Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[Infinity2152]

Bulls should offer a declining 5 year deal with max 8% decreases starting at 30 mil, team option on year 5. He gets his "30 mil" wish in the most team advantageous way possible.

That would be a reasonable compromise. Then work the numbers, guaranteed money, option years, performance bonuses, etc. till both sides meet. One reason I'm not in favor of waiting till the last minute, there are so many things to negotiate besides just starting price year 1 of the contract.

[MrSparkle]

I think 100/4 descending with ~$20m in incentives (ASG, All-NBA, etc.) would be the right deal. I'd avoid 5Y unless it's a team option.

[League Circles]

Not sure exactly how incentives are handled, but I always hate loose ends. It's why I hate draft pick protections in trades etc.

I think the Bulls should just make him several simultaneous offers that differ in pay:

A 3 year deal
A 4 year deal
A 5 year with a TO
A 5 year with a PO

Etc

Then he can choose from among them.

[Infinity2152]

The history of taking the QO isn't great which is why ultimately a deal is going to get done.

Read on Twitter

When you look at that list, which one showed even close to what Giddey has shown? Those are all role players except Bridges who got paid, not starters. Pretty clearly, even if they've had random starts. How much money was available in free agency, relative to next summer? There are three players (Kuminga, Giddey, Grimes) right now where taking the QO is a legit concern. That is not usual.

Totally different caliber of player and expected pay. If the Bulls are really $10 mill apart, that difference alone is more than most of those contracts.

Again, don't see why people think Giddey has to take the QO, or even that it would be best for him if the Bulls don't come to an acceptable number (to him). I think it's perfectly OK to bet on yourself at 22 if you think somebody's taking advantage in a deal. All those numbers prove is players will take the QO. What Giddey gets afterwards is totally unknown, likely to be more than he's offered now, and doesn't even matter if he's not here because he signed with another team. Only thing that will matter is we lost him. But saved a couple mill a year.

If low level players will do it to make $2-$4 mill extra AAV, a young starter putting up star numbers won't do it for an extra $10 mill/AAV? What logic is that? Those guys knew the history when they took it, lol. And still took it. If 5 players have done it in the last 7 years, it's clearly not unthinkable. That's almost one every year.

Valentine on the QO: 6pt, 3 rbs, 1.7 assts
Nerlens Noel: 4.4 pts, 5.6 rbs, .7 blocks
Rodney Hood: 12.2 pts, 2.5 rbs, 2 assts
Alex Len: 8.5pts, 7.5 rbs, .9 blocks

Unless you and Giddey both expect him to have that kind of season next year, wouldn't think what those guys got paid is relevant. There's a reason not taking the money was a bad decision, they weren't that good. Reason it rarely happens is because most teams aren't stupid or cheap enough to let it get to that point if they see a player as a long term option, especially at 22. They'll S&T a player before they lose him for nothing or play on the QO.

[nomorezorro]

the reason it's uncommon for good players to take the QO is because young good players get offered tens of millions of dollars in restricted free agency, and it is generally hard to turn down that much guaranteed money under the premise that you might be able to get even more a year later. especially because you have the right to negotiate with other teams and can get an actual gauge of your market value

which is why i will never agree with anyone who acts like giddey and the bulls have similar leverage in these negotiations. i just don't believe there's any question who's got more to lose when you're looking at a GM making an unpopular decision that could affect his long-term job security vs. a player who is actively turning down a guarantee of ~$100m and risking losing tens of millions of dollars if something goes wrong this upcoming season

[Infinity2152]

the reason it's uncommon for good players to take the QO is because young good players get offered tens of millions of dollars in restricted free agency, and it is generally hard to turn down that much guaranteed money under the premise that you might be able to get even more a year later. especially because you have the right to negotiate with other teams and can get an actual gauge of your market value

which is why i will never agree with anyone who acts like giddey and the bulls have similar leverage in these negotiations. i just don't believe there's any question who's got more to lose when you're looking at a GM making an unpopular decision that could affect his long-term job security vs. a player who is actively turning down a guarantee of ~$100m and risking losing tens of millions of dollars if something goes wrong this upcoming season

Well, for one the numbers put up 4 yrs/90 mill is not a guaranteed $100 mill. I think the guaranteed 4yrs/$100 mill is the price most of us are looking at, and it appears they haven't offered him that. Second, Giddey has made $28 mill in salary already, and would add another $11 mill taking the QO. That's not including his shoe contracts or endorsements. He's a mega-millionaire already. The first year is guaranteed if he takes the QO.

