Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[kodo]

$70M for 3 years ($23M AAV) would be fantastic with serious upside if he comes anywhere close to what he showed end of season at 21/11/9. Even if he dropped to 18/9/8 that's basically an all-star for a winning team in the 45 win range.

Close to Sabonis #s (19/13/8) on a 46 win SAC team and Sabonis was All-NBA.
Sabonis is $46M AAV for the length of his contract.

[sco]

$75M for 3 years ($23M AAV) would be fantastic with serious upside if he comes anywhere close to what he showed end of season at 21/11/9. Even if he dropped to 18/9/8 that's basically an all-star for a winning team in the 45 win range.

Close to Sabonis #s (19/13/8) on a 46 win SAC team and Sabonis was All-NBA.
Sabonis is $46M AAV for the length of his contract.

Somewhat related. I have been wondering if players collecting stats outside of their "main roles" (which is a confusing term in light of positionless basketball), but in Giddey's case, he is a heck of a rebounder. But his role is essentially our PG (on offense but SF on defense). When we think about his contributions, should we fully factor in his rebounding?

[MrSparkle]

75/3 sounds right. 60/3 seems comical and a bit insulting. Bulls can use the market leverage all they want, but ultimately players/agents want respect, and it’s disrespectful offering him PWill money while he’s asked to lead the team… and in the grand scheme, $5M in cap is not important enough for a team under the tax to die on the hill. Not sure if Giddey agrees without a player option.

A Rubio-esque career trajectory for Giddey sounds realistic. Some pros and cons between the two; Rubio had the ACL tear and was notably a worse scoring threat. OTOH he was a better defender and dribbler against ball-pressure. Ultimately Giddey projects better. I don’t see the difference between a $30M or $20M contract for him. In the end, his floor has no bottom, and ceiling has no top. He’s a high-risk player when you consider his career shooting trends, athleticism, defense and ankle durability. But the potential reward is there too. If he becomes a nightly 20/10/10 and stays healthy, all a sudden that 3Y deal (2Y if a PO) might not look so sweet, kind of like this Coby deal.

[dougthonus]

Yeah seems like a good compromise. Giddey gets lifetime security now and gets back in on market at 25 if he truly is worth more. Bulls avoid a potential bad long term deal. They will gladly play him more if proves he is worth it on this shorter deal.

Worth noting Giddey already has life time security, because he is by far the biggest NBA player in Australia, he has all kinds of marketing deals in Australia beyond what a normal player of his caliber would have.

[Almost Retired]

75/3 sounds right. 60/3 seems comical and a bit insulting. Bulls can use the market leverage all they want, but ultimately players/agents want respect, and it’s disrespectful offering him PWill money while he’s asked to lead the team… and in the grand scheme, $5M in cap is not important enough for a team under the tax to die on the hill. Not sure if Giddey agrees without a player option.

A Rubio-esque career trajectory for Giddey sounds realistic. Some pros and cons between the two; Rubio had the ACL tear and was notably a worse scoring threat. OTOH he was a better defender and dribbler against ball-pressure. Ultimately Giddey projects better. I don’t see the difference between a $30M or $20M contract for him. In the end, his floor has no bottom, and ceiling has no top. He’s a high-risk player when you consider his career shooting trends, athleticism, defense and ankle durability. But the potential reward is there too. If he becomes a nightly 20/10/10 and stays healthy, all a sudden that 3Y deal (2Y if a PO) might not look so sweet, kind of like this Coby deal.

I'd even go slightly above $25 million per year if we could lock him in for 4 years. Something like $105 million over 4 years. We can afford that. We won't be able to afford his next contract if he continues the improvement he's shown since Lavine was traded. I'm not keeping any guys with a third contract at these obscene max and super max salaries. I trade them for assets before they expire.

[bullskokie]

It should be noted that the Bulls intended to match any offer should Giddey get one. The problem here were the agents thought it was given. Giddey needs to sign the contract offered now as it is fair market and fire those agents!

