Josh Giddey 3.0

[dougthonus]

Right now, for the upcoming season, if Giddey took the $20 mil AAV the Bulls are offering him he would be 89th highest paid player in the league. If he took between 22-23 which is a number many of us are projecting, that puts him 81st. At $25 million he's tied with psychopath Miles Bridges for 74th. Its almost a certainty that no matter what happens, I subjectively will think we got a terrific deal for Giddey at any of these numbers.

If I were ranking players, I'd guess off the top of my head that Giddey would be ~80.

I looked up top 100 rankings for 2025, and the ringer has him at #81. They were the most respected publication I could find that had a ranking (1st on google search). That also seems to place his fair market value at or below $25M based on the way you have looked at it here.

I think Giddey will land on a good deal for Chicago at the end of the day. Terrific is probably highly dependent on if you have a glass half full or glass half empty view of him. I think he's extraordinarily unlikely to be a player you can flip for high value assets later (even on a good contract), because the type of teams that look to make all in playoff pushes will never be looking for a player with his skills. So then his value comes down to what you get on the court primarily.

I think that's really high value if we're trying to aim for 40ish wins and a lot lower if you're trying to do almost anything else (be it tank or compete). At the same time, he's pretty unlikely to be a negative value contract at that price, and we'll likely be able to pivot to something else if that makes sense without paying a cost. That ultimately makes it a good deal for what Chicago will likely be trying to accomplish in the best case scenario.

[Stratmaster]

Right now, for the upcoming season, if Giddey took the $20 mil AAV the Bulls are offering him he would be 89th highest paid player in the league. If he took between 22-23 which is a number many of us are projecting, that puts him 81st. At $25 million he's tied with psychopath Miles Bridges for 74th. Its almost a certainty that no matter what happens, I subjectively will think we got a terrific deal for Giddey at any of these numbers.

If I were ranking players, I'd guess off the top of my head that Giddey would be ~80.

I looked up top 100 rankings for 2025, and the ringer has him at #81. They were the most respected publication I could find that had a ranking (1st on google search). That also seems to place his fair market value at or below $25M based on the way you have looked at it here.

I think Giddey will land on a good deal for Chicago at the end of the day. Terrific is probably highly dependent on if you have a glass half full or glass half empty view of him. I think he's extraordinarily unlikely to be a player you can flip for high value assets later (even on a good contract), because the type of teams that look to make all in playoff pushes will never be looking for a player with his skills. So then his value comes down to what you get on the court primarily.

I think that's really high value if we're trying to aim for 40ish wins and a lot lower if you're trying to do almost anything else (be it tank or compete). At the same time, he's pretty unlikely to be a negative value contract at that price, and we'll likely be able to pivot to something else if that makes sense without paying a cost. That ultimately makes it a good deal for what Chicago will likely be trying to accomplish in the best case scenario.

But again, most of those contacts were negotiated 2 or 3 seasons ago. The cap has gone up 13% in the last 2 seasons. Average contract value are always going to be lower than current, newly negotiated, contracts.

[jnrjr79]

Right now, for the upcoming season, if Giddey took the $20 mil AAV the Bulls are offering him he would be 89th highest paid player in the league. If he took between 22-23 which is a number many of us are projecting, that puts him 81st. At $25 million he's tied with psychopath Miles Bridges for 74th. Its almost a certainty that no matter what happens, I subjectively will think we got a terrific deal for Giddey at any of these numbers.

If I were ranking players, I'd guess off the top of my head that Giddey would be ~80.

I looked up top 100 rankings for 2025, and the ringer has him at #81. They were the most respected publication I could find that had a ranking (1st on google search). That also seems to place his fair market value at or below $25M based on the way you have looked at it here.

I think Giddey will land on a good deal for Chicago at the end of the day. Terrific is probably highly dependent on if you have a glass half full or glass half empty view of him. I think he's extraordinarily unlikely to be a player you can flip for high value assets later (even on a good contract), because the type of teams that look to make all in playoff pushes will never be looking for a player with his skills. So then his value comes down to what you get on the court primarily.

