Josh Giddey Thread 2.0

[DuckIII]

Maybe Matas is that unicorn and will be a 2nd scorer plus elite defender and allow the team to be successful even if Giddey is materially less than what the end-season numbers showed. But that is asking a heck of a lot out of the kid.

Even then, the team in that spot would likely be better off with a PG who either can score more at a high efficiency, and doesn't put so much pressure on others to make up the difference, or who at least plays strong D (or isn't as big a liability, at least).

This is more or less where OKC was at. They had unicorns around Giddey, but he wasn't good enough to have the ball relative to their other guys, and with the ball less, his weaknesses were magnified.

This is the fundamental issue I have with the continual use of the "OKC didn't want him" example. People who rely on it never state it sincerely.

If we are being sincere about context, and how incredibly significant that context is, the accurate and much more meaningful way to write that statement is:

"This is more or less where OKC was at. They had unicorns around Giddey, including at the position he plays. But he wasn't good enough to have the ball relative to the best point guard on Earth, reigning MVP SGA who just had one of the most accomplished single seasons in basketball history. And with future first ballot HOFer SGA taking over Giddey's role on the team, Giddey's weaknesses were magnified."

Lets say the Blazers drafted MJ and then traded Drexler. It would be ridiculous to use that as a negative towards Clyde. It would simply be due to MJ being extremely unusually better at the same position.

[MikeDC]

Lets say the Blazers drafted MJ and then traded Drexler. It would be ridiculous to use that as a negative towards Clyde. It would simply be due to MJ being extremely unusually better at the same position.

But it would be completely fair to criticize Drexler if, during the time he and MJ were both on the team, Drexler played pretty poorly when he was on the court and MJ was off and still ended up pouting about it.

It would always be insincere to dismiss the fact that this was in fact the case with Giddey in OKC. Looking at the numbers, Giddey was unproductive on the court when SGA was off. Even when he was paired up with Will.

SGA Only (3 seasons in OKC) 2431 Minutes, +6.54 Net Rating
Giddey Only (3 seasons in OKC) 1486 Minutes, -3.28 Net Rating

SGA+JWill (2 seasons) 1068 Minutes + 4.3
Giddey+JWill (2 seasons) 980 Minutes + -1.37

In a thousand minutes with a budding all-NBA player next to him and no SGA on the court, Giddey was meh.

[Infinity2152]

I was just running trade scenarios that could look great for us. Godfather trades for Jaylen Brown or Devin Booker for Coby White, multiple picks, and any combination of Vucevic, Ayo, Huerter, Collins, Smith they want. Even money. We have $51 mill guaranteed on the books, $53 if we keep Phillips. Smith is $10 mill of that if he goes. Pay Giddey $25 mill, we're at $76 mill. Add the $57 mill for Brown or Booker, $133 mill. Cap-$166 mill, tax-$200 mill, apron $209 mill.

Sign Porzingas for $30 mill AAV 2 yr, 1 year team option: $167 mill

Best players
1. Booker
2. Porzingas
3. Giddey
4. Matas
5. Essengue
6. Okoro
7. Jones
8. Smith
9. Phillips

Fill out the roster with vet min/exceptions. Team might not be a championship team but very good, should run well, and a LOT of tradeable pieces. Still looking for that true 1A, but we're way more attractive with better pieces.

[DuckIII]

Lets say the Blazers drafted MJ and then traded Drexler. It would be ridiculous to use that as a negative towards Clyde. It would simply be due to MJ being extremely unusually better at the same position.

But it would be completely fair to criticize Drexler if, during the time he and MJ were both on the team, Drexler played pretty poorly when he was on the court and MJ was off and still ended up pouting about it.

Not really, no. Because you have the before, then you have the current when they are playing together while SGA becomes SGA, and taking it even further in Giddey's case we have the after as well. So it would really be a very stupid criticism that no one would make with a straight face if Clyde was Clyde, then a lesser version with Jordan, followed immediately by being the best Clyde he'd ever been after being traded away from Jordan.