[sco]

It should be noted that the Bulls intended to match any offer should Giddey get one. The problem here were the agents thought it was given. Giddey needs to sign the contract offered now as it is fair market and fire those agents!

Are you saying that his agent should be fired because he thought that Giddey would have received an offer, but didn't? If so, why?

[DuckIII]

Read on Twitter

That first tweet makes no sense. The Bulls will agree with Giddey on a 3 year deal . . . . 4 weeks from now?

I’m grateful to have never been on Twitter in my whole life. I assume the source of the tweet isn’t someone substantial?

Makes sense to me. They will land in the 3 year 70-75M range. Less years than a 4-5 year commitment, land in a higher AAV than 20M, allow Giddey to hit FA again when hes just 25 years old.

25M the next 3 years is reasonable for both sides here.

The tweet has been clarified which changes my post. My post was not questioning whether that would be a reasonable outcome, but rather how can someone report that a deal is expected to get done at X amount in a month. It made the tweet sound not credible. Which its not because its just a prediction by other agents rather than a report, which was clarified later.

Lets get it done and start building. I do think Giddey can continue blossoming running the show here. I don’t just base that off the 2nd half of last year, he showed he could be that guy in his first 2 years of OKC before his life fell apart. Guarantee we could not have traded Caruso for Giddey after year 2 - we bought low last year and the 2nd half only reinforced why we made that move.

Agree.

[DuckIII]

I don’t understand why this is dragging so much. No other team will all of a sudden make him an offer so he’s limited with those 2 options since the Bulls have leverage.

My guess:

Both sides want each other.

Both sides seem about $5M apart from the number that is reasonable.

Both sides will ultimately accept the reasonable number ($25M AAV)

Neither side wants to be the first mover and risk looking weaker and desperate and then moving more than $5M off their number.

There is no time pressure for either side to do anything until Oct 1st when the deadline to accept the QO hits. Neither side is likely to come to the table before then.

Totally agree. And its why I've not written any posts expressing concern. They both want and need each other. Its going to happen. The only thing the drag of time suggests to me is that Giddey will opt for less years and a player option.

As an aside: I realize Giddey has a crappy market to deal with which is killing his ability to generate leverage. But can you imagine being Giddey and having the Bulls hold solid at $20 mil per after the year he just had, while Pat is making $18 mil per? Its a business and there are reasons for that which can be explained rationally and objectively, but its still gotta be frustrating as hell.

Of course, on the other hand, being paid $20 million per year to play a game you love would not be frustrating at all.

[bullskokie]

It should be noted that the Bulls intended to match any offer should Giddey get one. The problem here were the agents thought it was given. Giddey needs to sign the contract offered now as it is fair market and fire those agents!

Are you saying that his agent should be fired because he thought that Giddey would have received an offer, but didn't? If so, why?

If it has taken them this long to reach a deal, I am 100% certain because the agent could not swallow his "diminishing commission" insisted there was money somewhere. When Brooklyn was out of the picture.. right there and then, the contract should have been signed negotiating 4-5 years with player option at least instead of hard BS-ing that $30M no one will give it right now. Now it seems like Giddey may settle for the QO the way these are going and ultimately ruining his relationship... because once Giddey signs that QO, its over!

[dougthonus]

As an aside: I realize Giddey has a crappy market to deal with which is killing his ability to generate leverage. But can you imagine being Giddey and having the Bulls hold solid at $20 mil per after the year he just had, while Pat is making $18 mil per? Its a business and there are reasons for that which can be explained rationally and objectively, but its still gotta be frustrating as hell.

As an aside, not really related to Giddey at all, a few lessons I think about in life:

1: Never chases someone else's money. Each negotiation in life is individual and circumstances change. Use whatever leverage you have of course, but in the end, being frustrated by the good fortune of others does nothing for you.

