Josh Giddey 3.0

[waffle]

I said it several threads ago, 3/75 or less likely 4/90 (or somesuch) with a PO at the end.

25 AAV may not be 30 but it sure as heck is 25.

Giddy is worth that all day every day and it's a good contract for both sides

[Chi town]

https://youtu.be/OWyHzDnG4Jc?si=LptR58rrxyx3dkkz

Vecenie on Giddey situation.

[Stratmaster]

the apron obviously isn't the reason the RFAs haven't gotten offer sheets, but i think it's pretty likely that it's significantly dampening the sign and trade market for these players. you literally can't acquire a player via s&t if you're over the first apron, and you're hard capped at the apron for the league year if you do s&t for a player. and even if you're under the apron, you're probably being more thoughtful about your spending with a de facto hard cap in place than you otherwise would be

and i think that matters even in cases where a team isn't particularly interested in moving their own RFA via s&t. if giddey's agent could come to the bulls and say "[team x] is willing to trade for me at $28 million a year," that puts way more pressure on the bulls than if he's saying "i swear someone would give me money if they could"

If the Bulls were looking for S&Ts, I agree the apron rules would depress those, but they aren't looking for S&Ts. I also agree the apron rules are depressing the markets somewhat holistically. I just don't agree they are the reason behind what is happening in today's FA market. This is just no one under the cap.

While giving your lesson on reporting to Infinity you stated in a previous post that the S&T inquiries had no meat to them because they don't name the teams or the terms. Now you use the same reporter's information to say the Bulls aren't interested in S&T. You can't have it both ways. And you can't have terms if the Bulls answer to the teams inquiry is "not interested".

There are many, many reports that don't name specific teams because it would put their sources into question. What I am beginning to see is a trend where if a team is nsmed you can pretty much discount the rumor because it is an armchair internet guy spewing his own idea for a trade. Golden State and Sacramento were both rumored to have interest. Were those reports more reliable than actual reporters with a track record who are unwilling to name teams? No. Likely less reliable.

[Stratmaster]

https://youtu.be/OWyHzDnG4Jc?si=LptR58rrxyx3dkkz

Vecenie on Giddey situation.

Pretty similar discussion to what is going on here. And 20 minutes of "air time" spent on it. Some thoughts.

Everybody in the world says 4/100. So why isn't it done?

What is this 4 year contract with a mutual option in year 4? Isn't that then just a 3 year contract? Is there an example of a contract like this?

They say at Giddey’s full season numbers he is worth 30 million. But think he should take 25 because of uncertainty about his role and whether he can play off ball. I think his role here is pretty well defined. Also,ehat is he worth somewhere in between his full season numbers and his end of season stretch? To me that is the most likely end result.

At the end they say (paraphrasing) players don't see the Bulls as a great organization to play for, but it would be silly to think Giddey would take a lower long term contract just to increase the chance he gets traded to a better organization. I agree. Is it silly to think he might be inclined to give up about 10 million for 1 year so he can get the hell out? Full disclosure, they also brought up that he gets to run the show in Chicago.

But all in all I agree, and almost everyone else does, that 4/100 is the likely result. If I am Giddey I insist on a PO for season 4.

[League Circles]

I think the best way to conceptualize Giddey and a deal at the moment is to view Giddey as being either a max player OR an MLE guy, without much in between in terms of plausible outcome. Because Giddey looks like there's a solid chance that he can run a good nba team offense, which would frankly make him a low end max player. But, he might not be able to do that, at least not with typical teammates. In which case, rather than just be a 4th or 5th man, he'd probably become a 6th man, and thus an mle guy. The 20-30 mil values reflect this IMO, with different weightings by the different parties on how likely the former and latter are.

In the 20-30 mil range, IMO there is like a 75% chance that Giddey would become overpaid OR underpaid. If he becomes what we think he can, even 30 mil is an underpay. If he doesn't, even 20 mil is an overpay especially for a team like us. This range hedges the bets.

Usually when you have a guy of this rough caliber, if he doesn't work out quite as hoped, he can often have a slight adjustment of role or be turned into a high minute bench player getting 25+ mph and you can still get solid value out of his ability. This is what the Bulls are trying to do with Patrick Williams right now for better or worse.

