Image ImageImage Image

Josh Giddey - Conundrum Killer

Moderators: HomoSapien, coldfish, Payt10, Ice Man, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, DASMACKDOWN, fleet, GimmeDat, RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper

jnrjr79
Head Coach
Posts: 6,771
And1: 4,038
Joined: May 27, 2003
Location: Chicago

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#961 » by jnrjr79 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 7:31 pm

Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made. Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.


Boy oh boy, is that damning with faint praise.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,906
And1: 18,994
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#962 » by dougthonus » Wed Feb 26, 2025 7:46 pm

Infinity2152 wrote:At this point, you could consider him a successful young high draft pick you have to pay a little early. He could possibly earn much more if he's an unrestricted FA in 2026.


I mean to state the obvious, he could also earn a lot less, and we don't know what he'll earn this summer. I think the fear is mostly that AK isn't the right guy to negotiate with someone he just recently traded for and feels on the hook about, but that may not be fair either.
Infinity2152
Veteran
Posts: 2,670
And1: 965
Joined: Jul 19, 2023
       

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#963 » by Infinity2152 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 7:47 pm

jnrjr79 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made. Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.


Boy oh boy, is that damning with faint praise.


What do you mean? I consider Giddey and Caruso as very good players, Luka and AD are superstars.

AD leagues better defensively than Luka, Caruso leagues better than Giddey
AD better rebounder (though Luka is exceptional), than Luka, Giddey leagues better than Caruso
AD much older than Luka, Caruso much older than Giddey
AD far more injury prone than Luka, Caruso far more injury prone than Caruso
AD much worse passer than Luka, Caruso much worse passer than Giddey

Shooting exchange is a little different, but AD's not a bad shooter, and I don't consider Caruso a good shooter. He's had 3 seasons of 40% or better from 3, and 4 seasons of 34% or below, including this one.

Maybe a FEW similarities?
User avatar
Jcool0
RealGM
Posts: 15,367
And1: 9,331
Joined: Jul 12, 2014
Location: Illinois
         

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#964 » by Jcool0 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 7:53 pm

Infinity2152 wrote:
jnrjr79 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made. Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.


Boy oh boy, is that damning with faint praise.


What do you mean? I consider Giddey and Caruso as very good players, Luka and AD are superstars.

AD leagues better defensively than Luka, Caruso leagues better than Giddey
AD better rebounder (though Luka is exceptional), than Luka, Giddey leagues better than Caruso
AD much older than Luka, Caruso much older than Giddey
AD far more injury prone than Luka, Caruso far more injury prone than Caruso
AD much worse passer than Luka, Caruso much worse passer than Giddey

Shooting exchange is a little different, but AD's not a bad shooter, and I don't consider Caruso a good shooter. He's had 3 seasons of 40% or better from 3, and 4 seasons of 34% or below, including this one.

Maybe a FEW similarities?


I believe it was this part "This is without doubt the best trade AK has made."
Infinity2152
Veteran
Posts: 2,670
And1: 965
Joined: Jul 19, 2023
       

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#965 » by Infinity2152 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 7:59 pm

Jcool0 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:
jnrjr79 wrote:
Boy oh boy, is that damning with faint praise.


What do you mean? I consider Giddey and Caruso as very good players, Luka and AD are superstars.

AD leagues better defensively than Luka, Caruso leagues better than Giddey
AD better rebounder (though Luka is exceptional), than Luka, Giddey leagues better than Caruso
AD much older than Luka, Caruso much older than Giddey
AD far more injury prone than Luka, Caruso far more injury prone than Caruso
AD much worse passer than Luka, Caruso much worse passer than Giddey

Shooting exchange is a little different, but AD's not a bad shooter, and I don't consider Caruso a good shooter. He's had 3 seasons of 40% or better from 3, and 4 seasons of 34% or below, including this one.

Maybe a FEW similarities?


I believe it was this part "This is without doubt the best trade AK has made."


Oh, I got you. No, I believe Giddey is going to be a great core piece for years to come. I think this move is crazy under rated, especially for only costing us a bench player. I've actually been under hyping my thoughts on what Giddey's potential could be, since so many guys are limiting him a lot because of his athleticism. I think having a great playmaker is so important to young guys getting better.