2: Take the best deal for yourself at the end of the day. After fully negotiating as best you can, you are left to choose between some array of choices, and fairness frequently doesn't apply, so simply make the best choice of those available to you.

In this sense, while the things you mentioned may be frustrating to Giddey or anyone really, in the same situation, I try not to worry about what is going on around me with other people that I can't control. It's always an apples / oranges situation, and if you're an apple that's jealous of an orange it doesn't get you anywhere in life, nor does it help to compare your outcome vs what your outcome may have been in a different set of circumstances that don't exist. You can only choose between the realities presently in front of you.

[sco]

It should be noted that the Bulls intended to match any offer should Giddey get one. The problem here were the agents thought it was given. Giddey needs to sign the contract offered now as it is fair market and fire those agents!

Are you saying that his agent should be fired because he thought that Giddey would have received an offer, but didn't? If so, why?

If it has taken them this long to reach a deal, I am 100% certain because the agent could not swallow his "diminishing commission" insisted there was money somewhere. When Brooklyn was out of the picture.. right there and then, the contract should have been signed negotiating 4-5 years with player option at least instead of hard BS-ing that $30M no one will give it right now. Now it seems like Giddey may settle for the QO the way these are going and ultimately ruining his relationship... because once Giddey signs that QO, its over!

I think the agent was right to wait and see. Bulls aren't pulling their offer. A better deal might materialize, and the Bulls would almost certainly match. That said, the latest rumor is that parties seem to be zeroing in on something like 3/$75.

[DuckIII]

As an aside: I realize Giddey has a crappy market to deal with which is killing his ability to generate leverage. But can you imagine being Giddey and having the Bulls hold solid at $20 mil per after the year he just had, while Pat is making $18 mil per? Its a business and there are reasons for that which can be explained rationally and objectively, but its still gotta be frustrating as hell.

As an aside, not really related to Giddey at all, a few lessons I think about in life:

1: Never chases someone else's money. Each negotiation in life is individual and circumstances change. Use whatever leverage you have of course, but in the end, being frustrated by the good fortune of others does nothing for you.

2: Take the best deal for yourself at the end of the day. After fully negotiating as best you can, you are left to choose between some array of choices, and fairness frequently doesn't apply, so simply make the best choice of those available to you.

In this sense, while the things you mentioned may be frustrating to Giddey or anyone really, in the same situation, I try not to worry about what is going on around me with other people that I can't control. It's always an apples / oranges situation, and if you're an apple that's jealous of an orange it doesn't get you anywhere in life, nor does it help to compare your outcome vs what your outcome may have been in a different set of circumstances that don't exist. You can only choose between the realities presently in front of you.

Great post. And I operate that way as well. The law firm I work for is a large corporate firm with many hundreds of attorneys in multiple markets. As a partner I have full access to what everyone else earns in salaries, bonuses, how many hours they bill, how much business they bring in, etc. I've never looked at it in 25 years. Not once. I have no idea what any of the other lawyers earn, nor what they do to deserve it. I'll never know. I don't see any reason to have it bouncing around in my head. I just mentioned this to a colleague the other day and he was completely dumbfounded and looked at me like I was from Mars.

[Dominator83]

fox's all star year is looking a lot like luol deng 06-07 season

Deng was a pretty consistent player throughout his career in 06-07 he averaged 18/7/2.5. From 08-13 he averaged 16.5/6.4/2.5. He was more an all around player then scorer and thanks to the Bulls winning he got some All Star appearances. Fox is more when he was the #1 option, he could put up big scoring numbers but when he isn't the top guy he doesn't bring much to make up for it.

i just mean in terms of it being a pretty extreme outlier FG%/efficiency season, built on the back of a career-high 2pt fg% that he wasn't able to come close to again in the rest of his time here

deng was still good after that, but people assumed he would be able to maintain/build on that level of performance considering he was just 21 years old. and it turned out he just never was *that* good again.