With Giddey, because he's a pure point and has relatively poor defensive and off ball skills, I don't think he can be a true 6th man in terms of mpg. If he can't start on a good team running the offense, somebody else better than him will, because it's a good team, and the type of guy that takes his starting job running the offense will play 30+ mpg, with Giddey lucky to get 20 mpg in a scenario like that, which even if he's good at it is a role that isn't worth more than the MLE.

This is really a unique player and situation.

[Stratmaster]

Siegel parroting the same thing Schaeffer said:

"That is why Chicago hasn't entertained the idea of a sign-and-trade involving Giddey whatsoever this offseason. Some teams did inquire about Giddey this summer, but they were met with a quick 'no' from the Bulls' brass, sources said," Siegel continued. "

[nomorezorro]

What is this 4 year contract with a mutual option in year 4? Isn't that then just a 3 year contract? Is there an example of a contract like this?

i'm pretty sure mutual options are legal in the nba, although in 5 minutes of googling i couldn't find a concrete example of a contract with a simultaneous player/team option. (they are much more common in the mlb, and as a result, searching "mutual option" + nba still pulled up a bunch of baseball-related articles.)

the way that de facto mutual options have manifested themselves recently, though, is contracts where the final year is a player option and the salary is unguaranteed, which means a team can cut a player with no cap ramifications even if he opts in. there are a few examples of this - it looks like the first recent case of it was when josh hart re-signed with new orleans as an RFA, as it happens. after that, buddy hield and dorian finney-smith signed contracts with the same structure.

[Stratmaster]

What is this 4 year contract with a mutual option in year 4? Isn't that then just a 3 year contract? Is there an example of a contract like this?

i'm pretty sure mutual options are legal in the nba, although in 5 minutes of googling i couldn't find a concrete example of a contract with a simultaneous player/team option. (they are much more common in the mlb, and as a result, searching "mutual option" + nba still pulled up a bunch of baseball-related articles.)

the way that de facto mutual options have manifested themselves recently, though, is contracts where the final year is a player option and the salary is unguaranteed, which means a team can cut a player with no cap ramifications even if he opts in. there are a few examples of this - it looks like the first recent case of it was when josh hart re-signed with new orleans as an RFA, as it happens. after that, buddy hield and dorian finney-smith signed contracts with the same structure.

Yeah it looks like it has been used a couple times with older players. Guys who will be mid-30's at the end of the contract. Which really makes it a team option for all practical purposes. I would think it would be a very rare situation where a player that age is going to opt out because they think they can get more money. Maybe a player that age might opt out for less AAV to get a 2 or 3 year deal?

[nomorezorro]

yeah the josh hart contract is the only example of it i could find for a player in a remotely similar situation to giddey, and even that is pretty different considering hart was obviously valued less by the pelicans than the bulls value giddey (and it was only one guaranteed year on the contract)

i do think it makes conceptual sense to have a mutual option in this context — both sides have legitimate reason to believe the player might significantly over/underperform the "fair" AAV — but i would be very surprised if it's actually in the contract

[Stratmaster]

yeah the josh hart contract is the only example of it i could find for a player in a remotely similar situation to giddey, and even that is pretty different considering hart was obviously valued less by the pelicans than the bulls value giddey (and it was only one guaranteed year on the contract)

i do think it makes conceptual sense to have a mutual option in this context — both sides have legitimate reason to believe the player might significantly over/underperform the "fair" AAV — but i would be very surprised if it's actually in the contract

The more I think about it, the main difference is after 3 years neither side has to renegotiate a long term deal if both sides are still happy with the contract. But the flip side of that is someone is likely going to feel they have leverage. Almost every player is going to either slightly under or over perform their contract.

I just never realized this was a thing lol

[kodo]

The "full season numbers he is worth $30M" is a pretty wild take from Sam Vecenie. It's certainly the big point of contention for all Giddey opinions and why it's such a divisive topic.