I think that's really high value if we're trying to aim for 40ish wins and a lot lower if you're trying to do almost anything else (be it tank or compete). At the same time, he's pretty unlikely to be a negative value contract at that price, and we'll likely be able to pivot to something else if that makes sense without paying a cost. That ultimately makes it a good deal for what Chicago will likely be trying to accomplish in the best case scenario.

But again, most of those contacts were negotiated 2 or 3 seasons ago. The cap has gone up 13% in the last 2 seasons. Average contract value are always going to be lower than current, newly negotiated, contracts.

The thing about this, though, is “the cap keeps going up” is an incomplete view of the landscape under the CBA, because you also have way more punitive consequences with the aprons, repeater tax, etc. So there is also downward pressure on salaries, because NBA teams do not really spend based on what the cap is (teams exceed it all the time, including the Bulls), they spend based on the lux tax and aprons. While those thresholds will go up, too, teams are less willing to cross them than they once were. The fact that teams are basically avoiding 3 max player superteams now is evidence of this downward pressure.

[dougthonus]

But again, most of those contacts were negotiated 2 or 3 seasons ago. The cap has gone up 13% in the last 2 seasons. Average contract value are always going to be lower than current, newly negotiated, contracts.

Most of those contracts have gone up either 10% or 16% over that time depending on if they had 5% or 8% raises. Some contracts are flat of course, but the majority have raises built in, so if you view a 10% improved contract, then we're talking about a total difference in less than 1M, if you had a 16% increase, that contract would have outstripped the league salary cap movement.

Certainly not a non-factor, but perhaps not as big a factor as it initially seems. You'd need to do some pretty robust looking to see what the typical impact is to see how much a factor that is.

I think if you toss in the league's changing attitude about contracts with the aprons in place as a counter measure, that you'd really be up for debate about how all those factors combine together to impact the market.

[SalmonsSuperfan]

25 mil per season is extremely fair to both sides based on his young age (upside potential), production, and comparative market. Both sides meet in the middle. Just get this done already and move on!

What upside? He's been the same player for the last three years and there's nothing in his game that suggests he'll take a leap in his 5th season. He's a glue guy, a role player. Based on the salary figure, in what world is he twice as good as Coby White?

Furthermore, why should the Bulls negotiate against themselves? He's a restricted free agent. If a team was going to offer him a giant salary, they would've done it already. I don't think $25mil aav is a huge overpay, unlike Pat he is actually producing and it's probably worth matching, but does any team even have cap space left to offer him that contract? Are teams going to make trades to offload salary so they can sign Giddey? What would teams actually give up to the Bulls for a S&T and why haven't they already done so in the last 2 months?

I think he's probably taking the QO.

The bolded seems like a silly question to me, given Coby White will certainly be getting more than $25M next year.

this is coby's third contract...is giddy twice as good as coby was as a rfa?

[jnrjr79]

What upside? He's been the same player for the last three years and there's nothing in his game that suggests he'll take a leap in his 5th season. He's a glue guy, a role player. Based on the salary figure, in what world is he twice as good as Coby White?

Furthermore, why should the Bulls negotiate against themselves? He's a restricted free agent. If a team was going to offer him a giant salary, they would've done it already. I don't think $25mil aav is a huge overpay, unlike Pat he is actually producing and it's probably worth matching, but does any team even have cap space left to offer him that contract? Are teams going to make trades to offload salary so they can sign Giddey? What would teams actually give up to the Bulls for a S&T and why haven't they already done so in the last 2 months?

I think he's probably taking the QO.

The bolded seems like a silly question to me, given Coby White will certainly be getting more than $25M next year.

this is coby's third contract...is giddy twice as good as coby was as a rfa?

Setting aside the fact that contract values aren’t linear like this - you don’t earn double the money by being twice the player - the answer is a fairly obvious yes. Coby White was coming off the bench and averaging 9.7 PPG when he signed his deal.

[Stratmaster]

If I were ranking players, I'd guess off the top of my head that Giddey would be ~80.

I looked up top 100 rankings for 2025, and the ringer has him at #81. They were the most respected publication I could find that had a ranking (1st on google search). That also seems to place his fair market value at or below $25M based on the way you have looked at it here.

