Josh Giddey 3.0

[GetBuLLish]

All of our priors will bias us towards how we feel about the negotiation which really has no ultimate right or wrong answer.

The only difference is one side wants the Bulls to pay Giddey the smallest amount that he would agree to, which is in the best interests of the Bulls (and their fans). The other side wants the Bulls to pay Giddey an amount that would make him the happiest, which is in the best interests of Giddey.

That's not an accurate summary.

It pretty much is. For anyone keeping the best interests of the Bulls in mind, there is no reason to be criticizing their approach so far with how they are dealing with Giddey. If they are able to sign him to, say, below $25M, then we should all be happy. Only once the negotiations have ended and they don't have a deal and we find out it's because the Bulls were being unreasonable, then people can be upset.

But right now, if you're upset at all with what the Bulls are doing, then you are not putting the team's interests at the top of the priority chain. Plain and simple.

And it is completely laughable the idea that the Bulls should avoid a situation where they pay Giddey the lowest amount of money possible but he's purportedly unhappy with the deal. I can't recall a single situation in the history of the NBA where a team was able to sign a player of Giddey's caliber to a team-friendly deal and that backfired because of the player's feelings. I'm going to step out on a limb and say it's never happened before.

[MikeDC]

There are quite a few relatively well publicized pieces of information:
1. Kuminga got offered: 2/$25M from the Warriors (2nd year is TO), Suns 4/$90M, and 3/$63 from the Kings. Now, Kuminga isn't the same guy, of course, but he's a similarly sized and aged guy, albeit with a different role, who has similar contract demands and is getting similar offers. They are putting his value in the range of $21-22.5M, or $25M for a single year. These offers also need to be understood in the context that they may be sending a pick (bad) or crummy salary (good) back to the Warriors.

2. There were those well researched articles in the Atlantic that canvased NBA people and put the value for Giddey at $22M/yr and Kuminga at $20.4M.

3. The Bulls have likely offered Giddey 4/$80M.

4. Other teams have shown interest in Giddey, but everyone knows the RFA game, so nobody is going to do it just to have him matched. Kuminga is a special case because they understand that the Warriors don't really want him back.

Anyway, I think there is a pretty obvious conclusion, which is that 4/$80 is probably a low-ball offer. It's lower than the offers that the league considered fair and it's lower than what Kuminga is being offered, and it's probably lower than what a couple of other teams have told Giddey's agent they would agree to.

I don't really care whether it's a fair offer or not. It's kind of meaningless. But what's not meaningless is the rest of the league giving somewhat credible info to Giddey that other teams would be offering more if they could. That's a problem, because it seems like bad faith on the part of the Bulls. The ideal here is that everyone comes out of the negotiation feeling like it's a win-win. In light of the information we have, I wouldn't feel that way if I were Giddey. I'd feel like the Bulls were taking advantage of the situation to put the screws to me. Maybe you don't care about that, but if you want him to a key part of the team going forward, and you want to have a good relationship with him, you offer 4/$90M if you're the Bulls.

If Giddey doesn't take that and holds out for more, well, then that's where I'd agree that he's the one being unreasonable. But the offer the Bulls have made is not one that he should accept at this point. And if the Bulls put a gun to his head and say it's this or the QO, they're likely to damage that relationship pretty severely.

[MikeDC]

The only difference is one side wants the Bulls to pay Giddey the smallest amount that he would agree to, which is in the best interests of the Bulls (and their fans). The other side wants the Bulls to pay Giddey an amount that would make him the happiest, which is in the best interests of Giddey.

That's not an accurate summary.

It pretty much is. For anyone keeping the best interests of the Bulls in mind, there is no reason to be criticizing their approach so far with how they are dealing with Giddey. If they are able to sign him to, say, below $25M, then we should all be happy. Only once the negotiations have ended and they don't have a deal and we find out it's because the Bulls were being unreasonable, then people can be upset.

But right now, if you're upset at all with what the Bulls are doing, then you are not putting the team's interests at the top of the priority chain. Plain and simple.

And it is completely laughable the idea that the Bulls should avoid a situation where they pay Giddey the lowest amount of money possible but he's purportedly unhappy with the deal. I can't recall a single situation in the history of the NBA where a team was able to sign a player of Giddey's caliber to a team-friendly deal and that backfired because of the player's feelings. I'm going to step out on a limb and say it's never happened before.

Scottie Pippen.
Jimmy Butler.

But mostly, we don't know because why would we. But we know that these kinds of negotiations are important beyond the money because they're negotiating terms of a relationship. You want this to be a win-win, and if you extract every last penny out of the other side, they'll remember it. It might come up, and it might not. But if you do that, don't expect anything from the other side.

There's a big spectrum between giving Giddey whatever he asks for and giving him he'd realistically get from other teams. The former is understandable, the latter is myopic.

[GetBuLLish]

That's not an accurate summary.

It pretty much is. For anyone keeping the best interests of the Bulls in mind, there is no reason to be criticizing their approach so far with how they are dealing with Giddey. If they are able to sign him to, say, below $25M, then we should all be happy. Only once the negotiations have ended and they don't have a deal and we find out it's because the Bulls were being unreasonable, then people can be upset.

But right now, if you're upset at all with what the Bulls are doing, then you are not putting the team's interests at the top of the priority chain. Plain and simple.

And it is completely laughable the idea that the Bulls should avoid a situation where they pay Giddey the lowest amount of money possible but he's purportedly unhappy with the deal. I can't recall a single situation in the history of the NBA where a team was able to sign a player of Giddey's caliber to a team-friendly deal and that backfired because of the player's feelings. I'm going to step out on a limb and say it's never happened before.