Factually speaking there are only a few players who have approached Giddey's ppg/rpg/apg #s at his age:
- Luka Doncic (far exceeded ppg)
- Oscar Robertson (far exceeded ppg)
- Lebron (far exceeded ppg)
- Magic Johnson
- Joker
- Ben Simmons

If you throw in the 38% 3P shooting, that certainly eliminates Simmons & Magic.

So Giddey is definitely worse than the first 3, and about on par with the second 3. Two are HOFers, 1 is a bust. But even as a bust Simmons had shown enough at an early age to get a 5 year max contract.

Bulls standing hard at $20M pretty much assumes he's not like any of the others and definitely 99% in the Ben Simmons career trajectory...in which case why is he even on the team? Waive him and move on. As I've said before, there is no such thing in the NBA as a $20M team leader. Does not exist anymore than an industry leading CTO making $50k. If you're sure the player is worth $20M, then you don't want that player period.

As pointed out by Marks, the average NBA starting PG (including all the terrible ones) make $36M. If Giddey is worth $20M, he's a bench PG at the very best, so he's not important to the team. S&T him to GS and get a 2nd rounder or something, sell it for more cash. The internal logic of the Bulls makes no sense here.

[dougthonus]

While giving your lesson on reporting to Infinity you stated in a previous post that the S&T inquiries had no meat to them because they don't name the teams or the terms. Now you use the same reporter's information to say the Bulls aren't interested in S&T. You can't have it both ways. And you can't have terms if the Bulls answer to the teams inquiry is "not interested".

There are many, many reports that don't name specific teams because it would put their sources into question. What I am beginning to see is a trend where if a team is nsmed you can pretty much discount the rumor because it is an armchair internet guy spewing his own idea for a trade. Golden State and Sacramento were both rumored to have interest. Were those reports more reliable than actual reporters with a track record who are unwilling to name teams? No. Likely less reliable.

Not sure what you think is contradictory in what I've said. I've said many times I don't think the Bulls are interested in S&Ts.

I've questioned the assumption that a team reaching out to the Bulls about a S&T means you can infer specifics about what price they are willing to meet Giddey at or what type of compensation they would offer the Bulls in a scenario where none of those things were reported.

[dougthonus]

i do think it makes conceptual sense to have a mutual option in this context — both sides have legitimate reason to believe the player might significantly over/underperform the "fair" AAV — but i would be very surprised if it's actually in the contract

I've heard people talk about a mutual option, there's no point. Just make the contract one year shorter. One side is always going to opt out. I mean it doesn't totally hurt to throw it on there if both sides want, but it seems like a really low probability that it gets picked up by both sides.

[dougthonus]

The "full season numbers he is worth $30M" is a pretty wild take from Sam Vecenie. It's certainly the big point of contention for all Giddey opinions and why it's such a divisive topic.

Factually speaking there are only a few players who have approached Giddey's ppg/rpg/apg #s at his age:
- Luka Doncic (far exceeded ppg)
- Oscar Robertson (far exceeded ppg)
- Lebron (far exceeded ppg)
- Magic Johnson
- Joker
- Ben Simmons

If you throw in the 38% 3P shooting, that certainly eliminates Simmons & Magic.

So Giddey is definitely worse than the first 3, and about on par with the second 3. Two are HOFers, 1 is a bust. But even as a bust Simmons had shown enough at an early age to get a 5 year max contract.

Bulls standing hard at $20M pretty much assumes he's not like any of the others and definitely 99% in the Ben Simmons career trajectory...in which case why is he even on the team? Waive him and move on. As I've said before, there is no such thing in the NBA as a $20M team leader. Does not exist anymore than an industry leading CTO making $50k. If you're sure the player is worth $20M, then you don't want that player period.

As pointed out by Marks, the average NBA starting PG (including all the terrible ones) make $36M. If Giddey is worth $20M, he's a bench PG at the very best, so he's not important to the team. S&T him to GS and get a 2nd rounder or something, sell it for more cash. The internal logic of the Bulls makes no sense here.

I think you're over complicating things. There are so few players that have his numbers only because there are so few people that will hit the rebound and assist mark, but that really isn't all that meaningful on the court. It's a magic stat that makes him more unique and that other super duper stars have done because they're awesome, but he is lacking the traits that make those guys super awesome.

