Josh Giddey - Conundrum Killer

[Peelboy]

Josh Giddey is not a superstar, but he seems to be a valuable player to even a contender with the right pieces around him. He's like a lot of players, with some serious skills and some reasonable significant flaws. He's a pretty good handler, passer, rebounder. He's a decent 3-pt shooter (37% this year). But he's a bad to mediocre defender, and needs the ball in his hands to be most effective.

But at $25M, he'd be somewhere around the 60th highest paid player (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/), probably lower because this is current season salaries, so assuming inflation. Even at $30M he'd be around 50th. Somewhere around 17%-18% of the cap as it increases. That seems entirely consistent with the value above.

And all of that ignores that he's only 22, and if you look for example at 3p%, it's 26%-33%-34%-37% over his first four years. Not out of reasonableness to say he can be a +- 40% 3pt shooter, which makes him more effective off ball. Not an off the dribble, pull-up guy, but a solid spot up guy with another creator on the floor. And he's had flashes of defensive attention. Add a bit more muscle and coaching on that front and he could be at least mediocre.

So there's upside, and if you had him at $25-$30M, shooting 39% from 3, getting you regular double doubles and flirting with triple doubles without being a defensive liability, that seems like a solid value deal for his ages 23-28 years. I get the argument that it's similar to Zach in a potentially "empty calorie" way, but I attribute a lot of that to the piss poor team construction around him.

Basically, my take is that he's worth resigning at $25-30 annually. But that the Bulls will find themselves limited by that deal because they'll be unable to effectively build around him. But the same is true if you let him go - the Bulls will be unable to effectively replace him or improve with the added flexibility. Basically because AK is terrible at his job. But that's not Giddey's fault.

[Chi town]

Giddey has improved big time on D, FT rate, and 3ball at 22.

I’m a believer in him getting to 5 3s per game at 40% and 6FT per game at 80%. A summer with Patton that he didn’t have last year due to the Olympics and his injury.

It’s not talked about much but Giddey has a pretty high ceiling and a work ethic that shows improvement year over year.

If he can become a good CS shooter he becomes a much more valuable building block.

If he can develop his handle much like Coby it will really open up his midrange offense.

I see ceiling Giddey as a winning player and a core guy you build with. Maybe even 2nd best player.

[League Circles]

Josh Giddey is not a superstar, but he seems to be a valuable player to even a contender with the right pieces around him. He's like a lot of players, with some serious skills and some reasonable significant flaws. He's a pretty good handler, passer, rebounder. He's a decent 3-pt shooter (37% this year). But he's a bad to mediocre defender, and needs the ball in his hands to be most effective.

But at $25M, he'd be somewhere around the 60th highest paid player (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/), probably lower because this is current season salaries, so assuming inflation. Even at $30M he'd be around 50th. Somewhere around 17%-18% of the cap as it increases. That seems entirely consistent with the value above.

And all of that ignores that he's only 22, and if you look for example at 3p%, it's 26%-33%-34%-37% over his first four years. Not out of reasonableness to say he can be a +- 40% 3pt shooter, which makes him more effective off ball. Not an off the dribble, pull-up guy, but a solid spot up guy with another creator on the floor. And he's had flashes of defensive attention. Add a bit more muscle and coaching on that front and he could be at least mediocre.

So there's upside, and if you had him at $25-$30M, shooting 39% from 3, getting you regular double doubles and flirting with triple doubles without being a defensive liability, that seems like a solid value deal for his ages 23-28 years. I get the argument that it's similar to Zach in a potentially "empty calorie" way, but I attribute a lot of that to the piss poor team construction around him.

Basically, my take is that he's worth resigning at $25-30 annually. But that the Bulls will find themselves limited by that deal because they'll be unable to effectively build around him. But the same is true if you let him go - the Bulls will be unable to effectively replace him or improve with the added flexibility. Basically because AK is terrible at his job. But that's not Giddey's fault.

Yikes, I didn't know those salary numbers would put him in the top 50-60 players. I don't think he ever projects to be a top 60 player.

[Peelboy]

Josh Giddey is not a superstar, but he seems to be a valuable player to even a contender with the right pieces around him. He's like a lot of players, with some serious skills and some reasonable significant flaws. He's a pretty good handler, passer, rebounder. He's a decent 3-pt shooter (37% this year). But he's a bad to mediocre defender, and needs the ball in his hands to be most effective.