Scottie Pippen.
Jimmy Butler.

But mostly, we don't know because why would we. But we know that these kinds of negotiations are important beyond the money because they're negotiating terms of a relationship. You want this to be a win-win, and if you extract every last penny out of the other side, they'll remember it. It might come up, and it might not. But if you do that, don't expect anything from the other side.

There's a big spectrum between giving Giddey whatever he asks for and giving him he'd realistically get from other teams. The former is understandable, the latter is myopic.

Check the bold/underlined from my post.

You just named two superstar level players. Giddey is far from that.

[GetBuLLish]

2. There were those well researched articles in the Atlantic that canvased NBA people and put the value for Giddey at $22M/yr

Anyway, I think there is a pretty obvious conclusion, which is that 4/$80 is probably a low-ball offer.

How in the world can these two sentences be in the same post...?

[drosestruts]

Most teams don't start training camp till late September. It's frustrating but there's no reason for anyone to budge until we're closer to that date.

[drosestruts]

Restricted free agency is broken and I'm not sure what the fix is

Create a separate, shorter transaction period specifically for RFAs?

Draft - June 25th
RFA begins July 1st | RFA ends July 8th (players either re-sign, sign somewhere else, take the QO, or get released as a UFA)
Regular free agency begins July 10

[dougthonus]

There are quite a few relatively well publicized pieces of information:
1. Kuminga got offered: 2/$25M from the Warriors (2nd year is TO), Suns 4/$90M, and 3/$63 from the Kings. Now, Kuminga isn't the same guy, of course, but he's a similarly sized and aged guy, albeit with a different role, who has similar contract demands and is getting similar offers. They are putting his value in the range of $21-22.5M, or $25M for a single year. These offers also need to be understood in the context that they may be sending a pick (bad) or crummy salary (good) back to the Warriors.

2. There were those well researched articles in the Atlantic that canvased NBA people and put the value for Giddey at $22M/yr and Kuminga at $20.4M.

3. The Bulls have likely offered Giddey 4/$80M.

4. Other teams have shown interest in Giddey, but everyone knows the RFA game, so nobody is going to do it just to have him matched. Kuminga is a special case because they understand that the Warriors don't really want him back.

Agree with all of that, and a good summary.

Anyway, I think there is a pretty obvious conclusion, which is that 4/$80 is probably a low-ball offer. It's lower than the offers that the league considered fair and it's lower than what Kuminga is being offered, and it's probably lower than what a couple of other teams have told Giddey's agent they would agree to.

I don't really care whether it's a fair offer or not. It's kind of meaningless. But what's not meaningless is the rest of the league giving somewhat credible info to Giddey that other teams would be offering more if they could. That's a problem, because it seems like bad faith on the part of the Bulls. The ideal here is that everyone comes out of the negotiation feeling like it's a win-win. In light of the information we have, I wouldn't feel that way if I were Giddey. I'd feel like the Bulls were taking advantage of the situation to put the screws to me. Maybe you don't care about that, but if you want him to a key part of the team going forward, and you want to have a good relationship with him, you offer 4/$90M if you're the Bulls.

If Giddey doesn't take that and holds out for more, well, then that's where I'd agree that he's the one being unreasonable. But the offer the Bulls have made is not one that he should accept at this point. And if the Bulls put a gun to his head and say it's this or the QO, they're likely to damage that relationship pretty severely.

I'm a bit confused why you think the Bulls are acting in "bad faith" at 4/80, but you are unconcerned with Giddey's position (implied 4/120) when you think the fair number is 4/90. That would seem of the two sides that you should view the Bulls as acting in significantly better faith than Giddey at this point.

[sco]

There are quite a few relatively well publicized pieces of information:
1. Kuminga got offered: 2/$25M from the Warriors (2nd year is TO), Suns 4/$90M, and 3/$63 from the Kings. Now, Kuminga isn't the same guy, of course, but he's a similarly sized and aged guy, albeit with a different role, who has similar contract demands and is getting similar offers. They are putting his value in the range of $21-22.5M, or $25M for a single year. These offers also need to be understood in the context that they may be sending a pick (bad) or crummy salary (good) back to the Warriors.

2. There were those well researched articles in the Atlantic that canvased NBA people and put the value for Giddey at $22M/yr and Kuminga at $20.4M.

3. The Bulls have likely offered Giddey 4/$80M.

4. Other teams have shown interest in Giddey, but everyone knows the RFA game, so nobody is going to do it just to have him matched. Kuminga is a special case because they understand that the Warriors don't really want him back.

Anyway, I think there is a pretty obvious conclusion, which is that 4/$80 is probably a low-ball offer. It's lower than the offers that the league considered fair and it's lower than what Kuminga is being offered, and it's probably lower than what a couple of other teams have told Giddey's agent they would agree to.

I don't really care whether it's a fair offer or not. It's kind of meaningless. But what's not meaningless is the rest of the league giving somewhat credible info to Giddey that other teams would be offering more if they could. That's a problem, because it seems like bad faith on the part of the Bulls. The ideal here is that everyone comes out of the negotiation feeling like it's a win-win. In light of the information we have, I wouldn't feel that way if I were Giddey. I'd feel like the Bulls were taking advantage of the situation to put the screws to me. Maybe you don't care about that, but if you want him to a key part of the team going forward, and you want to have a good relationship with him, you offer 4/$90M if you're the Bulls.

If Giddey doesn't take that and holds out for more, well, then that's where I'd agree that he's the one being unreasonable. But the offer the Bulls have made is not one that he should accept at this point. And if the Bulls put a gun to his head and say it's this or the QO, they're likely to damage that relationship pretty severely.