The Bulls leverage: If Giddey takes the QO, what do the Bulls have? Giddey for 1 year, then he's an unrestricted free agent. Stop acting like the Bulls can't lose as well as Giddey gives up $11-12 mill this season for the chance to add $40-$50 mill on his next contract. People gamble with way worse odds every single day. I'm watching people take loans on their homes to buy Yieldmax stocks, like 80+% of daytraders lose money and they do it every day. And they don't have $50+ mill cushions already to fall back on if everything goes wrong. Yes, I guess at 22 you could think the most important thing is to make sure, JUST IN CASE you suffer a massive career ending injury, you allow yourself to be bent over and take what you can get.

Don't know what the odds of him having a career ending injury next year are. Would imagine pretty small, and that's what would have to happen for him not to get a contract next season. He might not get $30 mill, but if they're only offering $22 mill and he gets even $26-$28 mill, he wins the gamble. Please stop acting like people don't gamble with larger amounts of money with far more risk. He's made it this far without a career ending injury. Most players aren't having career ending injuries at 22. An asteroid can hit your house, most people aren't paying for asteroid insurance, even if they could lose their whole house.

You're right, they don't have similar leverage. Losing Giddey for nothing if a nother team offers him a contract we won't match or he takes the QO hurts us WAY, WAY worse than it does Giddey. Unless he has that horrible season or for some reason re-signs with us next year for less than what we're offering now (Very likely). You're saying he should take possibly 10's of millions less to get his guaranteed money 1 year earlier. Fine if that's your opinion, it's not mine and may not be Giddey's.

Unless Giddey has that career ending injury, worst thing for Giddey is he has to wait a year to make that $11 mill back as an unrestricted free agency, and he can choose to go anywhere, California, Texas, Miami, etc. Join a legit contender that would LOVE to pay him that $30 mill.

[nomorezorro]

the squiggly thing in front of the dollar sign means "about"

(also there's no reporting that the bulls best offer is 4 years/$90 million; that was just zach lowe's best guess of where the contract would land at. between KC and fischer, the reporting is that we've offered somewhere between $20-24m AAV, and it seems likely that we'd be willing to go 5 years at our desired price)

[Infinity2152]

the squiggly thing in front of the dollar sign means "about"

(also there's no reporting that the bulls best offer is 4 years/$90 million; that was just zach lowe's best guess of where the contract would land at. between KC and fischer, the reporting is that we've offered somewhere between $20-24m AAV, and it seems likely that we'd be willing to go 5 years at our desired price)

Why would Giddey want 5 years at our desired price? Or are you now going to say that players don't take shorter contracts every year so they could enter free agency again earlier? Part of the whole point, there are other factors than just dollar amounts. They may have to give up that extra year and other concessions that won't favor us in the long run to keep it to a low number and still get him to sign. Or give him a player option. I'd rather pay him an extra couple of mill/yr and have that 5th year team option for instance. If he improves as most 22 year olds do, that $26-$27 mill would look cheap on a $200+ mill salary cap. We re-sign him year 5, could cost us $40-$50 mill easy. Maybe more.

Might give a little more for a front-loaded contract. Maybe add performance bonuses like an extra $3 mill for All-Star appearances. If he's going to the Al-Star games, he's certainly earning his keep. He plays great, he gets the money he wants. He doesn't we pay him less. Pay a little more for the last two years being team options. Insurance for us just in case.

Both the 4 yrs/90 and the between $20-$24 mill average out our desired price being around $22 mill. Of course we don't know the real number.

[nomorezorro]

i'm not saying he would want a five year deal. my first post was that our best offer to him (presumably) represented a guarantee of around $100 million, then you said $90 million isn't $100 million, then i said the reporting indicates we've probably offered him at least $100 million.