I think Giddey will land on a good deal for Chicago at the end of the day. Terrific is probably highly dependent on if you have a glass half full or glass half empty view of him. I think he's extraordinarily unlikely to be a player you can flip for high value assets later (even on a good contract), because the type of teams that look to make all in playoff pushes will never be looking for a player with his skills. So then his value comes down to what you get on the court primarily.

I think that's really high value if we're trying to aim for 40ish wins and a lot lower if you're trying to do almost anything else (be it tank or compete). At the same time, he's pretty unlikely to be a negative value contract at that price, and we'll likely be able to pivot to something else if that makes sense without paying a cost. That ultimately makes it a good deal for what Chicago will likely be trying to accomplish in the best case scenario.

But again, most of those contacts were negotiated 2 or 3 seasons ago. The cap has gone up 13% in the last 2 seasons. Average contract value are always going to be lower than current, newly negotiated, contracts.

The thing about this, though, is “the cap keeps going up” is an incomplete view of the landscape under the CBA, because you also have way more punitive consequences with the aprons, repeater tax, etc. So there is also downward pressure on salaries, because NBA teams do not really spend based on what the cap is (teams exceed it all the time, including the Bulls), they spend based on the lux tax and aprons. While those thresholds will go up, too, teams are less willing to cross them than they once were. The fact that teams are basically avoiding 3 max player superteams now is evidence of this downward pressure.

I don't discount that point. It is true. But teams have to spend at least 90% of the cap.

[Stratmaster]

But again, most of those contacts were negotiated 2 or 3 seasons ago. The cap has gone up 13% in the last 2 seasons. Average contract value are always going to be lower than current, newly negotiated, contracts.

Most of those contracts have gone up either 10% or 16% over that time depending on if they had 5% or 8% raises. Some contracts are flat of course, but the majority have raises built in, so if you view a 10% improved contract, then we're talking about a total difference in less than 1M, if you had a 16% increase, that contract would have outstripped the league salary cap movement.

Certainly not a non-factor, but perhaps not as big a factor as it initially seems. You'd need to do some pretty robust looking to see what the typical impact is to see how much a factor that is.

I think if you toss in the league's changing attitude about contracts with the aprons in place as a counter measure, that you'd really be up for debate about how all those factors combine together to impact the market.

Fair points. But by that approach it would be impossible to assign a value to any new contract. With the recent changes that may be true and is likely why we are seeing so much consternation around RFA signings.

[sco]

Right now, for the upcoming season, if Giddey took the $20 mil AAV the Bulls are offering him he would be 89th highest paid player in the league. If he took between 22-23 which is a number many of us are projecting, that puts him 81st. At $25 million he's tied with psychopath Miles Bridges for 74th. Its almost a certainty that no matter what happens, I subjectively will think we got a terrific deal for Giddey at any of these numbers.

If I were ranking players, I'd guess off the top of my head that Giddey would be ~80.

I looked up top 100 rankings for 2025, and the ringer has him at #81. They were the most respected publication I could find that had a ranking (1st on google search). That also seems to place his fair market value at or below $25M based on the way you have looked at it here.

I think Giddey will land on a good deal for Chicago at the end of the day. Terrific is probably highly dependent on if you have a glass half full or glass half empty view of him. I think he's extraordinarily unlikely to be a player you can flip for high value assets later (even on a good contract), because the type of teams that look to make all in playoff pushes will never be looking for a player with his skills. So then his value comes down to what you get on the court primarily.

I think that's really high value if we're trying to aim for 40ish wins and a lot lower if you're trying to do almost anything else (be it tank or compete). At the same time, he's pretty unlikely to be a negative value contract at that price, and we'll likely be able to pivot to something else if that makes sense without paying a cost. That ultimately makes it a good deal for what Chicago will likely be trying to accomplish in the best case scenario.

Was "Whole Season Giddey" #80 or "Post ASG Giddey" #80? Cuz those are 2 different guys...we just don't which one will play for us next season.

[dougthonus]

I don't discount that point. It is true. But teams have to spend at least 90% of the cap.