Some great points here!

IMO, I don't think either Giddey or the Bulls should be deemed to being unreasonable at this point because the two sides haven't reached a deal. If both sides have different views on his value, it's a good and fair thing to just wait to see if some team comes out of the woodwork with an offer. I think it is accommodating of the Bulls to let that happen without seemingly any pressure from their side. The absolute right thing for Giddey's agent to do is to make sure that he's checked with every other possible team to jump in with an offer...it's possible that some team is giving him a bit of a nibble (i.e. "hold on let me see if I can do something to clear some cap space and get back to you"). I think nothing really needs to happen until training camp starts...at that point, there is some pressure on the Bulls to have Giddey there. But honestly, I'm not sure Giddey really needs camp to learn the system or his teammates, so one could argue that nothing really needs to happen until the regular season starts.

I'll go further (arguably too far), if Vuc is still our starting Center, it doesn't really matter when Giddey shows up, we're not going to be any better and we're not going to learn much about our roster.

[MikeDC]

There are quite a few relatively well publicized pieces of information:
1. Kuminga got offered: 2/$25M from the Warriors (2nd year is TO), Suns 4/$90M, and 3/$63 from the Kings. Now, Kuminga isn't the same guy, of course, but he's a similarly sized and aged guy, albeit with a different role, who has similar contract demands and is getting similar offers. They are putting his value in the range of $21-22.5M, or $25M for a single year. These offers also need to be understood in the context that they may be sending a pick (bad) or crummy salary (good) back to the Warriors.

2. There were those well researched articles in the Atlantic that canvased NBA people and put the value for Giddey at $22M/yr and Kuminga at $20.4M.

3. The Bulls have likely offered Giddey 4/$80M.

4. Other teams have shown interest in Giddey, but everyone knows the RFA game, so nobody is going to do it just to have him matched. Kuminga is a special case because they understand that the Warriors don't really want him back.

Agree with all of that, and a good summary.

Anyway, I think there is a pretty obvious conclusion, which is that 4/$80 is probably a low-ball offer. It's lower than the offers that the league considered fair and it's lower than what Kuminga is being offered, and it's probably lower than what a couple of other teams have told Giddey's agent they would agree to.

I don't really care whether it's a fair offer or not. It's kind of meaningless. But what's not meaningless is the rest of the league giving somewhat credible info to Giddey that other teams would be offering more if they could. That's a problem, because it seems like bad faith on the part of the Bulls. The ideal here is that everyone comes out of the negotiation feeling like it's a win-win. In light of the information we have, I wouldn't feel that way if I were Giddey. I'd feel like the Bulls were taking advantage of the situation to put the screws to me. Maybe you don't care about that, but if you want him to a key part of the team going forward, and you want to have a good relationship with him, you offer 4/$90M if you're the Bulls.

If Giddey doesn't take that and holds out for more, well, then that's where I'd agree that he's the one being unreasonable. But the offer the Bulls have made is not one that he should accept at this point. And if the Bulls put a gun to his head and say it's this or the QO, they're likely to damage that relationship pretty severely.

I'm a bit confused why you think the Bulls are acting in "bad faith" at 4/80, but you are unconcerned with Giddey's position (implied 4/120) when you think the fair number is 4/90. That would seem of the two sides that you should view the Bulls as acting in significantly better faith than Giddey at this point.

Well, first, I explicitly rejected "fairness" as a thing here. It's don't think 4/$90M is "fair" and I don't think 4/$80M is "unfair". And, to be more clear, I don't think 4/$80M was bad faith as a starting point. Two months into this though, when it's evident that the market is meaningfully higher, it's no longer a credible offer.

Instead of fairness, I'd define 4/$90M as basically where both sides could walk away feeling like they didn't get abused. Right now, the Bulls aren't offering Giddey something he would reasonably accept.

There's no symmetrical "fairness" between players and teams. Giddey is a player, and the player pretty much always gets to ask for whatever he wants. If the team is going to be put out by that reality, they shouldn't be in the NBA. Especially when they just paid Pat Williams what they paid him.

Player offers are almost always "reasonable" in that there's a lot of uncertainty about what teams will accept. Sometimes they just seem to give what's asked, and if you don't ask, you don't get. From the perspective that the Bulls have certainly been more charitable with less deserving players and Giddey can concretely point to any number of similar players on bigger contracts to what he's asking for (Quickley and Suggs to name the obvious ones), I don't see his offer as unreasonable.

The Bulls offer would have Giddey demonstrably underpaid from what the market is for similar players. That's an unreasonable offer. Probably less than what he'd hit the market at as a UFA.

Giddey's offer would make him paid consistently with similar players. That makes it a reasonable offer.

Now, if I'm the Bulls, I wouldn't just accept that offer and say "OK" to 4/$120 just because some other team did and I was stupid enough to give too much to Pat (and Jalen Smith, and Jevon Carter, and Zach, etc).

Reasonable is a range.

The upper bound of that range is what you can point to with other players. That's where Giddey is at, and while I wouldn't pay him that, there's a world where he does blow up and becomes worth that.

The lower bound of that range seems to be 4/$90M based on what the information we've agreed on above. You go below that, and Giddey and his agent are going to look at this know that the Bulls are not just driving a hard bargain, but using the system extract every penny they can.