But at $25M, he'd be somewhere around the 60th highest paid player (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/), probably lower because this is current season salaries, so assuming inflation. Even at $30M he'd be around 50th. Somewhere around 17%-18% of the cap as it increases. That seems entirely consistent with the value above.

And all of that ignores that he's only 22, and if you look for example at 3p%, it's 26%-33%-34%-37% over his first four years. Not out of reasonableness to say he can be a +- 40% 3pt shooter, which makes him more effective off ball. Not an off the dribble, pull-up guy, but a solid spot up guy with another creator on the floor. And he's had flashes of defensive attention. Add a bit more muscle and coaching on that front and he could be at least mediocre.

So there's upside, and if you had him at $25-$30M, shooting 39% from 3, getting you regular double doubles and flirting with triple doubles without being a defensive liability, that seems like a solid value deal for his ages 23-28 years. I get the argument that it's similar to Zach in a potentially "empty calorie" way, but I attribute a lot of that to the piss poor team construction around him.

Basically, my take is that he's worth resigning at $25-30 annually. But that the Bulls will find themselves limited by that deal because they'll be unable to effectively build around him. But the same is true if you let him go - the Bulls will be unable to effectively replace him or improve with the added flexibility. Basically because AK is terrible at his job. But that's not Giddey's fault.

Yikes, I didn't know those salary numbers would put him in the top 50-60 players. I don't think he ever projects to be a top 60 player.

From the link above, here's salaries for 24/25, 25/26, 26/27, 27/28:

56. Tyler Herro $29,000,000 $31,000,000 $33,000,000 $0
57. Nicolas Claxton $27,556,817 $25,352,272 $23,147,727 $20,943,184
58. Miles Bridges $27,173,913 $25,000,000 $22,826,087 $0
59. John Collins $26,580,000 $26,580,000 $0 $0
60. Andrew Wiggins $26,276,786 $28,223,215 $30,169,644 $0
61. Anfernee Simons $25,892,857 $27,678,571 $0 $0
62. RJ Barrett $25,794,643 $27,705,357 $29,616,071 $0
63. Tobias Harris $25,365,854 $26,634,146 $0 $0
64. Jaren Jackson Jr $25,257,798 $23,413,395 $0 $0
65. Jonathan Isaac $25,000,000 $15,000,000 $14,500,000 $14,500,000

I think at 22 with his performance, Giddey fits right in there in terms of value. John Collins? Tyler Herro? Tobias Harris? Jonathan Isaac?

[WindyCityBorn]

I don’t why some keep talking like Giddey needs to b a 25 ppg scorer run the offense. That has never a requirement.

[WindyCityBorn]

Josh Giddey is not a superstar, but he seems to be a valuable player to even a contender with the right pieces around him. He's like a lot of players, with some serious skills and some reasonable significant flaws. He's a pretty good handler, passer, rebounder. He's a decent 3-pt shooter (37% this year). But he's a bad to mediocre defender, and needs the ball in his hands to be most effective.

But at $25M, he'd be somewhere around the 60th highest paid player (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/), probably lower because this is current season salaries, so assuming inflation. Even at $30M he'd be around 50th. Somewhere around 17%-18% of the cap as it increases. That seems entirely consistent with the value above.

And all of that ignores that he's only 22, and if you look for example at 3p%, it's 26%-33%-34%-37% over his first four years. Not out of reasonableness to say he can be a +- 40% 3pt shooter, which makes him more effective off ball. Not an off the dribble, pull-up guy, but a solid spot up guy with another creator on the floor. And he's had flashes of defensive attention. Add a bit more muscle and coaching on that front and he could be at least mediocre.

So there's upside, and if you had him at $25-$30M, shooting 39% from 3, getting you regular double doubles and flirting with triple doubles without being a defensive liability, that seems like a solid value deal for his ages 23-28 years. I get the argument that it's similar to Zach in a potentially "empty calorie" way, but I attribute a lot of that to the piss poor team construction around him.

Basically, my take is that he's worth resigning at $25-30 annually. But that the Bulls will find themselves limited by that deal because they'll be unable to effectively build around him. But the same is true if you let him go - the Bulls will be unable to effectively replace him or improve with the added flexibility. Basically because AK is terrible at his job. But that's not Giddey's fault.

Yikes, I didn't know those salary numbers would put him in the top 50-60 players. I don't think he ever projects to be a top 60 player.