This gets more into individual market dynamics which are certainly hurting Giddey. It's a good year to have money vs be a player looking for money if you are a middle income player. The middle income market is generally a tough one for players, especially when restricted, but also especially this year.

Those all factor into "reasonable" too, because "reasonable" doesn't exist in a vacuum. In the year the cap spike went up 30%, players signed deals that were totally unreasonable in their favor, no one was like "I'll take less", even the next year, the FAs did way worse than the previous year with the same total cap room because it was the shock of opening so many cap room teams at once that shifted the market.

Each market is different, and "reasonable" is different in the markets too. In this market, the Bulls are only bidding against the threat of the QO. They need to bid enough that he doesn't take it and enough that he's not so insulted he can't come back from it. I think the real interesting dynamic is going to be the years more so than the number. I'd be surprised if the number is not 25M +-1M.

If I'm the Bulls, I might do something like 27M AAV if the 5th year is a team option and you structure it as a declining contract.

Roughly looks like:
30.7, 28.9, 27, 25.1, 23.3

Gives me the value of a potentially really good contract in the last 3 years when I'm hopefully trying to build up a contender, and also gives me a piece I'm planning around for awhile. The trade value then is also likely to be fine, and if Giddey just craps the bed, I can kill the last year.

Vs if I'm doing a 3 year deal, I actually feel I have way less incentive to pay him money, particularly if he wants a PO. If he wanted a PO, I'd be like sure, 3 years 55-60M, PO on the 3rd year, or something really low.

If you do 3 years flat or 3 years PO/4th, I'd probably be closer to 75M/100M.

Depending on the dynamics you're trying to hit, these things all have different pros/cons, but the years / options end up being as meaningful as the AAV assuming the AAV is in reasonably narrow range anyway.

[jnrjr79]

But again, most of those contacts were negotiated 2 or 3 seasons ago. The cap has gone up 13% in the last 2 seasons. Average contract value are always going to be lower than current, newly negotiated, contracts.

The thing about this, though, is “the cap keeps going up” is an incomplete view of the landscape under the CBA, because you also have way more punitive consequences with the aprons, repeater tax, etc. So there is also downward pressure on salaries, because NBA teams do not really spend based on what the cap is (teams exceed it all the time, including the Bulls), they spend based on the lux tax and aprons. While those thresholds will go up, too, teams are less willing to cross them than they once were. The fact that teams are basically avoiding 3 max player superteams now is evidence of this downward pressure.

I don't discount that point. It is true. But teams have to spend at least 90% of the cap.

For sure. I’m not arguing contracts aren’t going up generally - they obviously are. It’s just not as simple as “the cap has gone up 13% over two years, so you must add 13% to those numbers to make it make sense in today’s dollars.”

[SalmonsSuperfan]

The bolded seems like a silly question to me, given Coby White will certainly be getting more than $25M next year.

this is coby's third contract...is giddy twice as good as coby was as a rfa?

Setting aside the fact that contract values aren’t linear like this - you don’t earn double the money by being twice the player - the answer is a fairly obvious yes. Coby White was coming off the bench and averaging 9.7 PPG when he signed his deal.

It's a simple way of assessing value in a sport where you can only spend so much. Ideally, most of the roster is on rookie contracts and actual good players are being paid "inefficient" contracts. Coby is a good contract, Giddey at $25mil is a 'meh' to bad contract. You don't win a championship by wasting all your cap space on role players. Ayo's production per dollar makes him more useful than Giddey at that amount. You're not building a team around either player, so why spend serious money on either?

[jnrjr79]

this is coby's third contract...is giddy twice as good as coby was as a rfa?

Setting aside the fact that contract values aren’t linear like this - you don’t earn double the money by being twice the player - the answer is a fairly obvious yes. Coby White was coming off the bench and averaging 9.7 PPG when he signed his deal.

It's a simple way of assessing value in a sport where you can only spend so much. Ideally, most of the roster is on rookie contracts and actual good players are being paid "inefficient" contracts. Coby is a good contract, Giddey at $25mil is a 'meh' to bad contract. You don't win a championship by wasting all your cap space on role players. Ayo's production per dollar makes him more useful than Giddey at that amount. You're not building a team around either player, so why spend serious money on either?

