RealGM

Kuminga, Grimes, Thomas, and Giddey are all still without a new contract. I think Josh has the most upside of these players based on his play during the last 40% of the 2024-25 NBA RS. But he doesn't have leverage; he wants 30M/y like Suggs, but CHI is reportedly offering 8M less.

What is he worth, and should any teams try to steal him away? I think he could fit well in PHX for the right price.

The best arguments for Giddey as a player:

a) age (23 for the 2025-26 NBA season)
b) upside and skill development (shooting, foul-drawing) shown during 2024-25 Post All-Star break & last 31 games, after LaVine trade/role expansion
c) synergy with off-ball scorers

A 22 y/o who flirted with a near 20-point triple-double for 31 games with positive TS+/above league average TS%. Who plays hard & has shown consistent yearly improvements. Surely there could be some decent upside? But what's the gamble worth?

Josh Giddey Post All-Star Break (19 games)

Box score and advanced stats

- 34.3 mpg (651 minutes total)
- 21.2 ppg, 10.7 rpg (2.4 orb), 9.3 apg, 1.5 spg, 0.8 bpg, 3.4 topg
- 50.0% FG (14.5 fga/g), 45.7% 3PT (4.3 3pa/g), 51.8% 2PT (10.3 2pa/g), 80.9% FT (5.8 fta/g; 40.0% FTr; 56.3% 2pt-FTr), 62.0% TS (+4.4 rTS; 108 TS+)
- 7.7 ORB%, 25.0 DRB%, 16.8 TRB%, 37.7 AST%, 2.0 STL%, 1.9 BLK%, 16.5 TOV%, 24.9 USG%, 126 ORtg, 110 DRtg, 22.0 GmSc, +7.6 BPM
- +137 (+7.2/g)

Second Spectrum tracking

Catch-and-shoot: 46.7% 3PT on 3.2 3pa/g
Pull-up: 44.4% 3PT on 0.9 3pa/g
Drives: 51.3% FG (5.9 fga/g), 78.0% FT (2.6 fta/g; 44.1% FTr), 60.34% TS, 8.5 ppg, 1.06 ppp, 1.9 apg (11.8 AST%), 0.9 topg (5.6 TOV%), estimated 1.64 ppp with passes added, on 16.0 drives/g
Defense: 46.8% DFG (-0.3) on 16.6 DFGA/g; <6 feet: 51.4% DFG (-11.5) on 5.7 DFGA/g; <10 feet: 51.3% DFG (-7.0) on 8.0 DFGA/g

--

The three-point shooting and foul drawing are by far the most impressive and promising skill developments. You wonder just how real these numbers are. For a larger sample size, that three-point shooting holds up at 43.8% 3PT on 4.4 3pa/g over 31 games and 42.9% 3PT on 4.0 3pa over 40 games. And the FTr was doubled year-on-year across the entire season. It was getting close to triple toward the end.

He played really well. I was surprised at the lack of discussion from the media and content creators. Deni Avdija, Quentin Grimes, and Coby White were talked about way more, and I think Josh actually played better than all of them while being the youngest. Josh's post All-Star +7.6 BPM is ridiculously high and clears Deni's +5.3, Quentin's +1.0, and Coby's +0.9.

And that TS% understates because Josh gets a lot of z-bounds (rebounding own unblocked misses). 33 z-bounds in 70 games on the season, which is a 9.3% z-bound percentage. In other words, he rebounds 9.3% of his own missed unblocked FGAs. His season average true shooting percentage rises from 56.7% TS (-0.8 rTS [67th percentile]) to 58.9% selfORB adjusted TS (+0.3 selfORB adjusted rTS [78th percentile]).

Also has a high grenade percentage (7%), ranking in the 92nd percentile. A grenade is when a teammate throws you a pass late in the shot clock, forcing you to take a tough shot. He has a 44.0% eFG on these shots - 75th percentile.

Post All-Star Break Small Sample Size

We can extend things out to 1/20/2025 for a 31-game sample. 18.9 ppg, 9.1 rpg, 7.9 apg, 1.4 spg, 0.8 bpg, 3.1 topg on 61.5% TS and +5.6 BPM. Rebounding, steal, and block rates all remain consistent. The minutes per game, assist rate, and usage rate continued to climb as LaVine was traded and Giddey's role increased.

He's been around these general numbers in the past for OKC. He had a stretch where he did 19/8/7 when Shai was injured during the 2023-24 season. Same strong runs in his sophomore and rookie seasons. The difference now is a noticeable increase in scoring rate and efficiency due to development in three-point shooting and foul drawing.

It's hard to know just how sustainable these new skill improvements are. There's enough there to be confident for me. Assuming the same role and supporting cast next season, I'd expect Josh to be flirting with a 20-point triple-double average with TS% at or slightly above league average. Within 1-2 counting stats, I'd say. I think that's a healthy, educated estimate based on all the evidence.