You’re wrong. It’s OK to admit it.

[Infinity2152]

Depends on what is considered successful. 30 win team? Probably. 40 win team? Maybe in the right circumstances. 45 wins? Highly unlikely. 50 wins? No.

Based off what Giddey's shown so far in his career I wouldn't expect more than 35 wins. Now this isn't a bad thing since most players aren't great floor raisers. The issue comes from Giddey needing to be prioritized. He needs to ball but hasn't shown that he can produce enough offense to warrant the high usage. Different play style but this is fundamentally the same issue Derozan has had throughout his career.

There is no such thing as one player making $25 million a year who caps a team at 35 wins regardless of who his teammates are. Including that player being the primary ball handler and distributor (which Giddey is quite good at).

I don’t like saying hater. But I gotta admit some of these takes are so blatantly illogical that they must be based on some other weird factors like Caruso emotions or that silly Giddey “pedo” nonsense.

I'm not saying he caps a team at 35 wins regardless of teammates. I'm saying that the better the team gets, the more likely it is that Giddey's negatives outweigh the positives. Of the 12 teams that currently are a top 6 seed, how many would Giddey start on? Houston maybe?

Ironically, OKC. Don't think they had Hartenstein when they had Giddey. Raises the defense another level, Giddey could easily start over Dort on that team at SF. SGA, Jalen Williams, Giddey, Holgrem, Hartenstein is still a top defensive team. Probably a better rebounding team, which is a defensive stat. He's better offensively than Dort.

Dort gets injured or traded in preseason, Giddey starts at SF all season, they're still title contenders.

[MrSparkle]

I don’t why some keep talking like Giddey needs to b a 25 ppg scorer run the offense. That has never a requirement.

Actually it kind of is, as much as we hate to admit it.

I don’t think there’s any recent example of a non-scoring primary ball-handler winning a playoff series… not unless they’re a 4th option (Rondo).

You can win in different ways, but bottom line is that every single successful playoff team in the last 15Y has had their top-2 ball-handlers be 20+ PPG scorers.

This said, his usage is around 20%, which is low. I assume it’s higher with Zach and Vuc out. Feels like Coby is still the primary BH, though. Fwiw it’s refreshing seeing the ball shared pretty evenly. Almost seems like we’re at 5/20% usage since Vuc’s been out, which is a college coach’s dream. Lot of off-ball movement and baseline cuts.

[2weekswithpay]

If the problem is Dallas was able to put Lively/Gafford on Giddey, what the heck was Holgrem doing? Being guarded by Kyrie? Giddey was effectively playing PF with three guards, one of the 4 was going to be guarded by PF/center anyway. It is not Giddey fault he was played as a big and was the second tallest player on the floor for OKC. Why would he would br guarded by anybody but the PF or center? Jalen Williams is 6'5 or so, and Dort is shorter. Can we please end this narrative, or somebody explain if Dallas plays two bigs, why one wouldn't be put on the 6'8 rebounding guy at all times?

Chet has the same issues that Porzingis had. He doesn't have the strength to punish teams that guard him with wings/forwards. Now this doesn't mean you can put Kyrie on him, Dallas didn't but it gives defenses matchup flexibility.

You're looking at this the wrong way IMO. Dallas had two bigs but they didn't play together. Giddey isn't being played as a big. OKC didn't ask him to do anything you'd expect from a big besides rebound. Gafford is guarding Giddey because they think he's the least threatening player in OKC's offense. Giddey is a better player on offense than Dort but Dort could make enough 3s to hurt Dallas' if they tried to guard him that way so they picked Giddey.

Every player on the team is flawed but when looking for ways to improve, you look at who's expendable and Giddey is the odd man out.

[League Circles]

Josh Giddey is not a superstar, but he seems to be a valuable player to even a contender with the right pieces around him. He's like a lot of players, with some serious skills and some reasonable significant flaws. He's a pretty good handler, passer, rebounder. He's a decent 3-pt shooter (37% this year). But he's a bad to mediocre defender, and needs the ball in his hands to be most effective.

But at $25M, he'd be somewhere around the 60th highest paid player (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/), probably lower because this is current season salaries, so assuming inflation. Even at $30M he'd be around 50th. Somewhere around 17%-18% of the cap as it increases. That seems entirely consistent with the value above.