Also, what does pouting about anything have to do with Giddey? Has he displayed a poor attitude? I read quite a bit about him after we traded for him and it appeared to me that everyone in OKC loved him and thought he was a great guy. And that certainly seemed to be the case in Chicago, even when he got off to such a poor start.

It would always be insincere to dismiss the fact that this was in fact the case with Giddey in OKC. Looking at the numbers, Giddey was unproductive on the court when SGA was off. Even when he was paired up with Will.

SGA Only (3 seasons in OKC) 2431 Minutes, +6.54 Net Rating
Giddey Only (3 seasons in OKC) 1486 Minutes, -3.28 Net Rating

SGA+JWill (2 seasons) 1068 Minutes + 4.3
Giddey+JWill (2 seasons) 980 Minutes + -1.37

In a thousand minutes with a budding all-NBA player next to him and no SGA on the court, Giddey was meh.

Based on one on/off stat, heavily influenced by total team quality which includes a time when OKC was rebuilding? Net rating is heavily impacted by whom you are on the floor with and how good your team is as a whole relative to the rest of the league. For example, in Giddey's first year OKC had the 28th worst team net rating in the NBA at negative 8.2. How are you factoring that in?

I'm also unsure why you are using aggregate net rating for Giddey's three years to Shai's. The whole point about the insincerity of the argument is that it ignores just how uniquely better Shai is than Giddey, which has nothing to do with whether or not Giddey is a positive at $25 million on a team with no SGA (or any other starting caliber PG).

If you want to break down exactly why I should take that statistic as a serious measurement of Giddey's general quality, you'll need to explain how you calculated it and why it matters. You've isolated basically 33% of Giddey's total minutes played at OKC, and then compared those minutes to SGA's. Given that everyone agrees SGA (who will make a salary 300% of Giddey's salary next year) is an elite franchise player capable of leading his team to the NBA championship and possibly even a dynasty, your stats seem to just show what we already accept as a basic premise to the debate.

[MGB8]

The issue isn't so much Giddey vs Shai (since I think Giddey can coexist with one other ball dominant player without being too heavily negatively impacted) - it's Giddey vs. Jaylen Williams.

But that still goes to the point that Jaylen Williams is a high end 2nd scorer and strong defender, so makes sense that team picks him over Giddey in a 3rd ball handler role that doesn't suit his skill set at all.

[DuckIII]

The issue isn't so much Giddey vs Shai (since I think Giddey can coexist with one other ball dominant player without being too heavily negatively impacted) - it's Giddey vs. Jaylen Williams.

But that still goes to the point that Jaylen Williams is a high end 2nd scorer and strong defender, so makes sense that team picks him over Giddey in a 3rd ball handler role that doesn't suit his skill set at all.

And Jaylen Williams is just better than Giddey too. I'd trade Giddey for JW so fast your head would spin and so would every team in the NBA. Beyond explaining why Williams is a better fit with SGA, and frankly simply to acknowledge that Williams is better than Giddey regardless, what does comparing Giddey to Williams tell us about the logic of Giddey on Chicago?

Giddey isn't a superstar and we have no intention of paying him like one. This is the only time in over 20 years on this Board I've ever seen a discussion like this go on for so long. Why are we comparing Giddey at 3/4th player money to future HOF players on dynastic quality teams, all of whom have been maxed out in salary?

[MGB8]

Not disagreeing.

[jnrjr79]

I was just running trade scenarios that could look great for us. Godfather trades for Jaylen Brown or Devin Booker for Coby White, multiple picks, and any combination of Vucevic, Ayo, Huerter, Collins, Smith they want. Even money. We have $51 mill guaranteed on the books, $53 if we keep Phillips. Smith is $10 mill of that if he goes. Pay Giddey $25 mill, we're at $76 mill. Add the $57 mill for Brown or Booker, $133 mill. Cap-$166 mill, tax-$200 mill, apron $209 mill.

Sign Porzingas for $30 mill AAV 2 yr, 1 year team option: $167 mill

Best players
1. Booker
2. Porzingas
3. Giddey
4. Matas
5. Essengue
6. Okoro
7. Jones
8. Smith
9. Phillips

Fill out the roster with vet min/exceptions. Team might not be a championship team but very good, should run well, and a LOT of tradeable pieces. Still looking for that true 1A, but we're way more attractive with better pieces.