[League Circles]

The history of taking the QO isn't great which is why ultimately a deal is going to get done.

Read on Twitter

When you look at that list, which one showed even close to what Giddey has shown? Those are all role players except Bridges who got paid, not starters. Pretty clearly, even if they've had random starts. How much money was available in free agency, relative to next summer? There are three players (Kuminga, Giddey, Grimes) right now where taking the QO is a legit concern. That is not usual.

Totally different caliber of player and expected pay. If the Bulls are really $10 mill apart, that difference alone is more than most of those contracts.

Again, don't see why people think Giddey has to take the QO, or even that it would be best for him if the Bulls don't come to an acceptable number (to him). I think it's perfectly OK to bet on yourself at 22 if you think somebody's taking advantage in a deal. All those numbers prove is players will take the QO. What Giddey gets afterwards is totally unknown, likely to be more than he's offered now, and doesn't even matter if he's not here because he signed with another team. Only thing that will matter is we lost him. But saved a couple mill a year.

If low level players will do it to make $2-$4 mill extra AAV, a young starter putting up star numbers won't do it for an extra $10 mill/AAV? What logic is that? Those guys knew the history when they took it, lol. And still took it. If 5 players have done it in the last 7 years, it's clearly not unthinkable. That's almost one every year.

Valentine on the QO: 6pt, 3 rbs, 1.7 assts
Nerlens Noel: 4.4 pts, 5.6 rbs, .7 blocks
Rodney Hood: 12.2 pts, 2.5 rbs, 2 assts
Alex Len: 8.5pts, 7.5 rbs, .9 blocks

Unless you and Giddey both expect him to have that kind of season next year, wouldn't think what those guys got paid is relevant. There's a reason not taking the money was a bad decision, they weren't that good. Reason it rarely happens is because most teams aren't stupid or cheap enough to let it get to that point if they see a player as a long term option, especially at 22. They'll S&T a player before they lose him for nothing or play on the QO.

Hard to draw any conclusions without info of what kinds of offers guys turned down.

Let's say Giddey is being offered double the QO currently from the Bulls in the first year of a deal, roughly 5 year, 125 as a quick estimate.

If he plays on the QO and has a serious injury, he genuinely may miss out on virtually all future earnings, so let's say he loses 110 million dollars.

On the plus side, he could be a legit max guy in a year on a 4 year deal with a new team, which combined with the QO, would be about 186 mil over the 5 years.

So his upside is probably making about an extra 60 million over 5 years over the 125 we're probably roughly offering, and his downside if he takes the QO and has a serious injury is probably losing about 110 of the 125.

If I were him I'd take the Bulls offer last minute instead of the QO.

Of course, he already has many millions of dollars that I don't, so it wouldn't be reckless for him to gamble on himself. I think most would also agree that a nearly career ending injury is probably a fair amount less likely than becoming a max guy.

[Infinity2152]

I get you. The assumption would be the contract is 5 years, no team option to come to that number.

Let me ask you this: Tons of players are offered extensions in their 3rd year. Many, many turn them down. Jimmy Butler turned down a 4yr/$40 mill extension from the Bulls. He got a 5 yr/$95 mill extension with a player option the next year. Kuminga's turned down multiple contracts I believe. What's the difference in turning down guaranteed money in year 3, versus year 4? Because every player turning down an extension is taking the same risk as taking the QO.

Actually worse turning down the extension. Then you have to go back to the same people you couldn't come to terms with and try all over again, but as a restricted free agent.

[Infinity2152]

The history of taking the QO isn't great which is why ultimately a deal is going to get done.

Read on Twitter

When you look at that list, which one showed even close to what Giddey has shown? Those are all role players except Bridges who got paid, not starters. Pretty clearly, even if they've had random starts. How much money was available in free agency, relative to next summer? There are three players (Kuminga, Giddey, Grimes) right now where taking the QO is a legit concern. That is not usual.

Totally different caliber of player and expected pay. If the Bulls are really $10 mill apart, that difference alone is more than most of those contracts.