Yeah, I don’t agree with this at all and suspect you just don’t think much of Giddey as a player.

$25M is 4th best player on a good team money. I think Giddey is that.

I’m a lot more worried about the Bulls giving Coby something like $40M than I am giving Giddey $25M.

[dougthonus]

Yeah, I don’t agree with this at all and suspect you just don’t think much of Giddey as a player.

$25M is 4th best player on a good team money. I think Giddey is that.

I’m a lot more worried about the Bulls giving Coby something like $40M than I am giving Giddey $25M.

If you have 3 players better than Giddey, then Giddey is almost certainly a terrible fit with those 3 players. That's part of the inherent problem with guys like Giddey, Vuc, or DeMar. They don't have skills that complement great players which makes them ideal to be higher in the pecking order of a bad team and a lot less valuable as lower in the pecking order player on a really good team.

That then raises two questions to me:
1: Do you think it can change? I would say its in the realm of possibility, but probably not. He mainly needs to make massive changes to his shot and defense. The defense feels like a lot of physical limits and few guys rebuild their whole shooting form.

2: How much does it really matter? We are highly unlikely to be impacted by the theoretical ceiling, and if we are, then we can look to pivot out of his deal into someone else at that point. At the prices talked about, it feels reasonably likely Giddey won't end up in albatross land where we can't make a change later if we suddenly have 3 stars and don't want the ball in Giddey's hands as a primary on ball guy and he still isn't useful off ball.

[jnrjr79]

Yeah, I don’t agree with this at all and suspect you just don’t think much of Giddey as a player.

$25M is 4th best player on a good team money. I think Giddey is that.

I’m a lot more worried about the Bulls giving Coby something like $40M than I am giving Giddey $25M.

If you have 3 players better than Giddey, then Giddey is almost certainly a terrible fit with those 3 players. That's part of the inherent problem with guys like Giddey, Vuc, or DeMar. They don't have skills that complement great players which makes them ideal to be higher in the pecking order of a bad team and a lot less valuable as lower in the pecking order player on a really good team.

I know you believe this, but I don’t agree with it. That’s not to say there aren’t players who are better than Giddey with whom he would be a bad fit, but as a blanket proposition I think this is untrue.

That then raises two questions to me:
1: Do you think it can change? I would say it’s in the realm of possibility, but probably not. He mainly needs to make massive changes to his shot and defense. The defense feels like a lot of physical limits and few guys rebuild their whole shooting form.

Yes, Giddey can change. I don’t think he needs to rebuild his whole shooting form. He can play perfectly serviceable defense IMO, but can never be an elite defender given speed limitations.

2: How much does it really matter? We are highly unlikely to be impacted by the theoretical ceiling, and if we are, then we can look to pivot out of his deal into someone else at that point. At the prices talked about, it feels reasonably likely Giddey won't end up in albatross land where we can't make a change later if we suddenly have 3 stars and don't want the ball in Giddey's hands as a primary on ball guy and he still isn't useful off ball.

This is mostly why I support the deal. If you have Giddey for 4 years and all of a sudden you end up having a couple of better players on the team that don’t fit with Giddey, you can move him or let him expire. Giddey probably isn’t going to be an impediment to anyone during the life of his deal, which makes him worth a gamble (at the right price) on whether he can improve his game.

[Stratmaster]

Yeah, I don’t agree with this at all and suspect you just don’t think much of Giddey as a player.

$25M is 4th best player on a good team money. I think Giddey is that.

I’m a lot more worried about the Bulls giving Coby something like $40M than I am giving Giddey $25M.

If you have 3 players better than Giddey, then Giddey is almost certainly a terrible fit with those 3 players. That's part of the inherent problem with guys like Giddey, Vuc, or DeMar. They don't have skills that complement great players which makes them ideal to be higher in the pecking order of a bad team and a lot less valuable as lower in the pecking order player on a really good team.

That then raises two questions to me:
1: Do you think it can change? I would say its in the realm of possibility, but probably not. He mainly needs to make massive changes to his shot and defense. The defense feels like a lot of physical limits and few guys rebuild their whole shooting form.