And all of that ignores that he's only 22, and if you look for example at 3p%, it's 26%-33%-34%-37% over his first four years. Not out of reasonableness to say he can be a +- 40% 3pt shooter, which makes him more effective off ball. Not an off the dribble, pull-up guy, but a solid spot up guy with another creator on the floor. And he's had flashes of defensive attention. Add a bit more muscle and coaching on that front and he could be at least mediocre.

So there's upside, and if you had him at $25-$30M, shooting 39% from 3, getting you regular double doubles and flirting with triple doubles without being a defensive liability, that seems like a solid value deal for his ages 23-28 years. I get the argument that it's similar to Zach in a potentially "empty calorie" way, but I attribute a lot of that to the piss poor team construction around him.

Basically, my take is that he's worth resigning at $25-30 annually. But that the Bulls will find themselves limited by that deal because they'll be unable to effectively build around him. But the same is true if you let him go - the Bulls will be unable to effectively replace him or improve with the added flexibility. Basically because AK is terrible at his job. But that's not Giddey's fault.

Yikes, I didn't know those salary numbers would put him in the top 50-60 players. I don't think he ever projects to be a top 60 player.

From the link above, here's salaries for 24/25, 25/26, 26/27, 27/28:

56. Tyler Herro $29,000,000 $31,000,000 $33,000,000 $0
57. Nicolas Claxton $27,556,817 $25,352,272 $23,147,727 $20,943,184
58. Miles Bridges $27,173,913 $25,000,000 $22,826,087 $0
59. John Collins $26,580,000 $26,580,000 $0 $0
60. Andrew Wiggins $26,276,786 $28,223,215 $30,169,644 $0
61. Anfernee Simons $25,892,857 $27,678,571 $0 $0
62. RJ Barrett $25,794,643 $27,705,357 $29,616,071 $0
63. Tobias Harris $25,365,854 $26,634,146 $0 $0
64. Jaren Jackson Jr $25,257,798 $23,413,395 $0 $0
65. Jonathan Isaac $25,000,000 $15,000,000 $14,500,000 $14,500,000

I think at 22 with his performance, Giddey fits right in there in terms of value. John Collins? Tyler Herro? Tobias Harris? Jonathan Isaac?

I don't particularly disagree, but there will always be a lot of noise / error mismatching player quality with salary, because young guys and old guys tend to be underpaid, while middle aged guys tend to be overpaid. IMO if there were a way to easily identify the top 60 players (not the top 60 salaries), and compare Giddey to them, it would be more concerning.

[League Circles]

Josh Giddey is not a superstar, but he seems to be a valuable player to even a contender with the right pieces around him. He's like a lot of players, with some serious skills and some reasonable significant flaws. He's a pretty good handler, passer, rebounder. He's a decent 3-pt shooter (37% this year). But he's a bad to mediocre defender, and needs the ball in his hands to be most effective.

But at $25M, he'd be somewhere around the 60th highest paid player (https://hoopshype.com/salaries/players/), probably lower because this is current season salaries, so assuming inflation. Even at $30M he'd be around 50th. Somewhere around 17%-18% of the cap as it increases. That seems entirely consistent with the value above.

And all of that ignores that he's only 22, and if you look for example at 3p%, it's 26%-33%-34%-37% over his first four years. Not out of reasonableness to say he can be a +- 40% 3pt shooter, which makes him more effective off ball. Not an off the dribble, pull-up guy, but a solid spot up guy with another creator on the floor. And he's had flashes of defensive attention. Add a bit more muscle and coaching on that front and he could be at least mediocre.

So there's upside, and if you had him at $25-$30M, shooting 39% from 3, getting you regular double doubles and flirting with triple doubles without being a defensive liability, that seems like a solid value deal for his ages 23-28 years. I get the argument that it's similar to Zach in a potentially "empty calorie" way, but I attribute a lot of that to the piss poor team construction around him.

Basically, my take is that he's worth resigning at $25-30 annually. But that the Bulls will find themselves limited by that deal because they'll be unable to effectively build around him. But the same is true if you let him go - the Bulls will be unable to effectively replace him or improve with the added flexibility. Basically because AK is terrible at his job. But that's not Giddey's fault.

Yikes, I didn't know those salary numbers would put him in the top 50-60 players. I don't think he ever projects to be a top 60 player.

You’re wrong. It’s OK to admit it.