Synergy With Off-Ball Scorers

Zach Collins with Josh Giddey (248 minutes): 17.4 points, 3.8 FTA, 86.2% at the rim, 34.4% 3PT, 67.3% TS.
Zach Collins without Josh Giddey (304 minutes): 14.0 points, 2.0 FTA, 65.8% at the rim, 25.0% 3PT, 60.2% TS.

Kevin Huerter with Josh Giddey (417 minutes): 15.1 points, 0.5 FTA, 75.0% at the rim, 38.9% 3PT, 59.7% TS.
Kevin Huerter without Josh Giddey (363 minutes): 16.0 points, 1.5 FTA, 75.0% at the rim, 36.3% 3PT, 53.4% TS.

Nikola Vucevic with Josh Giddey (1,429 minutes): 21.3 points, 2.2 FTA, 66.3% at the rim, 41.9% 3PT, 63.1% TS.
Nikola Vucevic without Josh Giddey (849 minutes): 19.9 points, 2.5 FTA, 65.7% at the rim, 36.9% 3PT, 57.8% TS.

Matas Buzelis and Coby White's TS% also goes up with Josh, which is to be expected. Points and free throws are per 75 possessions.

I'd go 25M over three. 75M is a pretty fair bet on a small sample size.

He wants 30M though over 4. Isn't getting it unless the Bulls bet against themselves. I think though Giddey is in a situation though he can afford to come back on the option and go for a bigger deal because there are going to be minutes and opportunities for him to grow his profile and a next contract.

The same for Cam Thomas. Grimes and Kuminga are kind of screwed because they aren't going to have the same level of opportunity if they come back they are going to be taking less money for a situation where they will likely be a role player.

Neither guys really have a market though as sign and trade guys and teams over the 1st apron it's really hard to do them anyways. So they are screwed. My guess is Giddey and Cam come back on a RFA tender. Kuminga and Grimes are forced to accept short term 2 to 3 year bridge contracts. Maybe they can parlay somehow into 2yrs + a player option.

The fight will be of course the Sixers and Warriors will want either a one year RFA or three year deal most likely. It's going to be hard to convince them to give decent money on a two year deal when they know in Grimes case he has to come back for 8.2M otherwise. Like you give him 2+ an option at even 30M that is 22M in his 2nd year + a player option on a third year, Like why would they do that?

All the leverage is with the teams right now.

A lot of guys were overpaid before the ramifications of the new CBA really hit home. Suggs was wildly overpaid, probably a $20 million guy. I'd rather have Giddey than Cam Thomas, Grimes, Kuminga, or Coby White. He's 22 and steadily improving every year. Has his flaws but they won't matter in Chicago, where nobody's winning anything and nobody really cares. $20 mil seems about right. I might go 3/70 since I invested a real player in getting him.

$100M/4 years.

3 years 70 mill last year being a PO

Take it or leave it.

Has to prove much more after a hot late season stretch. I question whether he’s a winning player and not just a bad team stat merchant. We are just one year removed from him being unplayable in the playoffs.

SpurNani wrote:3 years 70 mill last year being a PO

Take it or leave it.

Has to prove much more after a hot late season stretch. I question whether he’s a winning player and not just a bad team stat merchant. We are just one year removed from him being unplayable in the playoffs.

Giddey qualifying offer is 11.1M which gives him a bit more leverage but even if you assume a straight contract that is 47M over 2. You subtract the 11.1M and that is 1/36M plus the additional language of being a PO. That seems excessive. We all know there is zero chance of any of these guys actually leaving on a RFA contract.

That is why to me it has to spread over 3 years to make up the difference of the QO. Of course teams could just cave they often do with players. Like the Warriors are rumored to have offered 2/40 to Kuminga which whould be 32M more than his qualifying offer. So it's possible I guess

I'm not sure how the Bulls gave Patrick Williams a massive contract without proving anything but won't give Giddey his worth who has 10x the amount of upside and actually flashed all star potential.

Playing hardball with guys you think you need is not a great idea. That is the old Minnesota regime. If you believe in the dude, pay him. If you don’t let him go. Either way you are not winning.

3toheadmelo wrote:I'm not sure how the Bulls gave Patrick Williams a massive contract without proving anything but won't give Giddey his worth who has 10x the amount of upside and actually flashed all star potential.

Just about every Bulls fan immediately was skeptical of that extension if not downright furious. There's reports that they offered a long contract to motivate Williams to play harder. Instead he continues to regress yearly and is almost completely untradeable. Not as disastrous as the Vucevic trade, but those two are the pillars of our FO's failure.

He worth what he can get as a restricted free agent but fair value 20-25 annually.

Saberestar wrote:$100M/4 years.