2: How much does it really matter? We are highly unlikely to be impacted by the theoretical ceiling, and if we are, then we can look to pivot out of his deal into someone else at that point. At the prices talked about, it feels reasonably likely Giddey won't end up in albatross land where we can't make a change later if we suddenly have 3 stars and don't want the ball in Giddey's hands as a primary on ball guy and he still isn't useful off ball.

I will never understand the thought process that concludes a great ball distributor and rebounder is a bad fit alongside great players. I don't get your logic. But that's just me...

Giddey is nothing like the other 2 players you mentioned.

[MGB8]

25 million is 3rd best player money right now, not 4th. I wish it was 4th, but if you have one guy at 50 million - a senior MAX, one guy at 40 M, a junior MAX - that leaves you with 80 million for the remaining players on your team to stay under the luxury tax. If you next guy is 30, and the next is 25…. You have 25 million left for your 5th starter and next 3 (key) rotation players less that Tre Jones makes, on average, for each of those guys, with minimums for the rest.

To pay Giddey 25 M you have to think that he will be a reasonable quality 3rd best player. He doesn’t have to be ideal (that would be closer to 30)… but if you don’t think he is going to be a solid 3rd best player on a good team, the salary ceiling becomes 20 M… and really you should be looking to trade him.

[dougthonus]

I will never understand the thought process that concludes a great ball distributor and rebounder is a bad fit alongside great players. I don't get your logic. But that's just me...

Ball distribution isn't that useful a skill next to star players that generally have the ball. Being a good rebounder certainly is a positive, but not a critical one. The two most important, by far, complementary skills to have around great players are defense and shooting. Giddey doesn't have those things.

Look at any trade deadline article any year of what teams are looking for, and it's always those two things.

Giddey is nothing like the other 2 players you mentioned.

Agreed. There really is no one in the league like Giddey for that matter.

The commonality is on offense they are optimized by having the ball but great teams will be optimized with the ball in someone else's hands. On defense they are net negatives. A great team can't fully utilize their strengths.

[jnrjr79]

25 million is 3rd best player money right now, not 4th. I wish it was 4th, but if you have one guy at 50 million - a senior MAX, one guy at 40 M, a junior MAX - that leaves you with 80 million for the remaining players on your team to stay under the luxury tax. If you next guy is 30, and the next is 25…. You have 25 million left for your 5th starter and next 3 (key) rotation players less that Tre Jones makes, on average, for each of those guys, with minimums for the rest.

To pay Giddey 25 M you have to think that he will be a reasonable quality 3rd best player. He doesn’t have to be ideal (that would be closer to 30)… but if you don’t think he is going to be a solid 3rd best player on a good team, the salary ceiling becomes 20 M… and really you should be looking to trade him.

Denver Nuggets salaries:

55, 46, 22, 20


Celtics:

54, 53, 28, 27


Orlando (starting 2026 when Banchero’s deal kicks in):

48, 41, 39, 32


Minny:

45, 25, 25, 25


Cleveland:

46, 46, 39, 23


There are obviously tradeoffs in terms of depth, but if you don’t have two 30-year old+ max guys making 50-odd million, $25 million is a pretty feasible 4th salary. If you do have huge bucks at the top end, then yeah, $25M is probably your 3rd biggest deal.

This is not really a concern given where the Bulls are, though.

[jnrjr79]

I will never understand the thought process that concludes a great ball distributor and rebounder is a bad fit alongside great players. I don't get your logic. But that's just me...

Ball distribution isn't that useful a skill next to star players that generally have the ball. Being a good rebounder certainly is a positive, but not a critical one. The two most important, by far, complementary skills to have around great players are defense and shooting. Giddey doesn't have those things.

Look at any trade deadline article any year of what teams are looking for, and it's always those two things.

Giddey is nothing like the other 2 players you mentioned.

Agreed. There really is no one in the league like Giddey for that matter.

The commonality is on offense they are optimized by having the ball but great teams will be optimized with the ball in someone else's hands. On defense they are net negatives. A great team can't fully utilize their strengths.

Just scrolling through The Ringer’s top 100 list, going through the top 30 or so, Giddey strikes me as a good fit with about half of those players.