We keep talking about what's our path forward, and I think it's key to have someone who can effectively move the offense whether you're trying to win now or develop. Rather have great young PG and a weak PF for instance, because that PG can make everybody else better. Great power forward still needs somebody to get him the ball, unless he's starting the offense.

But yeah, he's made some pretty bad trades, lol! I'm not as critical of some as others.
jnrjr79
Head Coach
Posts: 6,771
And1: 4,038
Joined: May 27, 2003
Location: Chicago

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#966 » by jnrjr79 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 8:09 pm

Infinity2152 wrote:
jnrjr79 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made. Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.


Boy oh boy, is that damning with faint praise.


What do you mean? I consider Giddey and Caruso as very good players, Luka and AD are superstars.

AD leagues better defensively than Luka, Caruso leagues better than Giddey
AD better rebounder (though Luka is exceptional), than Luka, Giddey leagues better than Caruso
AD much older than Luka, Caruso much older than Giddey
AD far more injury prone than Luka, Caruso far more injury prone than Caruso
AD much worse passer than Luka, Caruso much worse passer than Giddey

Shooting exchange is a little different, but AD's not a bad shooter, and I don't consider Caruso a good shooter. He's had 3 seasons of 40% or better from 3, and 4 seasons of 34% or below, including this one.

Maybe a FEW similarities?


I think you misunderstood my point. Describing something as "the best trade AK has made" is clearing a very low bar, because AK has a generally poor track record w/r/t trades.

I didn't say anything about your comparison to the Luka trade. I was just making a joke.
Infinity2152
Veteran
Posts: 2,670
And1: 965
Joined: Jul 19, 2023
       

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#967 » by Infinity2152 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 8:12 pm

jnrjr79 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:
jnrjr79 wrote:
Boy oh boy, is that damning with faint praise.


What do you mean? I consider Giddey and Caruso as very good players, Luka and AD are superstars.

AD leagues better defensively than Luka, Caruso leagues better than Giddey
AD better rebounder (though Luka is exceptional), than Luka, Giddey leagues better than Caruso
AD much older than Luka, Caruso much older than Giddey
AD far more injury prone than Luka, Caruso far more injury prone than Caruso
AD much worse passer than Luka, Caruso much worse passer than Giddey

Shooting exchange is a little different, but AD's not a bad shooter, and I don't consider Caruso a good shooter. He's had 3 seasons of 40% or better from 3, and 4 seasons of 34% or below, including this one.

Maybe a FEW similarities?


I think you misunderstood my point. Describing something as "the best trade AK has made" is clearing a very low bar, because AK has a generally poor track record w/r/t trades.

I didn't say anything about your comparison to the Luka trade.


I got you. Yes I did. Maybe I shouldn't have phrased it as "best" trade given his relative trade history. I think it's a very underrated trade that's going to benefit the Bulls for years. Way more benefit than we see right now i terms of keeping this team young, exciting, offense moving, young guys getting assisted shot attempts, just overall great benefit the next few years.

Maybe I phrased it as "best" trade because this trade has also been so heavily criticized in his forum. Yeah, the bar is not that high for best trade. Unless we get a superstar from the Zach trade, lol! That trade greatly increased our losing rate and guarantees us that pick, plus opening up future picks. Or the Portland pick. Couple of trades are still TBD.
jnrjr79
Head Coach
Posts: 6,771
And1: 4,038
Joined: May 27, 2003
Location: Chicago

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#968 » by jnrjr79 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 8:39 pm

Infinity2152 wrote:
jnrjr79 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:
What do you mean? I consider Giddey and Caruso as very good players, Luka and AD are superstars.

AD leagues better defensively than Luka, Caruso leagues better than Giddey
AD better rebounder (though Luka is exceptional), than Luka, Giddey leagues better than Caruso
AD much older than Luka, Caruso much older than Giddey
AD far more injury prone than Luka, Caruso far more injury prone than Caruso
AD much worse passer than Luka, Caruso much worse passer than Giddey

Shooting exchange is a little different, but AD's not a bad shooter, and I don't consider Caruso a good shooter. He's had 3 seasons of 40% or better from 3, and 4 seasons of 34% or below, including this one.

Maybe a FEW similarities?


I think you misunderstood my point. Describing something as "the best trade AK has made" is clearing a very low bar, because AK has a generally poor track record w/r/t trades.