At 4/$90M or above though, if I were Giddey's agent, I'd say something like, "Well, Josh, I know you'd like what Quickley got, and that he's going to make more than you when you're a better player. I get that. But you need to realize that:

1. Quickley got way more than most teams are willing to pay and is widely viewed as a terrible deal and

2. we have to work with what we have to work with, and now that the Bulls have upped their offer, it's competitive with what you could expect from another team. Maybe we'd have gotten luckier if you were a UFA, but the evidence indicates that this is a tough market and while the Bulls are driving a hard bargain, it's, again, comparable to what you'd get elsewhere.

3. So 4/$120 doesn't seem to be in cards. I'd advise you to take 4/$90, rather than take the QO. Because if you do that, you're leaving a lot of money on the table. It's a risk that very few players take, I would advise against it.

4. We still have some time. If you're really upset at how the Bulls handled this, and you're really determined that you're going to hit is big on your next deal, the sensible option is to get to free agency earlier. We could counter with a 3 year deal. That'll guarantee you a significant raise now and protect some risk, but it'll get you on the market a year sooner. Honestly, you might have to give up a couple million to get the Bulls to do that, since they'd like to lock you in. Like, maybe we say that we're willing to accept 3/$63M. Or demand the 4th year be a player option. That's giving up $1M/year over the 4/$90M deal, but it means that if you make more than $27M in the first year of your next contract (and that's 3 years down the road), you're coming out ahead. Given your confidence and the general direction of the league, that's an acceptable risk.

[MikeDC]

Shorter version: - If I were Giddey's agent, I'd say, "Look, 4/$90M is what you can get elsewhere. At this price, the Bulls are no different from the other teams that I think would offer you the same thing. What would be the point of holding out or signing the QO if it doesn't actually get you a better deal than you could get elsewhere".

At 4/$80M, I say, "OK, we should just stand pat. I've talked to teams X, Y and Z and they'd offer more. We can't force the Bulls hand, but we can make things uncomfortable for them, and they do understand that if just never budge, it's going to have negative implications for them. So, sit tight, and if they really get stupid, we'll start thinking about the QO if we really have to, but I don't think it'll come to that.

[Stratmaster]

The first rule of contact negotiation is start with an aggressive but realistic offer. At 30 million it would make Giddey the 20th or 21st highest paid point guard based on AAV. That is aggressive but realistic.

At 20 million it would put him at 25 or 26 on the list. That isn't the area that "PG of the future coming off a rookie contract" are slotted in. It isn't realistic.

I don't think 20M or 30M is more realistic than the other, and I think ways you justify one number as aggressive but realistic in this are irrelevant. I don't care about his money earned relative to other PGs because positions aren't that meaningful in the NBA, nor do I care about calling him "PG of the future coming off a rookie contract".

Those are narratives that I don't believe in comparing his overall skillset and how it fits into a good team or his position in the pecking order on that team or how much a player is worth.

The 2nd rule is that it should be a conversation. Not a confrontation. That ship has already sailed and the Bulls stepped on their own... tails. Every report indicates the talks are contentious. Then add that the Bulls are unwilling to budge, but have also refused to consider sign and trade offers.

When will you start to be concerned? We are just over 1 month before the start of training camp. Are you ok with the Bulls entering training camp with their most critical player having no prior involvement with the team?

The deadline for the QO (if I'm not mistaken is Oct 1st, which is also the start of camp, so we'll have this resolved by then. I won't truly ever be concerned about Giddey because we're a bad team with no star players that needs to get assets. Giddey on a bad deal isn't an asset, Giddey on a good deal is. If we can't get the good deal, getting the bad deal isn't a thing I'd do.

Even people like David Haugh are starting to state it is time to begin worrying.

David Haugh isn't a Bulls guy.

I don't put a lot of stock in pure internet reporters. They all get benefit from blowing things out of proportion. But all the reports are using sentences like "mired in a contentious contract negotiation that seems to be going nowhere".

If you think the number is 25 million, we both agree. I said 27 mil when it started but the arguments about lack of teams capable of bidding are valid. A 25 AAV deal should have been relatively easy to get to If AKME hadn't decided this was the time to show how big their... "negotiating skill" is.

I think this is just all made up in your head though. Neither of us have any idea if either side has moved in any way whatsoever or whom is responsible for the lack of movement. If you think 25M is the right number like me, then both sides are equidistant from that number and neither is more at fault than the other based on what we know.

If you think 27M is the right number, it totally makes sense that you think the Bulls are way more at fault and their number is way less reasonable. Outside of this forum, a ton of the chatter I hear around Giddey feels like his value at 25M is too high and we should pay him 22-23M. That group probably thinks Giddey is being totally insane.

All of our priors will bias us towards how we feel about the negotiation which really has no ultimate right or wrong answer.

Some of what you said just doesn't make sense.

Position isn't that meaningful? Then why is the starting point position role the highest paid in basketball? Notice this time I didn't say Guard because I was waiting for someone to say "he isn't really a Guard". Positions might not matter to you. But roles absolutely play a huge part in what salary is paid. the Bulls are asking Giddey to run the offense, and a specific type of offense that he is particularly suited for. To act like that shouldn't affect the offers and negotiations, and that what role the player is expected to play for what length of time shouldn't either, is putting your head in the sand.

The QO can be extended by agreement of both parties. If Giddey asks for that do you think the Bulls will play hardball and refuse to extend it in order to continue negotiations? Giddey could absolutely ask for that extension and sit out until the contract can be resolved. I don't see this as a likely outcome, but the Bulls front office has managed to screw things up to this point. I have no faith they won't continue to.

The Bulls are a bad team, so no sense bothering to try to lock in the two players they have who look like they could be long term pieces? OK...when should they start doing that? Next year? 3 years from now? 5 years from now? you are going to have to explain that logic to me.