Yea and Pax's biggest flaw was how delusional he was in that 06-07 season. Like he honestly thought that Deng was too good to trade for 26 year old prime Pau Gasol. That was lunacy, especially back then when the game was still tailored to bigs. I was on these boards at that time screaming that good-but-not-great SFs are much easier to replace than an elite PF.

I totally get what your saying. That season made people think Deng was gonna be a top notch player and only get better for years to come. Never happened

[Infinity2152]

Fox: 2023: 21.8 PER. 2024: 20.1 PER. 2025: 19 PER (SAC). 16.8 PER (SA)

Its not a massive drop off until he hits the Spurs, but i think he is past his peak.

Excellent post, despite it being a controversial take. Fox is considerably more athletic, and better at both ends when he's healthy. But the injury issues have brought him down to this level. If he can heal up, he can return to Franchise player level. Obviously, that's a big IF, but should be factored in.

Fox is probably close to 6'2" and in the 180slbs i don't see him recovering from the 82 game NBA season in his late 20s (500+ games).

I think the Spurs did what they had to do and they should have done. They traded for Fox to pair with Wemby. Wemby got hurt, they didn't see much. They drafted Harper, who knew that was coming. They retain Fox, nobody really knows how good Harper will be in his first few years, certainly not if he's better than Fox. Fox stays healthy, he'll be pretty easily tradeable for a wing. Every max or near max contract for a non superstar gets called bad in here. That's what Fox, Lavine, Paul george level guys get. They could also trade Vasell and run a three guard rotation with Fox, Harper and Castle. I think any team signing him in free agency is paying him that much, so it's not an overpay.

Wemby's cheap right now and the Spurs make great business moves. Have little doubt they will get good use out of Fox and plus assets when they trade him. Also have to remember Fox has been on a pretty bad team the last few years. Like Lavine, been forced to be a number 1 when he could be a great number 2.

Here's the plan. Midseason, Giannis will realize he can't win with Myles Turner as his number two and Dame ain't coming back. Spurs will call and offer DeAaron Fox and Stephen Castle plus 6 first round picks for Giannis. Bucks go from no hope after Giannis leaves with that terrible cap situation to a much younger team with a lot of assets. Fox, castle, turner and a ton of picks is a lot of flexibility. I bet Fox's defense looks better if Turner was his center than Sabonis, lmao!

[Dominator83]

Excellent post, despite it being a controversial take. Fox is considerably more athletic, and better at both ends when he's healthy. But the injury issues have brought him down to this level. If he can heal up, he can return to Franchise player level. Obviously, that's a big IF, but should be factored in.

Fox is probably close to 6'2" and in the 180slbs i don't see him recovering from the 82 game NBA season in his late 20s (500+ games).

I think the Spurs did what they had to do and they should have done. They traded for Fox to pair with Wemby. Wemby got hurt, they didn't see much. They drafted Harper, who knew that was coming. They retain Fox, nobody really knows how good Harper will be in his first few years, certainly not if he's better than Fox. Fox stays healthy, he'll be pretty easily tradeable for a wing. Every max or near max contract for a non superstar gets called bad in here. That's what Fox, Lavine, Paul george level guys get. They could also trade Vasell and run a three guard rotation with Fox, Harper and Castle. I think any team signing him in free agency is paying him that much, so it's not an overpay.

Wemby's cheap right now and the Spurs make great business moves. Have little doubt they will get good use out of Fox and plus assets when they trade him. Also have to remember Fox has been on a pretty bad team the last few years. Like Lavine, been forced to be a number 1 when he could be a great number 2.

Here's the plan. Midseason, Giannis will realize he can't win with Myles Turner as his number two and Dame ain't coming back. Spurs will call and offer DeAaron Fox and Devin Vasell plus 6 first round picks for Giannis. Bucks go from no hope after Giannis leaves with that terrible cap situation to a much younger team with a lot of assets. Fox, vasell, turner and a ton of picks is a lot of flexibility. I bet Fox's defense looks better if Turner was his center than Sabonis, lmao!