I didn't say anything about your comparison to the Luka trade.


I got you. Yes I did. Maybe I shouldn't have phrased it as "best" trade given his relative trade history. I think it's a very underrated trade that's going to benefit the Bulls for years. Way more benefit than we see right now i terms of keeping this team young, exciting, offense moving, young guys getting assisted shot attempts, just overall great benefit the next few years.

Maybe I phrased it as "best" trade because this trade has also been so heavily criticized in his forum. Yeah, the bar is not that high for best trade. Unless we get a superstar from the Zach trade, lol! That trade greatly increased our losing rate and guarantees us that pick, plus opening up future picks. Or the Portland pick. Couple of trades are still TBD.


Yeah, I'm actually good with the trade, given the other options that were reported. It's just unfortunate that they have a really tough call on whether to re-sign hi so quickly, but in terms of just "what's the best player/prospect you could acquire," Giddey is probably better than anyone they would have drafted with the rumored picks. And given Caruso's age and health struggles this year, I do think it was good to trade him.
PJSteven22
Starter
Posts: 2,197
And1: 918
Joined: Feb 04, 2022

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#969 » by PJSteven22 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 9:07 pm

Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made.Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.

AK is that you?
greenwing
Starter
Posts: 2,050
And1: 534
Joined: Jul 14, 2008

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#970 » by greenwing » Wed Feb 26, 2025 9:27 pm

PJSteven22 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made.Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.

AK is that you?


In all fairness, Caruso got paid and despite being a nice role player on a contender, he's statistically having his worst shooting year since his rookie year. I would argue Giddey is certainly worth more than Caruso at the moment.
drosestruts
General Manager
Posts: 9,203
And1: 4,322
Joined: Apr 05, 2012
 

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#971 » by drosestruts » Wed Feb 26, 2025 9:34 pm

dougthonus wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:At this point, you could consider him a successful young high draft pick you have to pay a little early. He could possibly earn much more if he's an unrestricted FA in 2026.


I mean to state the obvious, he could also earn a lot less, and we don't know what he'll earn this summer. I think the fear is mostly that AK isn't the right guy to negotiate with someone he just recently traded for and feels on the hook about, but that may not be fair either.


Good extensions:
- Coby
- Ayo
- Ball

Bad extensions:
- Vuc
- Williams (i'd say TBD, but year one's been bad for sure)
- LaVine (I put him here not because I personally think it was bad but just what I believe others would rank it as on a binary good/bad scale)

So really 50/50 at worst.
Infinity2152
Veteran
Posts: 2,670
And1: 965
Joined: Jul 19, 2023
       

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#972 » by Infinity2152 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 9:59 pm

People view value and bad contracts in different ways. If a contract is traded for positive value, is it still a bad contract? For instance, we get a first or two seconds for Vuc this summer. As opposed to not paying him and having 2 $10 mill players expiring this summer. That cap space could have been used positively, or we could be stuck with a far worse contract. Vuc gave us numbers commensurate to the contract, and he was the exact player we were expecting him to be, not like he's declined. He's also been healthy and actually played more games and minutes than probably anybody else on the team.

Fan opinion Vuc's production wasn't worth $20 mill. Because that's what teams are paying for. They deemed his production worth $20 mill at the time, and the production is better this year.

Same with Lavine. We knew what we were paying for when we gave him that extension, and he did not get worse. They deemed his production at the time was worth the contract. Unless they expected him to get better, a contract where you get what you pay for is not a bad contract. New CBA and teams tightening wallets make Lavine's contract look worse.

Pat's is the only one that looks bad to me, mostly because he's regressed instead of progressing. When paying young guys like that, you need progression for the contract to have value, if they're paid at market or above market.
Muzbar
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,285
And1: 2,906
Joined: Apr 03, 2002
Location: Australia
Contact:
 

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#973 » by Muzbar » Wed Feb 26, 2025 10:05 pm

greenwing wrote:
PJSteven22 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made.Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.

AK is that you?


In all fairness, Caruso got paid and despite being a nice role player on a contender, he's statistically having his worst shooting year since his rookie year. I would argue Giddey is certainly worth more than Caruso at the moment.