Everything I've read indicates that Phoenix intends to build around Booker and doesn't want to trade him.

I would not be shocked, though, if Boston would listen to offers on Brown. Collins + Huerter + Coby + draft stuff would work, according to Spotrac. Those deals are all expiring and maybe Boston would have some interest in re-signing Coby since he can replace a good chunk of Brown's scoring, but won't cost nearly as much. Though they're already probably looking at a similar situation with Simons assuming they don't move him. You could take Coby out of the deal and put Jalen Smith in instead. The Bulls would have no centers other than Vooch, but for purposes of next season, who cares - just sign someone off the street. You could also put Vooch in the deal instead of Collins.

Giddey
Brown
Tre/Ayo (or Okoro if you want to play huge)
Matas
Whatever center you keep

Brown is kind of an intriguing target for me, since he's not someone who needs (or can, lol) dribble a ton, so his fit with Giddey might be pretty decent. His three-point shooting has been on a downward trend, though, which is not an ideal attribute with the rest of what would be on the roster.

It'll be interesting to see how things play out. The Bulls have a ton of expiring salaries, and it's not likely the most productive thing to do with all of those expirings is to let them expire and hit the free agent market next summer, since I don't think there will be a ton of appealing players available to the Bulls.

[Infinity2152]

I was just running trade scenarios that could look great for us. Godfather trades for Jaylen Brown or Devin Booker for Coby White, multiple picks, and any combination of Vucevic, Ayo, Huerter, Collins, Smith they want. Even money. We have $51 mill guaranteed on the books, $53 if we keep Phillips. Smith is $10 mill of that if he goes. Pay Giddey $25 mill, we're at $76 mill. Add the $57 mill for Brown or Booker, $133 mill. Cap-$166 mill, tax-$200 mill, apron $209 mill.

Sign Porzingas for $30 mill AAV 2 yr, 1 year team option: $167 mill

Best players
1. Booker
2. Porzingas
3. Giddey
4. Matas
5. Essengue
6. Okoro
7. Jones
8. Smith
9. Phillips

Fill out the roster with vet min/exceptions. Team might not be a championship team but very good, should run well, and a LOT of tradeable pieces. Still looking for that true 1A, but we're way more attractive with better pieces.

Everything I've read indicates that Phoenix intends to build around Booker and doesn't want to trade him.

I would not be shocked, though, if Boston would listen to offers on Brown. Collins + Huerter + Coby + draft stuff would work, according to Spotrac. Those deals are all expiring and maybe Boston would have some interest in re-signing Coby since he can replace a good chunk of Brown's scoring, but won't cost nearly as much. Though they're already probably looking at a similar situation with Simons assuming they don't move him. You could take Coby out of the deal and put Jalen Smith in instead. The Bulls would have no centers other than Vooch, but for purposes of next season, who cares - just sign someone off the street. You could also put Vooch in the deal instead of Collins.

Giddey
Brown
Tre/Ayo (or Okoro if you want to play huge)
Matas
Whatever center you keep

Brown is kind of an intriguing target for me, since he's not someone who needs (or can, lol) dribble a ton, so his fit with Giddey might be pretty decent. His three-point shooting has been on a downward trend, though, which is not an ideal attribute with the rest of what would be on the roster.

It'll be interesting to see how things play out. The Bulls have a ton of expiring salaries, and it's not likely the most productive thing to do with all of those expirings is to let them expire and hit the free agent market next summer, since I don't think there will be a ton of appealing players available to the Bulls.

Pretty sure Phoenix wants to keep Booker too. They're likely to have a worse season than last season. Have Beal's contract on their books for years. They're pretty stuck. I'll readily concede neither Brown, Booker nor Porzingas are ideal fits, but i think they make us much more competitive, make the team look much more attractive, and put us in conversations for bigger names players. Kind of waver between who I'd want between Brown and Booker. Brown's so much better defensively I'd sacrifice the 3pt shooting, I think. Can make it up with other players and specialists off the bench to keep the team numbers up.