Wrong about what? My subjective future projection on a guy that has played a few dozen games for our team? Oh please do point me in the direction of the valid objective opinions which I should follow lol

[WindyCityBorn]

I don’t why some keep talking like Giddey needs to b a 25 ppg scorer run the offense. That has never a requirement.

Actually it kind of is, as much as we hate to admit it.

I don’t think there’s any recent example of a non-scoring primary ball-handler winning a playoff series… not unless they’re a 4th option (Rondo).

You can win in different ways, but bottom line is that every single successful playoff team in the last 15Y has had their top-2 ball-handlers be 20+ PPG scorers.

This said, his usage is around 20%, which is low. I assume it’s higher with Zach and Vuc out. Feels like Coby is still the primary BH, though. Fwiw it’s refreshing seeing the ball shared pretty evenly. Almost seems like we’re at 5/20% usage since Vuc’s been out, which is a college coach’s dream. Lot of off-ball movement and baseline cuts.

Giddey doesn’t dominate the ball though like you said. He just makes good quick decisions. We aren’t trying to make him play like Luka, Harden or Lebron.

[WindyCityBorn]

Yikes, I didn't know those salary numbers would put him in the top 50-60 players. I don't think he ever projects to be a top 60 player.

You’re wrong. It’s OK to admit it.

Wrong about what? My subjective future projection on a guy that has played a few dozen games for our team? Oh please do point me in the direction of the valid objective opinions which I should follow lol

Saying you can never see him as top 60 player is wild. He is playing like a top 30 player right now at 23.

[Infinity2152]

If the problem is Dallas was able to put Lively/Gafford on Giddey, what the heck was Holgrem doing? Being guarded by Kyrie? Giddey was effectively playing PF with three guards, one of the 4 was going to be guarded by PF/center anyway. It is not Giddey fault he was played as a big and was the second tallest player on the floor for OKC. Why would he would br guarded by anybody but the PF or center? Jalen Williams is 6'5 or so, and Dort is shorter. Can we please end this narrative, or somebody explain if Dallas plays two bigs, why one wouldn't be put on the 6'8 rebounding guy at all times?

Chet has the same issues that Porzingis had. He doesn't have the strength to punish teams that guard him with wings/forwards. Now this doesn't mean you can put Kyrie on him, Dallas didn't but it gives defenses matchup flexibility.

You're looking at this the wrong way IMO. Dallas had two bigs but they didn't play together. Giddey isn't being played as a big. OKC didn't ask him to do anything you'd expect from a big besides rebound. Gafford is guarding Giddey because they think he's the least threatening player in OKC's offense. Giddey is a better player on offense than Dort but Dort could make enough 3s to hurt Dallas' if they tried to guard him that way so they picked Giddey.

Every player on the team is flawed but when looking for ways to improve, you look at who's expendable and Giddey is the odd man out.

Let's be real, Luka is PF size too. Like you said, Holgrem being able to be guarded by guards and wings is the only thing that makes that work. If you're not playing two bigs, who's guarding OKC's center while Dallas center is guarding Giddey?

You can say Giddey's not being played as a big. What does that mean? He's not being played as PG or SG certainly. He's the best rebounder, so they need him for that. When you don't play him, you lose rebounding. Second tallest player, so when he sits you lose height. He essentially had PF responsibility in a lineup with 4 guards, imo.

Game 1 Dallas Gafford 27 mins, Lively 13, Washington 25 mins, Powell 5 mins They played 2 bigs a lot. Starting lineup was Gafford and Washington.

Game 2 Gafford 26 minutes, Lively 20 mins, PJ Washington 40 minutes, Two bigs all game

Game 3 Gafford 19 mins, Lively 27, PJ Washington 40 minutes Two bigs all games

Game 4 Gafford 23 mins, Lively 25, PJ Washington 41 minutes Two bigs all game

Then OKC decides to bench Giddey, get even smaller

Either a PF or center was going to be guarding Giddey with SGA, Jalen Williams and Dort short and fast players on the court. PJ Washington isn't guarding them ideally. They put their worst big defender (Washington) on Holgrem and their best defensive big on Giddey.

Coincidence they immediately went and got a big man starter (Hartenstein)?

[League Circles]

You’re wrong. It’s OK to admit it.

Wrong about what? My subjective future projection on a guy that has played a few dozen games for our team? Oh please do point me in the direction of the valid objective opinions which I should follow lol

Saying you can never see him as top 60 player is wild. He is playing like a top 30 player right now at 23.