I mean, neither of us have any inside information on anything. All I can do is go by the reports which say the Bulls first offer was 4/80 and they have refused to budge.

I don't mean to put words in your mouth so correct me if I misstate this. I am reading your comment as saying you don't care what role Giddey plays, you don't care what other players in that same role with equal or lesser talent and promise are making, the offers are irrelevant. You keep going back to the equidistant argument.

That all translates to me to a very simple thought that you don't really care about Giddey because you don't see him as a valuable piece. If that is the case, why would you be OK with 25 mil? Or even 20 mil? If you are looking for a complete tank, wouldn't you have listened to all the sign and trade offers?

On the equidistant argument, I know the NBA isn't like other negotiations. I have a 1 week old example of why it doesn't work. I just bought a new car. I researched all the pricing including the trade in value of my old car, which was in as close to perfect shape as a 2019 vehicle could possibly be. The trade-in range was 11,500-14,400. They asked me what I wanted for it and I said $15,000.00. Aggressive, but realistic, and willing to take $13k if I had to. They came back and offered $10k. I politely told them, while standing and beginning to turn to walk away, that they could call me if they wanted to get serious. The Manager caught me on my way out and asked me what it would take to do the deal. I told him that after the insult, my number wasn't changing. they gave me 14,400 + $600 in other fluff.

They could have gotten it for $13,000 if they had offered me that in the first place.

[kodo]

Some great points here!

IMO, I don't think either Giddey or the Bulls should be deemed to being unreasonable at this point because the two sides haven't reached a deal. If both sides have different views on his value, it's a good and fair thing to just wait to see if some team comes out of the woodwork with an offer. I think it is accommodating of the Bulls to let that happen without seemingly any pressure from their side. The absolute right thing for Giddey's agent to do is to make sure that he's checked with every other possible team to jump in with an offer...it's possible that some team is giving him a bit of a nibble (i.e. "hold on let me see if I can do something to clear some cap space and get back to you"). I think nothing really needs to happen until training camp starts...at that point, there is some pressure on the Bulls to have Giddey there. But honestly, I'm not sure Giddey really needs camp to learn the system or his teammates, so one could argue that nothing really needs to happen until the regular season starts.

I'll go further (arguably too far), if Vuc is still our starting Center, it doesn't really matter when Giddey shows up, we're not going to be any better and we're not going to learn much about our roster.

Agreed this seems pretty amicable even though there's no movement. Giddey's camp starting point was $30M per, Bulls were $20M, pretty normal. They didn't compromise at $25M, so Giddey's camp has to weigh $20M vs QO, and his agent should. A lot of times the player really leave it mostly to the agency, esp. a 22 year old like Giddey.

First 3 years Bulls offer: $20M over 3 years = $60M
If Giddey gets $25M AAV next FA, it's $11M + $25M + $25M = $61M
If Giddey gets $30M AAV next FA, it's $11M + $30M + $30M = $71M
If Giddey plays like he did post ASG, he's in the Scottie Barnes range: $11M + 38M + 41M = $90M

I still point out that Toronto paid NOP a TOR 1st round pick (only top 4 protections) + 2nd rounder for the opportunity to pay Brandon Ingram $40M, who is a considerably worse player than Giddey's ceiling.

I don't think either side is being unreasonable here. I do think it will be a bad move if the Bulls lose him for nothing over $5M per year... that's less than adding another Jevon Carter to the roster. The other thing is people keep talking about Giddey's perception around the league, his average value perception is meaningless. NBA FA is an auction not an average. If 29 teams thinks player X is worth $20M and 1 team thinks he's worth $75M, he gets $75M. The cost to keep Giddey is going to be whatever is the worst, most outlier insane take on his value from a team with cap space next season. This is why every team in the league avoids the FA like the plague and either lock their players up early or gets rid of them before they hit UFA. This is also really relevant to Coby White.

[dougthonus]

Shorter version: - If I were Giddey's agent, I'd say, "Look, 4/$90M is what you can get elsewhere. At this price, the Bulls are no different from the other teams that I think would offer you the same thing. What would be the point of holding out or signing the QO if it doesn't actually get you a better deal than you could get elsewhere".

At 4/$80M, I say, "OK, we should just stand pat. I've talked to teams X, Y and Z and they'd offer more. We can't force the Bulls hand, but we can make things uncomfortable for them, and they do understand that if just never budge, it's going to have negative implications for them. So, sit tight, and if they really get stupid, we'll start thinking about the QO if we really have to, but I don't think it'll come to that.

Fundamentally, I think the Bulls will get to above 4/90 (though who knows).

Your description of the negotiation seems to be the Bulls just make offers, and Giddey chooses to accept or reject rather than a scenario where both sides are engaging on the offering process and are equally involved in getting to a negotiated solution. I disagree that this is how the process works. Both sides are need to engage in the negotiations IMO.

How they engage though is highly tactical, neither side likely wants to engage for a perceived first mover penalty.

[NZB2323]

The first rule of contact negotiation is start with an aggressive but realistic offer. At 30 million it would make Giddey the 20th or 21st highest paid point guard based on AAV. That is aggressive but realistic.

At 20 million it would put him at 25 or 26 on the list. That isn't the area that "PG of the future coming off a rookie contract" are slotted in. It isn't realistic.

I don't think 20M or 30M is more realistic than the other, and I think ways you justify one number as aggressive but realistic in this are irrelevant. I don't care about his money earned relative to other PGs because positions aren't that meaningful in the NBA, nor do I care about calling him "PG of the future coming off a rookie contract".

Those are narratives that I don't believe in comparing his overall skillset and how it fits into a good team or his position in the pecking order on that team or how much a player is worth.