Again, don't see why people think Giddey has to take the QO, or even that it would be best for him if the Bulls don't come to an acceptable number (to him). I think it's perfectly OK to bet on yourself at 22 if you think somebody's taking advantage in a deal. All those numbers prove is players will take the QO. What Giddey gets afterwards is totally unknown, likely to be more than he's offered now, and doesn't even matter if he's not here because he signed with another team. Only thing that will matter is we lost him. But saved a couple mill a year.

If low level players will do it to make $2-$4 mill extra AAV, a young starter putting up star numbers won't do it for an extra $10 mill/AAV? What logic is that? Those guys knew the history when they took it, lol. And still took it. If 5 players have done it in the last 7 years, it's clearly not unthinkable. That's almost one every year.

Valentine on the QO: 6pt, 3 rbs, 1.7 assts
Nerlens Noel: 4.4 pts, 5.6 rbs, .7 blocks
Rodney Hood: 12.2 pts, 2.5 rbs, 2 assts
Alex Len: 8.5pts, 7.5 rbs, .9 blocks

Unless you and Giddey both expect him to have that kind of season next year, wouldn't think what those guys got paid is relevant. There's a reason not taking the money was a bad decision, they weren't that good. Reason it rarely happens is because most teams aren't stupid or cheap enough to let it get to that point if they see a player as a long term option, especially at 22. They'll S&T a player before they lose him for nothing or play on the QO.

Hard to draw any conclusions without info of what kinds of offers guys turned down.

Let's say Giddey is being offered double the QO currently from the Bulls in the first year of a deal, roughly 5 year, 125 as a quick estimate.

If he plays on the QO and has a serious injury, he genuinely may miss out on virtually all future earnings, so let's say he loses 110 million dollars.

On the plus side, he could be a legit max guy in a year on a 4 year deal with a new team, which combined with the QO, would be about 186 mil over the 5 years.

So his upside is probably making about an extra 60 million over 5 years over the 125 we're probably roughly offering, and his downside if he takes the QO and has a serious injury is probably losing about 110 of the 125.

If I were him I'd take the Bulls offer last minute instead of the QO.

Of course, he already has many millions of dollars that I don't, so it wouldn't be reckless for him to gamble on himself. I think most would also agree that a nearly career ending injury is probably a fair amount less likely than becoming a max guy.

I think the last point is the most critical. Regardless of our personal risk tolerance, the odds of career ending injury vs the odds of him getting more than $22 mill as a UFA next summer would favor Giddey. When you already have $50+ mill, you can afford to take more chances. Don't think we can just assume he won't take the QO, that's all. This is exactly why there is a qualifying offer in the first place.

Like if this was agent's school, this would be the textbook example for when you should advise your client to take the QO. Career ending injury possibility has always existed for every player for every contract. Sounds like guys are saying it's never in a player's best interest to take the QO, they'll never win.

Not talking about taking the QO on a whim or being inflexible. Rumors are they're $8-$10/yr mill apart. That's $40-$50 mill on a five year contract. If that's not a large enough gap to take the QO, what is?

He has that career ending injury after pocketing another $11 mill. Add in the shoe deals, damn I've only made $70 mill by 23? What am I going to do to make money? Uh, invest and be rich and retired for life?

[nomorezorro]

I get you. The assumption would be the contract is 5 years, no team option to come to that number.

Let me ask you this: Tons of players are offered extensions in their 3rd year. Many, many turn them down. Jimmy Butler turned down a 4yr/$40 mill extension from the Bulls. He got a 5 yr/$95 mill extension with a player option the next year. Kuminga's turned down multiple contracts I believe. What's the difference in turning down guaranteed money in year 3, versus year 4? Because every player turning down an extension is taking the same risk as taking the QO.

Actually worse turning down the extension. Then you have to go back to the same people you couldn't come to terms with and try all over again, but as a restricted free agent.

i think the difference with a rookie extension is that the team is far more incentivized to make a contract offer where they "win," since they are the sole party who can negotiate with the player, and even if they don't come to terms, the team still has full matching rights a year later. the main motivating factor for a team in that situation is extracting value from the contract, rather than fear of imminently losing that player to a better offer from a competitor. this means it's easier for a player to walk away from negotiations under the guise that it won't be the best offer they receive, and more money is waiting for them a year later.

in restricted free agency, a player isn't quite on the open market due to the matching rights, but he can solicit offers from other teams, and the QO means there's a mechanism (however unlikely) for the player to lay the groundwork for an exit in the near future. as a result, teams have a lot more reason to ensure their offer to an RFA is generally in line with "fair market value" than they would for an extension-eligible rookie. likewise, it's harder for an RFA to tell himself "i'll make more money in free agency next year" when teams have every right to offer him that money *this* year.

