trade, he's one of the better contracts in the league on that salary. I don't think either outcome is more likely than the other. If you want him to prove it again, there's a chance he gets more expensive and our situation gets even worse.

[SfBull]

Everyone wants him, he's only 23 and is constantly improving all whilst being on a bargain contract.

He isn't constantly improving.

Except for improving every season.

Good call.

How??If he was that good the FO wouldn't be bringing players for taking his playing time like Matas and now Okoro?
No, he's just another bust and a very expensive one.It should be clear by now

[nomorezorro]

If he's the player he was after the LaVine trade, he's one of the better contracts in the league on that salary. I don't think either outcome is more likely than the other. If you want him to prove it again, there's a chance he gets more expensive and our situation gets even worse.

is paying a definitively good player $45m a year or whatever really worse than paying a questionably good player $30m a year

it's like the jimmy butler first contract situation. it would have been incredibly nice to have him on $10m/year or whatever deal we could have locked him in on, but the "downside" was just...having an all-star caliber player and paying him what he was worth. that's ok too!

[drosestruts]

On one hand you can sign a 22-year old who post all-star break pretty much averaged a triple-double, was a +9.9, and had a TS% of 62%

On the other hand you can sign and trade him somewhere, be intentionally bad, and draft a player you hope can one day maybe average 20/11/9 while being a positive on-court player with good effeciency.

decisions decisions

[MisterRoy]

AKME is going to look even worse for trading Caruso for a Giddey rental if they don't get this signing done.

[Red Larrivee]

If he's the player he was after the LaVine trade, he's one of the better contracts in the league on that salary. I don't think either outcome is more likely than the other. If you want him to prove it again, there's a chance he gets more expensive and our situation gets even worse.

is paying a definitively good player $45m a year or whatever really worse than paying a questionably good player $30m a year

it's like the jimmy butler first contract situation. it would have been incredibly nice to have him on $10m/year or whatever deal we could have locked him in on, but the "downside" was just...having an all-star caliber player and paying him what he was worth. that's ok too!

I think it is worse. What could you have done with that 15M difference? That's an entire player (or two) depending on how you approach it. Now the goal posts move to "Ok, sure he's worth 30M now....but is he really worth X? I don't know."

And what happens if he proves it again and just leaves anyway in UFA? Sure, the Bulls can pay more, but you never know when negotiations can cause resentment.

[ThisGuyFawkes]

If he's the player he was after the LaVine trade, he's one of the better contracts in the league on that salary. I don't think either outcome is more likely than the other. If you want him to prove it again, there's a chance he gets more expensive and our situation gets even worse.

is paying a definitively good player $45m a year or whatever really worse than paying a questionably good player $30m a year

it's like the jimmy butler first contract situation. it would have been incredibly nice to have him on $10m/year or whatever deal we could have locked him in on, but the "downside" was just...having an all-star caliber player and paying him what he was worth. that's ok too!

That's the risk/reward. I've seen enough to want to take the risk on signing him to a 5-year contract for $25-30M AAV that gives us plenty of flexibility to add or change pieces around him, hoping that he'll break out into a consistent all-star.

It would be okay for him to break out and then pay him more, but it doesn't seem like we're ever going over the cap so we need to save as much money on our "all-stars" as possible.

Just knowing what's he's shown and what improvements he's made every season, you know he has a high floor. You know he's going to increase the value of the players around him. His contract could basically pay for itself. I really don't see how this is a difficult decision.

I like the fact that we're negotiating though. Even a few million saved per season could be helpful.

[ThisGuyFawkes]

He isn't constantly improving.

Except for improving every season.

Good call.

How??If he was that good the FO wouldn't be bringing players for taking his playing time like Matas and now Okoro?
No, he's just another bust and a very expensive one.It should be clear by now

What are you even saying? You think Matas and Okoro are going to be taking Giddey's playing time? They're duplicate players in the same role and position? Please define how Giddey is already a bust. I feel like you're just trolling at this point.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

Its been said a few different times - but it feels like a large contingent of the fan base doesn't have a good handle on NBA salaries. They appear to be stuck in 2010 when the MLE was 5 million a year and max players were making 25 million AAV.