And how tradeable are those contracts? George is 1 year in, and he has negative trade value. Lavine for a long time had negative trade value. Last summer AK wanted to move him but couldn't because nobody would take him unless they were being compensated to. Luckily he had a great start to the season to where we got something decent (our pick back) and fillers that turned out to be useful here. And even then i believe we had to still send out a 2nd rounder or 2 in that deal. This time next year, Fox will be untradeable, unless its maybe for someone elses junk that nobody wants

[Infinity2152]

Fox is probably close to 6'2" and in the 180slbs i don't see him recovering from the 82 game NBA season in his late 20s (500+ games).

I think the Spurs did what they had to do and they should have done. They traded for Fox to pair with Wemby. Wemby got hurt, they didn't see much. They drafted Harper, who knew that was coming. They retain Fox, nobody really knows how good Harper will be in his first few years, certainly not if he's better than Fox. Fox stays healthy, he'll be pretty easily tradeable for a wing. Every max or near max contract for a non superstar gets called bad in here. That's what Fox, Lavine, Paul george level guys get. They could also trade Vasell and run a three guard rotation with Fox, Harper and Castle. I think any team signing him in free agency is paying him that much, so it's not an overpay.

Wemby's cheap right now and the Spurs make great business moves. Have little doubt they will get good use out of Fox and plus assets when they trade him. Also have to remember Fox has been on a pretty bad team the last few years. Like Lavine, been forced to be a number 1 when he could be a great number 2.

Here's the plan. Midseason, Giannis will realize he can't win with Myles Turner as his number two and Dame ain't coming back. Spurs will call and offer DeAaron Fox and Devin Vasell plus 6 first round picks for Giannis. Bucks go from no hope after Giannis leaves with that terrible cap situation to a much younger team with a lot of assets. Fox, vasell, turner and a ton of picks is a lot of flexibility. I bet Fox's defense looks better if Turner was his center than Sabonis, lmao!

And how tradeable are those contracts? George is 1 year in, and he has negative trade value. Lavine for a long time had negative trade value. Last summer AK wanted to move him but couldn't because nobody would take him unless they were being compensated to. Luckily he had a great start to the season to where we got something decent (our pick back) and fillers that turned out to be useful here. And even then i believe we had to still send out a 2nd rounder or 2 in that deal. This time next year, Fox will be untradeable, unless its maybe for someone elses junk that nobody wants

Well, George is way older and I'd argue Fox is worth more. Lavine negative trade value was when? He was considered a value contract on his RFA contract. His next contract didn't look like a massive overpay at the time. Every team doesn't have the option of only resigning Giannis or tatum? how long were they actively trying to trade him? The month or a couple of weeks before he got injured. Would argue Lavine would have looked better with Wemby instead of Vucevic too. Fox's value is what it is to that team with Wemby right now. If he's a huge piece of why they make the conference Finals this year, he's worth it.

[Dominator83]

I think the Spurs did what they had to do and they should have done. They traded for Fox to pair with Wemby. Wemby got hurt, they didn't see much. They drafted Harper, who knew that was coming. They retain Fox, nobody really knows how good Harper will be in his first few years, certainly not if he's better than Fox. Fox stays healthy, he'll be pretty easily tradeable for a wing. Every max or near max contract for a non superstar gets called bad in here. That's what Fox, Lavine, Paul george level guys get. They could also trade Vasell and run a three guard rotation with Fox, Harper and Castle. I think any team signing him in free agency is paying him that much, so it's not an overpay.

Wemby's cheap right now and the Spurs make great business moves. Have little doubt they will get good use out of Fox and plus assets when they trade him. Also have to remember Fox has been on a pretty bad team the last few years. Like Lavine, been forced to be a number 1 when he could be a great number 2.