(obviously, there is the unique dynamic this year with basically nobody having cap space, which isn't currently projected to be the case next year. i do think that makes it a little more likely that someone like giddey might be willing to take a gamble on the QO, but i'm skeptical that's enough to make it an option we actually have to worry about — cap space can dry up quickly, the aprons will probably still have a chilling effect on spending, and it's very far from a guarantee that there will be a suitor for giddey next year at the price we're offering now, let alone the price he's hoping for.)

[League Circles]

Giddey can also choose to not sign the QO or the Bulls' offer or any offer sheet and just sit out and remain a RFA, potentially through the season and into next summer right? Force the Bulls to sign and trade him maybe?

[Infinity2152]

I get you. The assumption would be the contract is 5 years, no team option to come to that number.

Let me ask you this: Tons of players are offered extensions in their 3rd year. Many, many turn them down. Jimmy Butler turned down a 4yr/$40 mill extension from the Bulls. He got a 5 yr/$95 mill extension with a player option the next year. Kuminga's turned down multiple contracts I believe. What's the difference in turning down guaranteed money in year 3, versus year 4? Because every player turning down an extension is taking the same risk as taking the QO.

Actually worse turning down the extension. Then you have to go back to the same people you couldn't come to terms with and try all over again, but as a restricted free agent.

i think the difference with a rookie extension is that the team is far more incentivized to make a contract offer where they "win," since they are the sole party who can negotiate with the player, and even if they don't come to terms, the team still has full matching rights a year later. the main motivating factor for a team in that situation is extracting value from the contract, rather than fear of imminently losing that player to a better offer from a competitor. this means it's easier for a player to walk away from negotiations under the guise that it won't be the best offer they receive, and more money is waiting for them a year later.

in restricted free agency, a player isn't quite on the open market due to the matching rights, but he can solicit offers from other teams, and the QO means there's a mechanism (however unlikely) for the player to lay the groundwork for an exit in the near future. as a result, teams have a lot more reason to ensure their offer to an RFA is generally in line with "fair market value" than they would for an extension-eligible rookie. likewise, it's harder for an RFA to tell himself "i'll make more money in free agency next year" when teams have every right to offer him that money *this* year.

(obviously, there is the unique dynamic this year with basically nobody having cap space, which isn't currently projected to be the case next year. i do think that makes it a little more likely that someone like giddey might be willing to take a gamble on the QO, but i'm skeptical that's enough to make it an option we actually have to worry about — cap space can dry up quickly, the aprons will probably still have a chilling effect on spending, and it's very far from a guarantee that there will be a suitor for giddey next year at the price he's hoping for.)

I mean I get you. I think every person and every situation is unique. Circumstance have come together where we're negotiating like this. We're only looking at it from the team's side. We view the risk of him taking the QO differently. A 15% risk is too high for me. The consequences would be staggering. How far back are we if Coby and Giddey are both UFA's 2026? How much would we pay to keep them, they'll be top free agents. Even worse, they both leave.

Look at it from Giddey's side. Let's say 10 teams had cap space enough to sign Giddey. Let's say those teams all know he wants $30 mill, he's been saying it all year. I think the odds are extremely high a team would have offered him over $30 mill AAV to steal him. People will argue, he's a 22yr old who's been putting up crazy stats for years really, and looking much better all around. I think $35 mill offers would come. Don't think as a player I'd accept "I'm worth less because nobody has the money to pay me, so I'll take whatever."

I doesn't have those options, the market is screwing me. But I've been faithful, playing my heart out, Bulls have the advantage. They can pay me fairly or they can try to screw me as hard as they can, or somewhere in between. If the offer is $22 mill and I sincerely believe they would match up to that $35 mill, I'd take that as screwing me while they have the chance. I really believe I'm worth $35 mill easy. It would be pretty insane for me to take a5year deal anywhere near $22 mill.