Giddey at 25 million would the 71st highest paid player in the NBA - he'd be making 40% of what the max guys would be making.

[Magilla_Gorilla]

Except for improving every season.

Good call.

How??If he was that good the FO wouldn't be bringing players for taking his playing time like Matas and now Okoro?
No, he's just another bust and a very expensive one.It should be clear by now

What are you even saying? You think Matas and Okoro are going to be taking Giddey's playing time? They're duplicate players in the same role and position? Please define how Giddey is already a bust. I feel like you're just trolling at this point.

Matas and Okoro (and eventually) Noa are all players that will play and defend multiple positions. That seems to be the whole point (whether you agree with it or not). There is 'duplication' in that it is by design so that all of these pieces are interchangeable and can play together.

[dougthonus]

If he's the player he was after the LaVine trade, he's one of the better contracts in the league on that salary. I don't think either outcome is more likely than the other. If you want him to prove it again, there's a chance he gets more expensive and our situation gets even worse.

Everything you said is true, except, I think it's WAY more likely at least some specific things aren't going to replicate such as shot 46% from three with completely broken form. I don't think there is any chance in hell that replicates over any meaningful sample size. Reverting to his 33%-35% from three average would put his TS% post all-star break at 57-58% (league average was 57.6%) instead of 62% (great).

If you had to guess Giddey's three point percentage next year, what is your guess? 46%? I'd guess 33-35% is significantly more likely to me. If you now have a league average scorer with very good passing, a lot of counting stats, but has negative gravity and is below average on defense, what is that worth to you?

For me, that's probably a role player. Anti-gravity guys are really, really hard to build a team around, especially if they are hurting you on defense.

[Peelboy]

I mean at some point, if you have a large group of players you think are all "bad contracts," then.....those aren't bad contracts, they're market rate?
$30M makes Josh the 60th highest paid player in the league for 2025-26 per hoopshype (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/).

So about the level of 3d man on a good team or 2d on a mediocre team. That seems.....right to me? Give what he's demonstrated and that he's 23 which suggests there's additional development there to be had (whether the Bulls can achieve that being debatable)?

I wouldn't go much higher, and I'd love him at $25-$28, but I'm not considering $30M as an albatross. But I've been wrong before.

EDIT: I'll also add that signing Josh to $30M now doesn't really kill the Bulls near term because they don't have great use for that cap space in the next 1-2 years. FAs aren't flocking here, and if a star wants a trade, hard to believe they're angling for Bulls (and if they are, likely Josh is in the deal for salaries). If you do a 4 yr deal, then you're really looking at the team considering potential use of those cap resources in yrs 3/4, at which point cap has gone up and he's more affordable.

The opportunity cost is simply move Giddey in a S&T or let him take the QO, move Coby/Ayo for picks, be really bad in 2026 where there are maybe 4 superstar quality prospects (like we should have done in 2025 and 2026) and then rebuild with 120M in cap room, some high upside draft picks, and some additional filler draft picks for role players.

Worst case, I think you end up with the same team simply paying a different guy other than Giddey market rate next year.

I will stipulate that if letting him go is part of a teardown, then sure I could see it. In that case you play hardball to get a definitively valuable contract or trade him off the QO or S&T for picks. And trade Coby/Ayo for picks and waive/extend Vuc or use him in a deal for a more onerous salary and get more picks. Dare to dream.

But we all know that's not this FO. It's a case of pay Josh $30M, play him on the QO while retaining Coby/Ayo (or trading them for others ala Okoro), or get some marginal value in an S&T (no way in HELL AK can extract an FRP for Josh).