I strongly disagree. He's a sub par defender and an average scorer who can pass and rebound really well. Don't let counting stats define guys.

[WindyCityBorn]

Wrong about what? My subjective future projection on a guy that has played a few dozen games for our team? Oh please do point me in the direction of the valid objective opinions which I should follow lol

Saying you can never see him as top 60 player is wild. He is playing like a top 30 player right now at 23.

I strongly disagree. He's a sub par defender and an average scorer who can pass and rebound really well. Don't let counting stats define guys.

No I’m watching him. He is one of the highest IQ players in the league. He is an elite rebounder and passer with elite court vision. Defense is around average and improving. Him not being an elite scorer is really your biggest gripe.

[ShouldaPaidBG]

The more I see him, the more it’s clear he has to be the number ONE primary ball handler to be effective. We can all see how much better he looks once the air was cleared after the Zach trade.

Now can you build a successful team around him as that guy? The very real multi million dollar question.

I mean the answer to that sure seems like obviously not. The focal point of your offense needs to be a dynamic scorer that draws double times and scores in high volume above league average efficiency.

I think the more interesting question to me is can he become a good enough and consistent enough shooter where he no longer needs to be the #1 ball handler to be effective. I think it's way more likely he becomes a consistent enough shooter to play off ball than he becomes a dynamic enough offensive player to be the offensive fulcrum.

Partially because it's nearly impossible for him to get good enough to be a the primary ball handler on a good team without improving his shooting, because to be that good, he needs to be a great scoring threat which will involve better and more advanced shooting than just consistent off-ball shooting.

Magic Johnson wasn't his team's best scorer.

[ShouldaPaidBG]

I don’t why some keep talking like Giddey needs to b a 25 ppg scorer run the offense. That has never a requirement.

Actually it kind of is, as much as we hate to admit it.

I don’t think there’s any recent example of a non-scoring primary ball-handler winning a playoff series… not unless they’re a 4th option (Rondo).

You can win in different ways, but bottom line is that every single successful playoff team in the last 15Y has had their top-2 ball-handlers be 20+ PPG scorers.

This said, his usage is around 20%, which is low. I assume it’s higher with Zach and Vuc out. Feels like Coby is still the primary BH, though. Fwiw it’s refreshing seeing the ball shared pretty evenly. Almost seems like we’re at 5/20% usage since Vuc’s been out, which is a college coach’s dream. Lot of off-ball movement and baseline cuts.

How about, f*** history let's try something new

[WindyCityBorn]

The more I see him, the more it’s clear he has to be the number ONE primary ball handler to be effective. We can all see how much better he looks once the air was cleared after the Zach trade.

Now can you build a successful team around him as that guy? The very real multi million dollar question.

I mean the answer to that sure seems like obviously not. The focal point of your offense needs to be a dynamic scorer that draws double times and scores in high volume above league average efficiency.

I think the more interesting question to me is can he become a good enough and consistent enough shooter where he no longer needs to be the #1 ball handler to be effective. I think it's way more likely he becomes a consistent enough shooter to play off ball than he becomes a dynamic enough offensive player to be the offensive fulcrum.

Partially because it's nearly impossible for him to get good enough to be a the primary ball handler on a good team without improving his shooting, because to be that good, he needs to be a great scoring threat which will involve better and more advanced shooting than just consistent off-ball shooting.

Magic Johnson wasn't his team's best scorer.

Neither was Scottie Pippen, Kyle Lowry or Tony Parker. Didn’t stop those teams from winning championships.

[sco]

Saying you can never see him as top 60 player is wild. He is playing like a top 30 player right now at 23.

I strongly disagree. He's a sub par defender and an average scorer who can pass and rebound really well. Don't let counting stats define guys.

No I’m watching him. He is one of the highest IQ players in the league. He is an elite rebounder and passer. Defense is around average.

I think his defense here has been a roller-coaster. Coming in he didn't know the system, which often makes guys look lazy and slower than they actually are. I also think there were some adjustments, i.e. not having him guard quick guards, but instead putting him on the opponent's less offensive forward. Lastly, I think playing with Ball has increased his defensive IQ.

He's not Caruso out there, but IMO he is better than Coby. He clearly has BBIQ and good vision which I think he uses to compensate for not being lightning quick or super strong. That said, he isn't slow by any stretch and he may not be the hulk, but he's definitely scrappy.