Basically, turn Coby, expirings and picks into a better SG, expensive but in his prime to run with our young guys. Wouldn't worry much about spending picks to do it, with so many young players already on the roster and adding a starter in his 20's in this deal.

[Bulliever2020]

This Bulls team after the Lavine trade was the most entertaining team we've had since the Rose years. The style of play was fast and fun. I'm willing to bet on this group growing and getting better over tanking because it was entertaining. Tanking will not be entertaining and probably won't work. Being mediocre with a boring style and no room for young guys to grow is the worst.

As long as we don't trade any of our first rd picks coming up I'm all for signing Giddey to 25 mil a year. You hope continued growth from Matas, hopefully Essengue grows, and keep using late lotto or late teen picks on high upside players. All you need is one to truly hit or a true Superstar ask to come here.

I know this philosophy a lot will say is not choosing a path. I think it is choosing a path. It is hard for a team to tank and then become great. The truly elite teams of the past 5-10 years either got the #1 pick and that guy was a true gamechanger or drafted in the 7-15 range and got a player that turned into a stud. True #1 game changers: LeBron & and I'm not sure who else. 7-15 Range: Shai (#11), Mitchell (#13), Curry (#7), Halliburton (#7), & Giannis (#15). My point is simply that this is a path and one that I fully endorse.

This seems like a strawman to me. I don't think anyone or at least the majority has not disagreed with any of this. Pretty sure most would be fine with Giddey at 25 AAV and continuing to slowly build with what we have. It is when the number approaches 30 when people start to get a little apprehensive.

[DuckIII]

This Bulls team after the Lavine trade was the most entertaining team we've had since the Rose years. The style of play was fast and fun. I'm willing to bet on this group growing and getting better over tanking because it was entertaining. Tanking will not be entertaining and probably won't work. Being mediocre with a boring style and no room for young guys to grow is the worst.

As long as we don't trade any of our first rd picks coming up I'm all for signing Giddey to 25 mil a year. You hope continued growth from Matas, hopefully Essengue grows, and keep using late lotto or late teen picks on high upside players. All you need is one to truly hit or a true Superstar ask to come here.

I know this philosophy a lot will say is not choosing a path. I think it is choosing a path. It is hard for a team to tank and then become great. The truly elite teams of the past 5-10 years either got the #1 pick and that guy was a true gamechanger or drafted in the 7-15 range and got a player that turned into a stud. True #1 game changers: LeBron & and I'm not sure who else. 7-15 Range: Shai (#11), Mitchell (#13), Curry (#7), Halliburton (#7), & Giannis (#15). My point is simply that this is a path and one that I fully endorse.

This seems like a strawman to me. I don't think anyone or at least the majority has not disagreed with any of this. Pretty sure most would be fine with Giddey at 25 AAV and continuing to slowly build with what we have. It is when the number approaches 30 when people start to get a little apprehensive.

Here's my read of the board:

1. Most people are okay with Giddey at 25, but some are a little queasy about it because they don't like him as a player and don't trust what he did last year.

2. Most people are okay with - "okay with" being defined as accepting of it relative to what we have been doing or could have done - the path AK has chosen now, which appears to be going for an oversized, extremely fast, run and gun group focused on youth.

3. But there are still many - including me - who feel the better path is to get even worse for at least one more year. Getting the caliber players we just got in two years in a row at 11 is rare in the extreme. We appear to have gotten super lucky. One more year, even worse, in a highly anticipated draft would be ideal, but is likely not the plan.

While it is true that several recent champs and contenders are not led by top 5 picks, people need to stop treating it like its a new norm. Its not.

Outside of the players mentioned (Giannis, Jokic, SGA, Mitchell, Hali, Curry), consider this list connected to the present and future of this era:

Wemby
Chet
Luka
LeBron
Ant
Flagg
Mobley
Cade
Banchero
Ja
Amen Thompson
Zion if he's ever healthy again.

These guys are all top 5 picks and are the likely future stars of this league. It is still, by significant margins, the most likely way to get a franchise player worthy of a contending team. I admit the draft has gotten less top heavy recently due to a variety of factors, but its still top heavy and always will be.

[MGB8]

The "good" news is that Bulls have a very good chance of being back in the lotto after this season.