I think most of us think $26-$27 mill is a fair concession on both sides. Yes, if I was him, after all I'd done for the Bulls since I've been here and you're talking about me leading the team, I take that $22mill offer as an insult, especially if it takes you too long to move up to something reasonable. Keep insulting me and I go nuclear.

And if I'm Coby White, I'm watching their treatment of Giddey after the season he just had very closely. Every player in (and out) the league with a podcast is talking about how Kuminga, Grimes and Giddey are getting screwed over and going to be screwed. The guy we're looking to lead the offense.

[Infinity2152]

Question for the room. What do you think the actual numbers are for players having career ending injuries in their first 5 years, particularly Giddey's age? Lillard's expected back, Kyrie, Tatum, and they're much older. After watching Ball, PG13, Simmons, Rose come back what do you think the actual odds are Giddey would suffer a literal career ending injury next year, based on previous numbers of players in the league. Way less than 1% have a career ending injury in their first 5 years?

People keep bringing up he could have a career ending injury. For every 100 players playing, 60 get drafted each year, how many will have a career ending injury in year 5? One? Three? Five? Players who didn't come into the league with injury concerns at all?

[sco]

I get you. The assumption would be the contract is 5 years, no team option to come to that number.

Let me ask you this: Tons of players are offered extensions in their 3rd year. Many, many turn them down. Jimmy Butler turned down a 4yr/$40 mill extension from the Bulls. He got a 5 yr/$95 mill extension with a player option the next year. Kuminga's turned down multiple contracts I believe. What's the difference in turning down guaranteed money in year 3, versus year 4? Because every player turning down an extension is taking the same risk as taking the QO.

Actually worse turning down the extension. Then you have to go back to the same people you couldn't come to terms with and try all over again, but as a restricted free agent.

i think the difference with a rookie extension is that the team is far more incentivized to make a contract offer where they "win," since they are the sole party who can negotiate with the player, and even if they don't come to terms, the team still has full matching rights a year later. the main motivating factor for a team in that situation is extracting value from the contract, rather than fear of imminently losing that player to a better offer from a competitor. this means it's easier for a player to walk away from negotiations under the guise that it won't be the best offer they receive, and more money is waiting for them a year later.

in restricted free agency, a player isn't quite on the open market due to the matching rights, but he can solicit offers from other teams, and the QO means there's a mechanism (however unlikely) for the player to lay the groundwork for an exit in the near future. as a result, teams have a lot more reason to ensure their offer to an RFA is generally in line with "fair market value" than they would for an extension-eligible rookie. likewise, it's harder for an RFA to tell himself "i'll make more money in free agency next year" when teams have every right to offer him that money *this* year.

(obviously, there is the unique dynamic this year with basically nobody having cap space, which isn't currently projected to be the case next year. i do think that makes it a little more likely that someone like giddey might be willing to take a gamble on the QO, but i'm skeptical that's enough to make it an option we actually have to worry about — cap space can dry up quickly, the aprons will probably still have a chilling effect on spending, and it's very far from a guarantee that there will be a suitor for giddey next year at the price he's hoping for.)

I mean I get you. I think every person and every situation is unique. Circumstance have come together where we're negotiating like this. We're only looking at it from the team's side. We view the risk of him taking the QO differently. A 15% risk is too high for me. The consequences would be staggering. How far back are we if Coby and Giddey are both UFA's 2026? How much would we pay to keep them, they'll be top free agents. Even worse, they both leave.

Look at it from Giddey's side. Let's say 10 teams had cap space enough to sign Giddey. Let's say those teams all know he wants $30 mill, he's been saying it all year. I think the odds are extremely high a team would have offered him over $30 mill AAV to steal him. People will argue, he's a 22yr old who's been putting up crazy stats for years really, and looking much better all around. I think $35 mill offers would come. Don't think as a player I'd accept "I'm worth less because nobody has the money to pay me, so I'll take whatever."