Here's the plan. Midseason, Giannis will realize he can't win with Myles Turner as his number two and Dame ain't coming back. Spurs will call and offer DeAaron Fox and Devin Vasell plus 6 first round picks for Giannis. Bucks go from no hope after Giannis leaves with that terrible cap situation to a much younger team with a lot of assets. Fox, vasell, turner and a ton of picks is a lot of flexibility. I bet Fox's defense looks better if Turner was his center than Sabonis, lmao!

And how tradeable are those contracts? George is 1 year in, and he has negative trade value. Lavine for a long time had negative trade value. Last summer AK wanted to move him but couldn't because nobody would take him unless they were being compensated to. Luckily he had a great start to the season to where we got something decent (our pick back) and fillers that turned out to be useful here. And even then i believe we had to still send out a 2nd rounder or 2 in that deal. This time next year, Fox will be untradeable, unless its maybe for someone elses junk that nobody wants

Well, George is way older and I'd argue Fox is worth more. Lavine negative trade value was when? He was considered a value contract on his RFA contract. His next contract didn't look like a massive overpay at the time. Every team doesn't have the option of only resigning Giannis or tatum? how long were they actively trying to trade him? The month or a couple of weeks before he got injured. Would argue Lavine would have looked better with Wemby instead of Vucevic too. Fox's value is what it is to that team with Wemby right now. If he's a huge piece of why they make the conference Finals this year, he's worth it.

Paying the Fox's of the world Luka Doncic money, is how bad teams stay bad and mediocre teams stay mediocre. and yes Zach at $20 mill per was a great value. The same Zach at $45 per was an albatross that was hard to move

[sco]

And how tradeable are those contracts? George is 1 year in, and he has negative trade value. Lavine for a long time had negative trade value. Last summer AK wanted to move him but couldn't because nobody would take him unless they were being compensated to. Luckily he had a great start to the season to where we got something decent (our pick back) and fillers that turned out to be useful here. And even then i believe we had to still send out a 2nd rounder or 2 in that deal. This time next year, Fox will be untradeable, unless its maybe for someone elses junk that nobody wants

Well, George is way older and I'd argue Fox is worth more. Lavine negative trade value was when? He was considered a value contract on his RFA contract. His next contract didn't look like a massive overpay at the time. Every team doesn't have the option of only resigning Giannis or tatum? how long were they actively trying to trade him? The month or a couple of weeks before he got injured. Would argue Lavine would have looked better with Wemby instead of Vucevic too. Fox's value is what it is to that team with Wemby right now. If he's a huge piece of why they make the conference Finals this year, he's worth it.

Paying the Fox's of the world Luka Doncic money, is how bad teams stay bad and mediocre teams stay mediocre. and yes Zach at $20 mill per was a great value. The same Zach at $45 per was an albatross that was hard to move

I'm not mad that we ended up with Noa, but I do wonder if Zach's contract would have brought back more value in the offseason?

[Red8911]

Well, George is way older and I'd argue Fox is worth more. Lavine negative trade value was when? He was considered a value contract on his RFA contract. His next contract didn't look like a massive overpay at the time. Every team doesn't have the option of only resigning Giannis or tatum? how long were they actively trying to trade him? The month or a couple of weeks before he got injured. Would argue Lavine would have looked better with Wemby instead of Vucevic too. Fox's value is what it is to that team with Wemby right now. If he's a huge piece of why they make the conference Finals this year, he's worth it.

Paying the Fox's of the world Luka Doncic money, is how bad teams stay bad and mediocre teams stay mediocre. and yes Zach at $20 mill per was a great value. The same Zach at $45 per was an albatross that was hard to move

I'm not mad that we ended up with Noa, but I do wonder if Zach's contract would have brought back more value in the offseason?

If the Bulls had never pulled off the Sacramento trade then he would still be here and they would still be looking for a team to take him.

We would also have an 1000 page Zach trade thread where Reaves and the Lakers come up every couple of days even though the Lakers were known for a while to not ever being interested in Zach.

Bottom line, Bulls made the best move possible with Zach. They got lucky Fox asked out of Sacramento and created that whole deal.