The 2nd rule is that it should be a conversation. Not a confrontation. That ship has already sailed and the Bulls stepped on their own... tails. Every report indicates the talks are contentious. Then add that the Bulls are unwilling to budge, but have also refused to consider sign and trade offers.

When will you start to be concerned? We are just over 1 month before the start of training camp. Are you ok with the Bulls entering training camp with their most critical player having no prior involvement with the team?

The deadline for the QO (if I'm not mistaken is Oct 1st, which is also the start of camp, so we'll have this resolved by then. I won't truly ever be concerned about Giddey because we're a bad team with no star players that needs to get assets. Giddey on a bad deal isn't an asset, Giddey on a good deal is. If we can't get the good deal, getting the bad deal isn't a thing I'd do.

Even people like David Haugh are starting to state it is time to begin worrying.

David Haugh isn't a Bulls guy.

I don't put a lot of stock in pure internet reporters. They all get benefit from blowing things out of proportion. But all the reports are using sentences like "mired in a contentious contract negotiation that seems to be going nowhere".

If you think the number is 25 million, we both agree. I said 27 mil when it started but the arguments about lack of teams capable of bidding are valid. A 25 AAV deal should have been relatively easy to get to If AKME hadn't decided this was the time to show how big their... "negotiating skill" is.

I think this is just all made up in your head though. Neither of us have any idea if either side has moved in any way whatsoever or whom is responsible for the lack of movement. If you think 25M is the right number like me, then both sides are equidistant from that number and neither is more at fault than the other based on what we know.

If you think 27M is the right number, it totally makes sense that you think the Bulls are way more at fault and their number is way less reasonable. Outside of this forum, a ton of the chatter I hear around Giddey feels like his value at 25M is too high and we should pay him 22-23M. That group probably thinks Giddey is being totally insane.

All of our priors will bias us towards how we feel about the negotiation which really has no ultimate right or wrong answer.

Some of what you said just doesn't make sense.

Position isn't that meaningful? Then why is the starting point position role the highest paid in basketball? Notice this time I didn't say Guard because I was waiting for someone to say "he isn't really a Guard". Positions might not matter to you. But roles absolutely play a huge part in what salary is paid. the Bulls are asking Giddey to run the offense, and a specific type of offense that he is particularly suited for. To act like that shouldn't affect the offers and negotiations, and that what role the player is expected to play for what length of time shouldn't either, is putting your head in the sand.

The QO can be extended by agreement of both parties. If Giddey asks for that do you think the Bulls will play hardball and refuse to extend it in order to continue negotiations? Giddey could absolutely ask for that extension and sit out until the contract can be resolved. I don't see this as a likely outcome, but the Bulls front office has managed to screw things up to this point. I have no faith they won't continue to.

The Bulls are a bad team, so no sense bothering to try to lock in the two players they have who look like they could be long term pieces? OK...when should they start doing that? Next year? 3 years from now? 5 years from now? you are going to have to explain that logic to me.

I mean, neither of us have any inside information on anything. All I can do is go by the reports which say the Bulls first offer was 4/80 and they have refused to budge.

I don't mean to put words in your mouth so correct me if I misstate this. I am reading your comment as saying you don't care what role Giddey plays, you don't care what other players in that same role with equal or lesser talent and promise are making, the offers are irrelevant. You keep going back to the equidistant argument.

That all translates to me to a very simple thought that you don't really care about Giddey because you don't see him as a valuable piece. If that is the case, why would you be OK with 25 mil? Or even 20 mil? If you are looking for a complete tank, wouldn't you have listened to all the sign and trade offers?

On the equidistant argument, I know the NBA isn't like other negotiations. I have a 1 week old example of why it doesn't work. I just bought a new car. I researched all the pricing including the trade in value of my old car, which was in as close to perfect shape as a 2019 vehicle could possibly be. The trade-in range was 11,500-14,400. They asked me what I wanted for it and I said $15,000.00. Aggressive, but realistic, and willing to take $13k if I had to. They came back and offered $10k. I politely told them, while standing and beginning to turn to walk away, that they could call me if they wanted to get serious. The Manager caught me on my way out and asked me what it would take to do the deal. I told him that after the insult, my number wasn't changing. they gave me 14,400 + $600 in other fluff.

They could have gotten it for $13,000 if they had offered me that in the first place.

It seems kind of silly to say that the point gets paid the most money.

Curry is making $60M a year. Dame makes 54.1M a year. SGA makes $38M a year, and his new extension will pay him $70M.

Giddey is a PG like those players, but he isn’t like those players. Last year he averaged 15, 8, and 6, 57 TS%, 18.1 PER. He got benched in the playoffs, has never made an all-star team, and no other team is giving him a $30M/year offer.

I like Giddey, but the Bulls have the leverage here. If Giddey wants to make more, he just needs a bigger offer from another team. If he can’t get another offer from another team…the Bulls have the leverage, especially in this new CBA.

You were fine not selling your car, but what if you needed money, took your car to 30 different dealerships, and only 1 made you an offer?

[dougthonus]

Some of what you said just doesn't make sense.

Position isn't that meaningful?

Position isn't meaningful relative to skills you bring to the table. The lines of traditional positions are really blurry now. You need an array of skills. Nikola Jokic effectively plays the PG role as a C for the Nuggets. What position do you want to call him? Michael Jordan would be viewed as a PG by today's definitions, but he wasn't back in the day.

The role is what is important, and maybe I'm splitting hairs in the definition, but I think it is particularly important in this question. Guy who needs the ball to operate but does not create gravity, require double teams, score through double teams, play the role of go to guy, and shot creator is generally not a useful starting role. Especially if that player cannot shoot to play off the ball or defend well.