Boston and Indiana's injury issues hurt this goal, but other teams have not gotten worse or improved. Cavs and Knicks are the front runners. Absent a Giannis trade, unlikely now with the Turner move, they are likely next. Detroit has not slipped and should be improving. Orlando and Atlanta added meaningful talent. So that is 6 teams almost certainly ahead of the Bulls.

Indiana, even with the Hali injury, is likely to want to compete (and thus stay ahead of the Bulls even losing Hali and Turner). Miami also doesn't seem to be looking to tank. The Sixers are, as always in recent years, determined by injury issues.

And Toronto has some reason to want to push for better outcomes after the Masai firing.

Play-in loss feels like the most likely outcome, and Bulls likely won't be bottom feeders, but maybe the bingo balls bounce better this time around.

[Bulliever2020]

This Bulls team after the Lavine trade was the most entertaining team we've had since the Rose years. The style of play was fast and fun. I'm willing to bet on this group growing and getting better over tanking because it was entertaining. Tanking will not be entertaining and probably won't work. Being mediocre with a boring style and no room for young guys to grow is the worst.

As long as we don't trade any of our first rd picks coming up I'm all for signing Giddey to 25 mil a year. You hope continued growth from Matas, hopefully Essengue grows, and keep using late lotto or late teen picks on high upside players. All you need is one to truly hit or a true Superstar ask to come here.

I know this philosophy a lot will say is not choosing a path. I think it is choosing a path. It is hard for a team to tank and then become great. The truly elite teams of the past 5-10 years either got the #1 pick and that guy was a true gamechanger or drafted in the 7-15 range and got a player that turned into a stud. True #1 game changers: LeBron & and I'm not sure who else. 7-15 Range: Shai (#11), Mitchell (#13), Curry (#7), Halliburton (#7), & Giannis (#15). My point is simply that this is a path and one that I fully endorse.

This seems like a strawman to me. I don't think anyone or at least the majority has not disagreed with any of this. Pretty sure most would be fine with Giddey at 25 AAV and continuing to slowly build with what we have. It is when the number approaches 30 when people start to get a little apprehensive.

Here's my read of the board:

1. Most people are okay with Giddey at 25, but some are a little queasy about it because they don't like him as a player and don't trust what he did last year.

2. Most people are okay with - "okay with" being defined as accepting of it relative to what we have been doing or could have done - the path AK has chosen now, which appears to be going for an oversized, extremely fast, run and gun group focused on youth.

3. But there are still many - including me - who feel the better path is to get even worse for at least one more year. Getting the caliber players we just got in two years in a row at 11 is rare in the extreme. We appear to have gotten super lucky. One more year, even worse, in a highly anticipated draft would be ideal, but is likely not the plan.

While it is true that several recent champs and contenders are not led by top 5 picks, people need to stop treating it like its a new norm. Its not.

Outside of the players mentioned (Giannis, Jokic, SGA, Mitchell, Hali, Curry), consider this list connected to the present and future of this era:

Wemby
Chet
Luka
LeBron
Ant
Flagg
Mobley
Cade
Banchero
Ja
Amen Thompson
Zion if he's ever healthy again.

These guys are all top 5 picks and are the likely future stars of this league. It is still, by significant margins, the most likely way to get a franchise player worthy of a contending team. I admit the draft has gotten less top heavy recently due to a variety of factors, but its still top heavy and always will be.

100% agree. And I would be totally fine with letting Giddey go if he got another offer because I have thought from the beginning he would be very tough to build a winner around and I would love the chance at a franchise player, but I think Giddey at 25 AAV is an asset that is easily tradeable. I could be wrong but weren't you all about keeping Giddey? I am a little confused that you now seem like you prefer we don't retain him? Because if we do retain him we most definitely are not going to be at the top of the lotto record wise.

[DuckIII]

100% agree. And I would be totally fine with letting Giddey go if he got another offer because I have thought from the beginning he would be very tough to build a winner around and I would love the chance at a franchise player, but I think Giddey at 25 AAV is an asset that is easily tradeable. I could be wrong but weren't you all about keeping Giddey? I am a little confused that you now seem like you prefer we don't retain him? Because if we do retain him we most definitely are not going to be at the top of the lotto record wise.