You'd be arguing with a brick wall.
Here to argue about nonsensical things and suck away your joy. :kissmybutt:
cocktailswith_2short
Head Coach
Posts: 6,962
And1: 481
Joined: May 25, 2002
     

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#974 » by cocktailswith_2short » Wed Feb 26, 2025 10:11 pm

We got a lottery pick that's backing it up for an old Injury prone defensive specialist it was a heist
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,906
And1: 18,994
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#975 » by dougthonus » Wed Feb 26, 2025 10:16 pm

drosestruts wrote:Good extensions:
- Coby
- Ayo
- Ball

Bad extensions:
- Vuc
- Williams (i'd say TBD, but year one's been bad for sure)
- LaVine (I put him here not because I personally think it was bad but just what I believe others would rank it as on a binary good/bad scale)

So really 50/50 at worst.


It's also different to separate out the value of the extension vs the expected value of the extension. Coby White 9.7 points per game when we extended him and 19.1 and 18 the next two years. Coby proved worth it, but his extension was quite expensive relative to his production.

It's notable because Coby had previously declined in per 36 scoring each year in the league from 18.5 to 14.9 over those four years then went back up to 18.9 setting a career high, so this wasn't just a minutes play.

The same is true of Ayo to a degree, though he only had two years, so his data is a lot messier.

Vuc was just dumb all together, Pat probably looks dumb all together as well.

Ball is too early to tell. I like it, but a pretty unique set of circumstances where Ball himself almost seemed to phrase it as a favor to us for standing by him.

LaVine was a fine extension I think. We could have moved him the next year for multiple 1sts.

However, in the areas where we would say "this was a good extension", he relied on the player to make a leap beyond reasonable expectations for that player's age and experience for it to work. In fact, one could say that was true in all his extension talks. A couple times that happened, but if a guy went on their expected path, he was going to probably lose each of these extensions.

If we put that on Giddey, my guess is AK pays him something like 30M a year and then Giddey has to play at an extremely high level to prove worthy of that and is more likely than not to fail to live up to it.

Of these guys, I'd also say only Pat/Vuc were ones he was particularly on the hook for. Maybe Ayo to some degree, but Ayo was coming off such a poor year when he signed his extension it wasn't a big deal. Coby was never his guy, and the Bulls made it clear that they didn't really care for Coby the way they treated him the whole year prior to the extension. They had banished him to not really playing until he proved on the court he needed more minutes, and they tried to trade him but found no takers.

In this sense, with my general view of a lot of nuance in how the Bulls looked at guys and how they treat guys in their "camp" so to speak, I think Giddey is in for a monster extension from this FO. Perhaps that proves out to be inaccurate as admittedly, there are very few data points here to make all these guesses about.
PJSteven22
Starter
Posts: 2,197
And1: 918
Joined: Feb 04, 2022

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#976 » by PJSteven22 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 10:48 pm

greenwing wrote:
PJSteven22 wrote:
Infinity2152 wrote:This is without doubt the best trade AK has made.Traded a 29 yr old expiring often injured player for a 21-year-old with a year left on rookie contract that's more talented and less injury history. It's the discount version of the Luka/AD trade except we didn't have to include a first to do it.

Yes, it's riskier to sign him after one season. But we'll have an entire season, that has to be enough. The cost to re-sign him after a season and a half could end up much higher if he's great. Like I think he will be and AK might too. So pay him $25-30 AAV mill now or pay him $40-$50 AAV after an extra season. Barnes got $44 mill, a better Giddey with a larger cap in a year certainly might. There's risk either way. We re-sign White after year 5, we pay more. Re-sign Pat after year 5, pay less.

AK is that you?


In all fairness, Caruso got paid and despite being a nice role player on a contender, he's statistically having his worst shooting year since his rookie year. I would argue Giddey is certainly worth more than Caruso at the moment.

Caruso is a more impactful defender. Also you could have had better assets than Josh Giddey or Better pieces that contribute to winning like a Deni Avdija. Just because he’s shooting well and Caruso isn’t doesn’t mean that that trade was a success. I know how Caruso can impact winning. The jury is still out on Giddey.
User avatar
Jcool0
RealGM
Posts: 15,367
And1: 9,331
Joined: Jul 12, 2014
Location: Illinois
         

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#977 » by Jcool0 » Wed Feb 26, 2025 11:51 pm

PJSteven22 wrote:
greenwing wrote:
PJSteven22 wrote:AK is that you?