As an example, Lonzo Ball, when healthy signed with us on a 4/80 deal that would pro-rate into about a 4/100 deal in today's dollars, and I would view him as a far more desirable player if he were healthy. He also was a PG by role, but not the dominant offensive player, but his defense and shooting allowed him to still fit in really well in that spot and alleviate ball handling responsibilities, initiate a break, and then still fit into a valuable offensive role.

The QO can be extended by agreement of both parties. If Giddey asks for that do you think the Bulls will play hardball and refuse to extend it in order to continue negotiations?

I would potentially agree to extend it for a couple days if we had real traction on something and just needed tiny bit more time to finalize, but that's it. If we had made no traction, I'd make my best final offer and tell him to decide.

Giddey could absolutely ask for that extension and sit out until the contract can be resolved. I don't see this as a likely outcome, but the Bulls front office has managed to screw things up to this point. I have no faith they won't continue to.

Not that I have any faith in our FO, but they haven't screwed up anything yet. Nothing objective has happened yet. At this point, they haven't signed a bad contract which would be a screw up or a good contract (which we could celebrate). Nothing has been lost by delays. So they are in neutral.

The Bulls are a bad team, so no sense bothering to try to lock in the two players they have who look like they could be long term pieces? OK...when should they start doing that? Next year? 3 years from now? 5 years from now? you are going to have to explain that logic to me.

No sense locking in non stars into bad deals when you are a bad team.

I mean, neither of us have any inside information on anything. All I can do is go by the reports which say the Bulls first offer was 4/80 and they have refused to budge.

'

An argument no more relevant than Giddey has refused to budge off 30M (to our knowledge).

I don't mean to put words in your mouth so correct me if I misstate this. I am reading your comment as saying you don't care what role Giddey plays, you don't care what other players in that same role with equal or lesser talent and promise are making, the offers are irrelevant. You keep going back to the equidistant argument.

That all translates to me to a very simple thought that you don't really care about Giddey because you don't see him as a valuable piece. If that is the case, why would you be OK with 25 mil? Or even 20 mil? If you are looking for a complete tank, wouldn't you have listened to all the sign and trade offers?

I don't think Giddey plays the role of primary ball handler like anyone else in the NBA because of his very particular sets of traits of not being able to shoot off the ball, not being able to generate efficient offense on the ball, and not being able to defend. I think he's a very clear non-star player, Iv'e said I think he's a good 4th best guy on a good team or a bad 3rd best guy. I'm willing to offer him a fair contract for that assessment, and to me that is 25M.

I won't be all that moved if we don't manage to keep him though, because I simply don't care that much about him, like I would not care that much about any player in that position given the Bulls position. I would be fine if we pursued draft assets and a deep rebuild on the condition that we did so in a sane, aggressive way vs trying to have our cake and eat it too. We have no indication of doing that though, and I'm okay with the current plan as well, but for me, an important part of the current plan is then making good value decisions.

On the equidistant argument, I know the NBA isn't like other negotiations. I have a 1 week old example of why it doesn't work. I just bought a new car. I researched all the pricing including the trade in value of my old car, which was in as close to perfect shape as a 2019 vehicle could possibly be. The trade-in range was 11,500-14,400. They asked me what I wanted for it and I said $15,000.00. Aggressive, but realistic, and willing to take $13k if I had to. They came back and offered $10k. I politely told them, while standing and beginning to turn to walk away, that they could call me if they wanted to get serious. The Manager caught me on my way out and asked me what it would take to do the deal. I told him that after the insult, my number wasn't changing. they gave me 14,400 + $600 in other fluff.

They could have gotten it for $13,000 if they had offered me that in the first place.

Glad you got the deal you wanted on your car. Pretty sure it has absolutely no remote relevance to Josh Giddey's negotiation, but always good to see a friend get a win.

[Stratmaster]

I don't think 20M or 30M is more realistic than the other, and I think ways you justify one number as aggressive but realistic in this are irrelevant. I don't care about his money earned relative to other PGs because positions aren't that meaningful in the NBA, nor do I care about calling him "PG of the future coming off a rookie contract".

Those are narratives that I don't believe in comparing his overall skillset and how it fits into a good team or his position in the pecking order on that team or how much a player is worth.



The deadline for the QO (if I'm not mistaken is Oct 1st, which is also the start of camp, so we'll have this resolved by then. I won't truly ever be concerned about Giddey because we're a bad team with no star players that needs to get assets. Giddey on a bad deal isn't an asset, Giddey on a good deal is. If we can't get the good deal, getting the bad deal isn't a thing I'd do.



David Haugh isn't a Bulls guy.



I think this is just all made up in your head though. Neither of us have any idea if either side has moved in any way whatsoever or whom is responsible for the lack of movement. If you think 25M is the right number like me, then both sides are equidistant from that number and neither is more at fault than the other based on what we know.

If you think 27M is the right number, it totally makes sense that you think the Bulls are way more at fault and their number is way less reasonable. Outside of this forum, a ton of the chatter I hear around Giddey feels like his value at 25M is too high and we should pay him 22-23M. That group probably thinks Giddey is being totally insane.

All of our priors will bias us towards how we feel about the negotiation which really has no ultimate right or wrong answer.

Some of what you said just doesn't make sense.