It would take a long time to explain my real preferences, and we can't go back in time anyway. To answer your question succinctly:

1. Yes, I do want to keep Giddey and am very comfortable at $25 AAV.

2. When I was talking about preferring to get worse for a year, I wasn't referring to not signing Giddey. I was (without mentioning them) referring to trading Coby White, Ayo, Vuc - really anyone except Giddey, Matas or Noa - for future looking assets that will not help us win next season. And if not trading them, running the roster in a way that focuses heavily on Matas and Noa. They aren't good enough yet to win as primary players, so make them that (or in Noa's case just play him a lot) and lose some extra games while they develop.

Basically, get worse while retaining the core three players of Giddey, Matas and Noa and get a much higher draft pick in a highly touted draft as a result. And then start trying to get good quickly. Year 5 Giddey, Year 3 Matas, Year 2 Noa, and a top 6 pick in this year's draft looks like a very nice, flexible core to try to build a contender around going forward. That's your rebuild/reboot. That's what I would do.

[Dominator83]

The issue isn't so much Giddey vs Shai (since I think Giddey can coexist with one other ball dominant player without being too heavily negatively impacted) - it's Giddey vs. Jaylen Williams.

But that still goes to the point that Jaylen Williams is a high end 2nd scorer and strong defender, so makes sense that team picks him over Giddey in a 3rd ball handler role that doesn't suit his skill set at all.

And Jaylen Williams is just better than Giddey too. I'd trade Giddey for JW so fast your head would spin and so would every team in the NBA. Beyond explaining why Williams is a better fit with SGA, and frankly simply to acknowledge that Williams is better than Giddey regardless, what does comparing Giddey to Williams tell us about the logic of Giddey on Chicago?

Giddey isn't a superstar and we have no intention of paying him like one. This is the only time in over 20 years on this Board I've ever seen a discussion like this go on for so long. Why are we comparing Giddey at 3/4th player money to future HOF players on dynastic quality teams, all of whom have been maxed out in salary?

That would be a god awful trade for us. Now, Jalen Williams on the other hand.....

[Bulliever2020]

100% agree. And I would be totally fine with letting Giddey go if he got another offer because I have thought from the beginning he would be very tough to build a winner around and I would love the chance at a franchise player, but I think Giddey at 25 AAV is an asset that is easily tradeable. I could be wrong but weren't you all about keeping Giddey? I am a little confused that you now seem like you prefer we don't retain him? Because if we do retain him we most definitely are not going to be at the top of the lotto record wise.

It would take a long time to explain my real preferences, and we can't go back in time anyway. To answer your question succinctly:

1. Yes, I do want to keep Giddey and am very comfortable at $25 AAV.

2. When I was talking about preferring to get worse for a year, I wasn't referring to not signing Giddey. I was (without mentioning them) referring to trading Coby White, Ayo, Vuc - really anyone except Giddey, Matas or Noa - for future looking assets that will not help us win next season. And if not trading them, running the roster in a way that focuses heavily on Matas and Noa. They aren't good enough yet to win as primary players, so make them that (or in Noa's case just play him a lot) and lose some extra games while they develop.

Basically, get worse while retaining the core three players of Giddey, Matas and Noa and get a much higher draft pick in a highly touted draft as a result. And then start trying to get good quickly. Year 5 Giddey, Year 3 Matas, Year 2 Noa, and a top 6 pick in this year's draft looks like a very nice, flexible core to try to build a contender around going forward. That's your rebuild/reboot. That's what I would do.

Gotcha. That would be nice and I definitely agree I don't think Coby is a long term piece, especially at the amount he would cost. I just don't think trading Coby/Ayo/Vuc would move the needle significantly. Maybe we move from 11 to 7. I think with Giddey around he keeps us from totally bottoming out into one of the top 5 worst teams in the NBA. Either way would definitely be open to more ping pong balls. We need more talent, period.

[GuardianEnzo]

I don't see "he's not as good as SGA or Jalen WIlliams" as much of a dig at Giddey. There's plenty of headroom for that to be true and him still to be our best player, as both those guys are legit stars and we're a pretty bad team.