I doesn't have those options, the market is screwing me. But I've been faithful, playing my heart out, Bulls have the advantage. They can pay me fairly or they can try to screw me as hard as they can, or somewhere in between. If the offer is $22 mill and I sincerely believe they would match up to that $35 mill, I'd take that as screwing me while they have the chance. I really believe I'm worth $35 mill easy. It would be pretty insane for me to take a5year deal anywhere near $22 mill.

I think most of us think $26-$27 mill is a fair concession on both sides. Yes, if I was him, after all I'd done for the Bulls since I've been here and you're talking about me leading the team, I take that $22mill offer as an insult, especially if it takes you too long to move up to something reasonable. Keep insulting me and I go nuclear.

And if I'm Coby White, I'm watching their treatment of Giddey after the season he just had very closely. Every player in (and out) the league with a podcast is talking about how Kuminga, Grimes and Giddey are getting screwed over and going to be screwed. The guy we're looking to lead the offense.

I do agree that if Giddey was a FA next season, he'd likely get offered/paid more. That said, that's the NBA and how the CBA works. The market is fluid. Teams are constrained. He can take the QO, like some have said to try to get more next season...I can't imagine he will, be he could. It's not like it's only injury that he needs to worry about. The Bulls could recognize he's on his way out and just start Jones or go to more of a time split...which would kill his market value. Or he could just have a regression to the mean season and show that he's just a marginal starter, and be worth less.

I like Coby and root for him to succeed. He's a guy who had gotten better every year. I would be sad to see him go elsewhere; however, if some team wants to pay $35M/yr for him, and we don't match, I won't be too bothered.

While both guys are objectively good starting talents with some (but not tons) of upside, neither guy is a legit number 1 option on a contending team. I get AK's strategy to find players without tanking; however, where his strategy gets risky is paying those young vets for potential that they haven't shown (for a full season...don't give men no big payday for no Februlauri).

[League Circles]

A bunch of great posts by you guys in a row, good point by all

[Infinity2152]

I believe in team finances being important. I don't place the same value of saving every dollar over all other consideration as others do. Not saying it's bad, just different ways of weighing. Let's take Giddey specifically out. Looking at the Bulls right now, there's no way I lose a 22-yr old with those numbers to save $2-$5 mill a year for several reasons.

1. I'd recognize that I'm offering him below fair market value in the first place. That's natural if i have the advantage. I know if pressed, I would pay him that money in a free market. So if I lose him for the same money I would have paid him anyway, I'm just dumb. My last and final offer shouldn't be what I think he HAS to take, it should be what I think he's worth.

2. He's an asset. A few mill more either way is not changing his market value much as a trade asset. This is a young asset, likely to appreciate. exactly the type of asset you may overpay a few bucks for and still be fine.

3. Point guards like Giddey are HARD to find. Period. He's 22. It could be any other 22-year-old PG that's really good at running an offense. That's the most important thing. If ever there's a player to invest in upside, it's a player who's been steadily improving. You'll always have to take some risk, every signing COULD be an overpay. There's relatively low risk he significantly underplays his contract, like Pat Will.

4. We cannot afford to lose assets for nothing. You don't want him at $30 mill, sign him and trade him during the season, you'll get a buttload. Small risk gamble, but way better than losing him for nothing. I find it HIGHLY unlikely he's untradeable at $30 mill. We'd get first round picks, maybe several. In my opinion.

5. When we're talking about guys who will probably be starters the next 4-5 years, leeway is much more than 6th man, role player types. At least for me. Every player doesn't have equal importance.

Not saying all these things are correct, but this is my frame of thought.

[DrModesty]

When you look at that list, which one showed even close to what Giddey has shown? Those are all role players except Bridges who got paid, not starters. Pretty clearly, even if they've had random starts. How much money was available in free agency, relative to next summer? There are three players (Kuminga, Giddey, Grimes) right now where taking the QO is a legit concern. That is not usual.

Totally different caliber of player and expected pay. If the Bulls are really $10 mill apart, that difference alone is more than most of those contracts.