In a non-teardown scenario, I don't see much value in the non-Josh options. Would you rather have a 2d or 2 a year from now and $30M or Josh with the embedded volatility? To me that's a pretty marginal bet (again colored by our FO using 2ds on Simonovic/Olibrich rather than high upside guys). If Josh is somewhere between H1 and H2 last year as his "normalized level," I don't see his contract as onerous (esp given age). PER isn't the be-all/end-all, but he ranked 51 in PER last year overall, consistent with $30M being a top 30 salary (understanding that there's skew in all kinds of ways from contract age, etc). And his last 3 years at ages 20-21-22 were 17.1, 16.6, 18.1. And back half of the season would be higher (but I don't find that readily available).

Basically I don't see the contract as near as onerous in today's NBA as you seem to, combined with the opportunity cost being nowhere near as high as you think particularly given this FO. I'd still love a sub-$30 salary, but I wouldnt' let him walk for nothing if he sticks at demanding $30. In that case, maybe do a TO in yr4, or go with a lower salary but a PO for y4.
But

[MissileMike]

Personally, I see Utah going for Giddey now that they cleared cap.

It's not enough still- bulls would easily match.

[nomorezorro]

just as a point of clarification - as a giddey skeptic, i am not saying they should let him walk or take the QO over paying him $30+ million a year, and i don't get the impression that there's a meaningful number of people who think that should be the bulls approach

i just think there's a rash of people who have already gotten way too anxious after a week of no deal and are going "ahh why not give him the top dollar figure he wants, let's just get this done!". and i think there are a ton of reasons to try to extract maximum value out of these contract negotiations, and not a ton of reason to believe we are in a window where there's any meaningful risk of giddey walking away from those negotiations.

if we get to the $30m or nothing precipice, gun to my head, whatever, retain the asset. but until then...use the leverage, man. don't negotiate from a place of fear for a player who's not a bonafide star.

[dougthonus]

I will stipulate that if letting him go is part of a teardown, then sure I could see it. In that case you play hardball to get a definitively valuable contract or trade him off the QO or S&T for picks. And trade Coby/Ayo for picks and waive/extend Vuc or use him in a deal for a more onerous salary and get more picks. Dare to dream.

But we all know that's not this FO. It's a case of pay Josh $30M, play him on the QO while retaining Coby/Ayo (or trading them for others ala Okoro), or get some marginal value in an S&T (no way in HELL AK can extract an FRP for Josh).

But that's the thing with making recommendations on a message forum. I don't have to start with the supposition that I'm only allowed to make choices that map to the previous, really bad choices were. The front office has said they have permission to do a full rebuild, so they are choosing to go this way. They don't have to. I can instead look at as an option, if I can't get Giddey at a price that I'm excited about, I have this whole other option on the table which actually has way more upside, and after one year, probably makes me more comfortable anyway.

Basically I don't see the contract as near as onerous in today's NBA as you seem to, combined with the opportunity cost being nowhere near as high as you think particularly given this FO. I'd still love a sub-$30 salary, but I wouldnt' let him walk for nothing if he sticks at demanding $30. In that case, maybe do a TO in yr4, or go with a lower salary but a PO for y4.
But

It's hard to really have a discussion about how onerous the contract is, because you really have to agree on what type of player Giddey is and also agree on what types of options you think the team can realistically go down. I think people struggle to agree on both those things.

[Almost Retired]

How??If he was that good the FO wouldn't be bringing players for taking his playing time like Matas and now Okoro?
No, he's just another bust and a very expensive one.It should be clear by now

What are you even saying? You think Matas and Okoro are going to be taking Giddey's playing time? They're duplicate players in the same role and position? Please define how Giddey is already a bust. I feel like you're just trolling at this point.

Matas and Okoro (and eventually) Noa are all players that will play and defend multiple positions. That seems to be the whole point (whether you agree with it or not). There is 'duplication' in that it is by design so that all of these pieces are interchangeable and can play together.

Okoro is certainly a plus defender who can cover 1-3 and some 4s. Matas, barring injury, is going to be an All Star caliber player. If Noa develops we're going to go from one of the worst defensive teams to one of the best. We just need a true rim protecting Center who can keep defenses honest by being able to hit 35% from "3". Not moving up in the 2nd round for Kalkbrenner was a cheap ass mistake. I hope AKME makes up for it by drafting Tomislav Ivisik next year.