Giddey was pretty much as advertised for us - we knew the flaws, we knew the skills. So did OKC, and because of those skills and flaws he was a luxury item for them. Their choosing to trade him for a very specific sort of role player who fit their needs much better (and whom they won the championship with) doesn't mean they didn't value Giddey. It means they knew his biggest value to them was in what he could bring back in trade. We should have gotten one of their 200 1st round picks, but the players involved made sense for both teams.

[Chi town]

The issue isn't so much Giddey vs Shai (since I think Giddey can coexist with one other ball dominant player without being too heavily negatively impacted) - it's Giddey vs. Jaylen Williams.

But that still goes to the point that Jaylen Williams is a high end 2nd scorer and strong defender, so makes sense that team picks him over Giddey in a 3rd ball handler role that doesn't suit his skill set at all.

JDub is a #1 on over half the teams in the league.

What Giddey showed post ASB especially off ball shooting and FTs would play with any #1s or #2s across the league.

[Chi town]

100% agree. And I would be totally fine with letting Giddey go if he got another offer because I have thought from the beginning he would be very tough to build a winner around and I would love the chance at a franchise player, but I think Giddey at 25 AAV is an asset that is easily tradeable. I could be wrong but weren't you all about keeping Giddey? I am a little confused that you now seem like you prefer we don't retain him? Because if we do retain him we most definitely are not going to be at the top of the lotto record wise.

It would take a long time to explain my real preferences, and we can't go back in time anyway. To answer your question succinctly:

1. Yes, I do want to keep Giddey and am very comfortable at $25 AAV.

2. When I was talking about preferring to get worse for a year, I wasn't referring to not signing Giddey. I was (without mentioning them) referring to trading Coby White, Ayo, Vuc - really anyone except Giddey, Matas or Noa - for future looking assets that will not help us win next season. And if not trading them, running the roster in a way that focuses heavily on Matas and Noa. They aren't good enough yet to win as primary players, so make them that (or in Noa's case just play him a lot) and lose some extra games while they develop.

Basically, get worse while retaining the core three players of Giddey, Matas and Noa and get a much higher draft pick in a highly touted draft as a result. And then start trying to get good quickly. Year 5 Giddey, Year 3 Matas, Year 2 Noa, and a top 6 pick in this year's draft looks like a very nice, flexible core to try to build a contender around going forward. That's your rebuild/reboot. That's what I would do.

Gotcha. That would be nice and I definitely agree I don't think Coby is a long term piece, especially at the amount he would cost. I just don't think trading Coby/Ayo/Vuc would move the needle significantly. Maybe we move from 11 to 7. I think with Giddey around he keeps us from totally bottoming out into one of the top 5 worst teams in the NBA. Either way would definitely be open to more ping pong balls. We need more talent, period.

Bingo.

If the right deal came along for Coby building around Giddey Noa Buz is exactly what we should be doing with a top 10 pick and hopefully lottery luck.

I’d even be fine trading Coby for recent picks and not multiple 1sts if the players fit.

I like Coby for Beringer and Terrence Shannon and a pick swap. Both those players fit our new pace style.

[dougthonus]

"This is more or less where OKC was at. They had unicorns around Giddey, including at the position he plays. But he wasn't good enough to have the ball relative to the best point guard on Earth, reigning MVP SGA who just had one of the most accomplished single seasons in basketball history. And with future first ballot HOFer SGA taking over Giddey's role on the team, Giddey's weaknesses were magnified."

I'm not sure why you think this same problem doesn't exist next to any other elite perimeter player. They all have the ball in their hands. You saw the same hints of the problem playing next to Zach LaVine. In fact, people discuss at great length Giddey's performance increasing because his role changed. LaVine wasn't playing PG.

Lets say the Blazers drafted MJ and then traded Drexler. It would be ridiculous to use that as a negative towards Clyde. It would simply be due to MJ being extremely unusually better at the same position.

I'm not an expert on Clyde Drexler, but I wouldn't expect any reason that Clyde Drexler would make Jordan's life harder if they were on the same team.