Position isn't that meaningful? Then why is the starting point position role the highest paid in basketball? Notice this time I didn't say Guard because I was waiting for someone to say "he isn't really a Guard". Positions might not matter to you. But roles absolutely play a huge part in what salary is paid. the Bulls are asking Giddey to run the offense, and a specific type of offense that he is particularly suited for. To act like that shouldn't affect the offers and negotiations, and that what role the player is expected to play for what length of time shouldn't either, is putting your head in the sand.

The QO can be extended by agreement of both parties. If Giddey asks for that do you think the Bulls will play hardball and refuse to extend it in order to continue negotiations? Giddey could absolutely ask for that extension and sit out until the contract can be resolved. I don't see this as a likely outcome, but the Bulls front office has managed to screw things up to this point. I have no faith they won't continue to.

The Bulls are a bad team, so no sense bothering to try to lock in the two players they have who look like they could be long term pieces? OK...when should they start doing that? Next year? 3 years from now? 5 years from now? you are going to have to explain that logic to me.

I mean, neither of us have any inside information on anything. All I can do is go by the reports which say the Bulls first offer was 4/80 and they have refused to budge.

I don't mean to put words in your mouth so correct me if I misstate this. I am reading your comment as saying you don't care what role Giddey plays, you don't care what other players in that same role with equal or lesser talent and promise are making, the offers are irrelevant. You keep going back to the equidistant argument.

That all translates to me to a very simple thought that you don't really care about Giddey because you don't see him as a valuable piece. If that is the case, why would you be OK with 25 mil? Or even 20 mil? If you are looking for a complete tank, wouldn't you have listened to all the sign and trade offers?

On the equidistant argument, I know the NBA isn't like other negotiations. I have a 1 week old example of why it doesn't work. I just bought a new car. I researched all the pricing including the trade in value of my old car, which was in as close to perfect shape as a 2019 vehicle could possibly be. The trade-in range was 11,500-14,400. They asked me what I wanted for it and I said $15,000.00. Aggressive, but realistic, and willing to take $13k if I had to. They came back and offered $10k. I politely told them, while standing and beginning to turn to walk away, that they could call me if they wanted to get serious. The Manager caught me on my way out and asked me what it would take to do the deal. I told him that after the insult, my number wasn't changing. they gave me 14,400 + $600 in other fluff.

They could have gotten it for $13,000 if they had offered me that in the first place.

It seems kind of silly to say that the point gets paid the most money.

Curry is making $60M a year. Dame makes 54.1M a year. SGA makes $38M a year, and his new extension will pay him $70M.

Giddey is a PG like those players, but he isn’t like those players. Last year he averaged 15, 8, and 6, 57 TS%, 18.1 PER. He got benched in the playoffs, has never made an all-star team, and no other team is giving him a $30M/year offer.

I like Giddey, but the Bulls have the leverage here. If Giddey wants to make more, he just needs a bigger offer from another team. If he can’t get another offer from another team…the Bulls have the leverage, especially in this new CBA.

You were fine not selling your car, but what if you needed money, took your car to 30 different dealerships, and only 1 made you an offer?

Where did I say Giddey should get paid like Curry, Dame or SGA. I didn't compare him to the best players at his position. I compared him to all of them.
I stated the average point guard salary is higher than for any other position. Which is simply a fact. How is stating a fact silly?

Where did I say the Bulls didn't have leverage? I acknowledged that and have done so about 100 times.

My car reference was to Doug as we have been debating the equidistant approach to negotiations. It was not Giddey specific nor NBA specific. I thought my first sentence about it made that clear.

But thanks for your reply.

[meekrab]

Restricted free agency is broken and I'm not sure what the fix is

Create a separate, shorter transaction period specifically for RFAs?

Draft - June 25th
RFA begins July 1st | RFA ends July 8th (players either re-sign, sign somewhere else, take the QO, or get released as a UFA)
Regular free agency begins July 10

Nonsense, RFA is working exactly as designed. What's the problem with waiting it out?

[MikeDC]

Shorter version: - If I were Giddey's agent, I'd say, "Look, 4/$90M is what you can get elsewhere. At this price, the Bulls are no different from the other teams that I think would offer you the same thing. What would be the point of holding out or signing the QO if it doesn't actually get you a better deal than you could get elsewhere".

At 4/$80M, I say, "OK, we should just stand pat. I've talked to teams X, Y and Z and they'd offer more. We can't force the Bulls hand, but we can make things uncomfortable for them, and they do understand that if just never budge, it's going to have negative implications for them. So, sit tight, and if they really get stupid, we'll start thinking about the QO if we really have to, but I don't think it'll come to that.

Fundamentally, I think the Bulls will get to above 4/90 (though who knows).

Your description of the negotiation seems to be the Bulls just make offers, and Giddey chooses to accept or reject rather than a scenario where both sides are engaging on the offering process and are equally involved in getting to a negotiated solution. I disagree that this is how the process works. Both sides are need to engage in the negotiations IMO.

How they engage though is highly tactical, neither side likely wants to engage for a perceived first mover penalty.

I don't think there's a single way that "the process" of negotiation works, but I pointed out that Giddey appears to have made an offer (whatever his starting ask was) and further pointed out some counter offers he should consider (different length) and amounts.

Giddey's offer, while high, has some justification in the sense that he can point to other guys and teams agreeing to those things. The Bulls offer is notably below what the market seems to be. A simple way to put it is that the Bulls are the ones who are not "engaged".

Because of they are not engaged, the onus is on the Bulls to engage by making an offer that at least hits those minimums to be competitive.
Which is why Giddey is probably right to sit tight and say, "come back when you're serious". There's no point in responding to non-competitive offers. In fact, there is a point in not-responding to them.

[WindyCityBorn]

I can’t even imagine how boring it must to still be discussing Giddey and Kuminga