In all fairness, Caruso got paid and despite being a nice role player on a contender, he's statistically having his worst shooting year since his rookie year. I would argue Giddey is certainly worth more than Caruso at the moment.

Caruso is a more impactful defender. Also you could have had better assets than Josh Giddey or Better pieces that contribute to winning like a Deni Avdija. Just because he’s shooting well and Caruso isn’t doesn’t mean that that trade was a success. I know how Caruso can impact winning. The jury is still out on Giddey.


Not sure Washington was looking to add a Caruso type.
2weekswithpay
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,452
And1: 2,580
Joined: Dec 22, 2020
     

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#978 » by 2weekswithpay » Thu Feb 27, 2025 12:11 am

Infinity2152 wrote:People view value and bad contracts in different ways. If a contract is traded for positive value, is it still a bad contract? For instance, we get a first or two seconds for Vuc this summer. As opposed to not paying him and having 2 $10 mill players expiring this summer. That cap space could have been used positively, or we could be stuck with a far worse contract. Vuc gave us numbers commensurate to the contract, and he was the exact player we were expecting him to be, not like he's declined. He's also been healthy and actually played more games and minutes than probably anybody else on the team.

Fan opinion Vuc's production wasn't worth $20 mill. Because that's what teams are paying for. They deemed his production worth $20 mill at the time, and the production is better this year.

Same with Lavine. We knew what we were paying for when we gave him that extension, and he did not get worse. They deemed his production at the time was worth the contract. Unless they expected him to get better, a contract where you get what you pay for is not a bad contract. New CBA and teams tightening wallets make Lavine's contract look worse.

Pat's is the only one that looks bad to me, mostly because he's regressed instead of progressing. When paying young guys like that, you need progression for the contract to have value, if they're paid at market or above market.


Yeah, Beal is a good example. Washington got some expirings and seconds for him not much but still positive value. Hard to argue that Beal isn't an awful contract.
Stratmaster
RealGM
Posts: 22,266
And1: 8,933
Joined: Oct 02, 2010
       

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#979 » by Stratmaster » Thu Feb 27, 2025 1:13 am

Chi town wrote:
Stratmaster wrote:
ChettheJet wrote:Giddey is having a very strong 3 game stretch and looks like the guy you want to have around rather than some 2nd round pick in the G League. that said, it's 3 games I still want to see what he ends up looking like between now and 3 games left in the season before I start to worry about what contract he rates. He's still part of a very large group of guards none of which has stood out above the rest all year.


It's been more than 3 games.


Strat, I’m interested. Did you hoop back in the day?

If so, what was your game like?

Always interested in your takes. You’re a hoops purist. I respect it.


Somewhere between what jcool responded with and what Homosapien responded with.

Oh what the hell. Let's tell a story:

Once upon a time, when I started my Junior year in high school I was 15, 5'6", 115', slow and attended one of the best non-chicago basketball high schools in the state.

By the end of my Senior year I was 17, 6'4", 135' and still slow. I was rolling in gym class enough that Dolph Stanley (the head basketball coach; if you haven't heard of him Google him) asked me why I never went out for the basketball team. I told him I did but he cut me twice.

It took me until my mid-twenties to fill out to the svelte 6'3.5" (I've started shrinking), 185' playing weight I have maintained since.

Played a lot of playground basketball against high school varsity players in this area and against college players in Memphis. Some of those Memphis guys were amazing.

I was a good ball-handler and passer by the playground standards of the day and had a decent outside shot. That came from my 5'6" days.

I became a good inside defender against guys a lot heavier than me in Memphis. I also limped into my apartment and collapsed with bruised ribs, arms and once almost got my jaw knocked off guarding a guy my height but 35 pounds heavier.

So the TLDR summary. "Didn't play any consequential hoops"
User avatar
Jcool0
RealGM
Posts: 15,367
And1: 9,331
Joined: Jul 12, 2014
Location: Illinois
         

Re: Josh Giddey Conundrum 

Post#980 » by Jcool0 » Thu Feb 27, 2025 2:55 am

Is Giddey our best 3PT shooter?

Return to Chicago Bulls