Again, don't see why people think Giddey has to take the QO, or even that it would be best for him if the Bulls don't come to an acceptable number (to him). I think it's perfectly OK to bet on yourself at 22 if you think somebody's taking advantage in a deal. All those numbers prove is players will take the QO. What Giddey gets afterwards is totally unknown, likely to be more than he's offered now, and doesn't even matter if he's not here because he signed with another team. Only thing that will matter is we lost him. But saved a couple mill a year.

If low level players will do it to make $2-$4 mill extra AAV, a young starter putting up star numbers won't do it for an extra $10 mill/AAV? What logic is that? Those guys knew the history when they took it, lol. And still took it. If 5 players have done it in the last 7 years, it's clearly not unthinkable. That's almost one every year.

Valentine on the QO: 6pt, 3 rbs, 1.7 assts
Nerlens Noel: 4.4 pts, 5.6 rbs, .7 blocks
Rodney Hood: 12.2 pts, 2.5 rbs, 2 assts
Alex Len: 8.5pts, 7.5 rbs, .9 blocks

Unless you and Giddey both expect him to have that kind of season next year, wouldn't think what those guys got paid is relevant. There's a reason not taking the money was a bad decision, they weren't that good. Reason it rarely happens is because most teams aren't stupid or cheap enough to let it get to that point if they see a player as a long term option, especially at 22. They'll S&T a player before they lose him for nothing or play on the QO.

Hard to draw any conclusions without info of what kinds of offers guys turned down.

Let's say Giddey is being offered double the QO currently from the Bulls in the first year of a deal, roughly 5 year, 125 as a quick estimate.

If he plays on the QO and has a serious injury, he genuinely may miss out on virtually all future earnings, so let's say he loses 110 million dollars.

On the plus side, he could be a legit max guy in a year on a 4 year deal with a new team, which combined with the QO, would be about 186 mil over the 5 years.

So his upside is probably making about an extra 60 million over 5 years over the 125 we're probably roughly offering, and his downside if he takes the QO and has a serious injury is probably losing about 110 of the 125.

If I were him I'd take the Bulls offer last minute instead of the QO.

Of course, he already has many millions of dollars that I don't, so it wouldn't be reckless for him to gamble on himself. I think most would also agree that a nearly career ending injury is probably a fair amount less likely than becoming a max guy.

I think the last point is the most critical. Regardless of our personal risk tolerance, the odds of career ending injury vs the odds of him getting more than $22 mill as a UFA next summer would favor Giddey. When you already have $50+ mill, you can afford to take more chances. Don't think we can just assume he won't take the QO, that's all. This is exactly why there is a qualifying offer in the first place.

Like if this was agent's school, this would be the textbook example for when you should advise your client to take the QO. Career ending injury possibility has always existed for every player for every contract. Sounds like guys are saying it's never in a player's best interest to take the QO, they'll never win.

Not talking about taking the QO on a whim or being inflexible. Rumors are they're $8-$10/yr mill apart. That's $40-$50 mill on a five year contract. If that's not a large enough gap to take the QO, what is?

He has that career ending injury after pocketing another $11 mill. Add in the shoe deals, damn I've only made $70 mill by 23? What am I going to do to make money? Uh, invest and be rich and retired for life?

Your numbers inflated because that won't take in to account taxes and agent's fees. He already will have spent substantial money too (he has several very nice cars for example).

But taxes and agent fees will come off of the contract he signs up for as well, so that goes both ways. Your general logic is sound in that his combination of wealth, age, current market factors, past pedigree of play, downside risk and size of gap in negotiations make the QO a viable choice if the Bulls don't come correct to him.

Of course that doesn't mean the Bulls just need to acquiesce to him, but the leverage is not all Chicago's, and Giddey leaving would be bad for the Bulls. I'd go as far as saying that the risk Chicago faces is worse than Giddey.

If a deal isn't reached because Chicago is lowballing considerably (We know Giddey is asking for 30m, which is not an extreme number, though it is too rich for some), then next season Giddey will have a good probability of earning more money, a good probability of earning similar money, a small probability of earning less money and a much smaller probability of his entire career being derailed by career altering injury.

If a deal isn't reached, then next season Chicago has a good probability of paying Giddey more money, a smaller probability of paying him similar money, an even smaller probability of paying him less money and likely the biggest slice of probability is him leaving for nothing.