I agree with this one. Most fans think every contract is an overpay. He is only 22-23 years old. He got played out from OKC because of no defense and no shooting. It's a different story when he can make the 3. Meanwhile, his defense is ****, his offense is too good. Now, remember, he will most likely improve a lot on offense going forward. If he sucks, it's not that bad. It's only 25 per season. I usually overpay, which would be 35 per season.

SpurNani wrote:3 years 70 mill last year being a PO

Take it or leave it.

Has to prove much more after a hot late season stretch. I question whether he’s a winning player and not just a bad team stat merchant. We are just one year removed from him being unplayable in the playoffs.

Giddey wouldhave to take this. Effectively he gets 2 seasons running the show on the Bulls. Then he can opt out of he's outplayed the deal.

4/100 with a 4th year team option. But how often have these reluctant, retain the asset, stand offs have resulted in a good contract? When teams aren’t sure they want to pay a guy, they usually shouldn’t and you end up in an Isaac Okoro/John Collins/Ayton situation where you are happy to dump them later. But I actually like Giddey so maybe he’s the exception.

Zeno wrote:4/100 with a 4th year team option. But how often have these reluctant, retain the asset, stand offs have resulted in a good contract? When teams aren’t sure they want to pay a guy, they usually shouldn’t and you end up in an Isaac Okoro/John Collins/Ayton situation where you are happy to dump them later. But I actually like Giddey so maybe he’s the exception.

The Bulls aren't unsure they want to keep Giddey, they just know there's no cap space out there so eventually they will get him to come down from the 30M number.

4/100 is where I think they eventually meet, within 10% anyway. Maybe an option year maybe not. Josh will still be right in his prime when it ends and if he's outplayed the deal he'll get a huge bag from somebody.

meekrab wrote:

Zeno wrote:4/100 with a 4th year team option. But how often have these reluctant, retain the asset, stand offs have resulted in a good contract? When teams aren’t sure they want to pay a guy, they usually shouldn’t and you end up in an Isaac Okoro/John Collins/Ayton situation where you are happy to dump them later. But I actually like Giddey so maybe he’s the exception.

The Bulls aren't unsure they want to keep Giddey, they just know there's no cap space out there so eventually they will get him to come down from the 30M number.

4/100 is where I think they eventually meet, within 10% anyway. Maybe an option year maybe not. Josh will still be right in his prime when it ends and if he's outplayed the deal he'll get a huge bag from somebody.

True but at the same time more often than not if you are 100 percent on a guy, you try to work through these negotiations quicker than this and compromise a bit more I think. But I think 4/100 with a team option should be where it ends and will probably be a positive value deal

Zeno wrote:4/100 with a 4th year team option. But how often have these reluctant, retain the asset, stand offs have resulted in a good contract? When teams aren’t sure they want to pay a guy, they usually shouldn’t and you end up in an Isaac Okoro/John Collins/Ayton situation where you are happy to dump them later. But I actually like Giddey so maybe he’s the exception.

I was wondering something different: how often have these “turn down the offer” guys ever made it up on the back end? Has anyone ever taken the qualifying offer and then gotten a huge deal the next year? I can’t remember anyone. If you take the QO then I think you get stuck in a spot where your team might not care about you because you’ll probably walk and that could effect your playing time (more likely in Kuminga’s case).

There isn’t any money out there for these guys. If they can lock in $40-50m guaranteed they should do it. If Giddey and Kuminga get 2+1 deals they can be back out on the market before they are 25. The ego blow is better than becoming the next Nerlens Noel.

This board is right on the money, we should all be agents. 3/$70 seems right to me. 3/$65 with a player option or 3/$75 with a team option seems fair too.
Give him a chance to prove himself.

What are the Bulls goals or plans? Do they have any?

SpurNani wrote:3 years 70 mill last year being a PO

Take it or leave it.

Has to prove much more after a hot late season stretch. I question whether he’s a winning player and not just a bad team stat merchant. We are just one year removed from him being unplayable in the playoffs.

F*** people exaggerate this nonsense, this was not the case.

seren wrote:Playing hardball with guys you think you need is not a great idea. That is the old Minnesota regime. If you believe in the dude, pay him. If you don’t let him go. Either way you are not winning.

You need these guys to win even if they aren't stars and if they develop their contracts become huge assets.

Sixers in 4 wrote:

seren wrote:Playing hardball with guys you think you need is not a great idea. That is the old Minnesota regime. If you believe in the dude, pay him. If you don’t let him go. Either way you are not winning.

You need these guys to win even if they aren't stars and if they develop their contracts become huge assets.

If you need him, pay him. That is what I am saying. A three year contract with a player option at the end is not that huge of an asset as you might think even if it is on the cheap. It would just mean the player will leave in two years and is biting his time.