It's also useless to use counting stat logic or classify him in a broad group of "PGs" and then try to use metrics, because these classifications ignore the massive flaws he has that make him a polarizing player.

The Bulls want Giddey back on a good contract, and are negotiating as such. Maybe they screw this up, they've certainly screwed up enough stuff under AK, but the position makes plenty of sense. You look at the sources around the league, and they're all mostly focused on about 25M for Giddey as the magic number. The Bulls and Giddey are both equidistant from it. They'll likely both wait until time mounts pressure on both sides then meet in the middle somewhere.

Could that happen earlier? Conceptually there's no reason it can't, but professional negotiators (in my experience) don't want to flinch until they have to, and it sure feels like both sides are in this boat.

[Infinity2152]

See, the waiting until the last minute is the part I don't get. How long before the deadline? A day? 2 days? A week?

Seems to me the only way that makes sense if both sides have absolutely no intention of moving from their current position. Either Giddey takes the 4yrs/80 mill or he takes the QO. Let's say the Bulls are willing to move to $25 mill max. Giddey's willing to drop to $27 max.

What's the logic behind the Bulls not offering $22 mill now? Deadline still exists, threat still exists. But more time to negotiate, and when one side moves, it can encourage the other side to move. I don't see any advantage in giving yourself less time to negotiate, when the threat remains the same.

Same logic applies to why Giddey's side isn't offering say $28 mill AAV with some favorable terms instead of the Bulls making the first move. The Bulls are in the position of power, have far more experience with negotiations. My kids are older than Giddey. I've probably defended AK as much or more than anyone in this forum over the years. This is a business relationship, between parties that are hoping to work together for years, maybe even many years. Checked out Giddey's current agent, not impressed.

So maybe I'm personally biased. I think Giddey wants to be here, at least for now. Organization, team is kind of like a family. AK is Dad. I truly hope the plan is not to wait until the last minute and pray the 22yr old makes the first move. At some point, SOMEBODY has to make the first move, right? Or will it just be all or nothing, no negotiations?

[step]

See, the waiting until the last minute is the part I don't get. How long before the deadline? A day? 2 days? A week?

October 1st is the deadline for Giddey to accept his QO from memory, *edit* as per below... this can also be extended

July 13 was the last day we could withdraw it (not that we would).

The game of chicken still has a while to go... and technically can go like up until March 1.

Qualifying offers expire on Oct. 1, but can be extended. However, the extension of a qualifying offer cannot go past March 1. If the deadline passes and the qualifying offer is neither withdrawn nor accepted, the player continues to be a restricted free agent. Teams and players are free to negotiate a new contract after the qualifying offer expires as the deadline only affects the player’s ability to accept his qualifying offer.

Players can always accept the qualifying offer and play the following season under its terms. This is sometimes done to ensure unrestricted free agency in the following offseason.

https://www.nba.com/news/free-agency-explained

It’s important to note that the October 1 deadline isn’t necessarily a hard and fast one — it can be pushed back as long as the team and player agree, and that can be done multiple times. For example, the two sides may initially agree to delay the deadline back to Oct. 15, then two weeks later decide to push it back again to November 1. However, that date can’t be postponed indefinitely…

March 1: Very last day for a restricted free agent to accept his qualifying offer; deadline for an RFA to sign an offer sheet

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2025/08/key-dates-deadlines-for-restricted-free-agents.html

[dougthonus]

See, the waiting until the last minute is the part I don't get. How long before the deadline? A day? 2 days? A week?

Seems to me the only way that makes sense if both sides have absolutely no intention of moving from their current position. Either Giddey takes the 4yrs/80 mill or he takes the QO. Let's say the Bulls are willing to move to $25 mill max. Giddey's willing to drop to $27 max.

What's the logic behind the Bulls not offering $22 mill now? Deadline still exists, threat still exists. But more time to negotiate, and when one side moves, it can encourage the other side to move. I don't see any advantage in giving yourself less time to negotiate, when the threat remains the same.

Same logic applies to why Giddey's side isn't offering say $28 mill AAV with some favorable terms instead of the Bulls making the first move. The Bulls are in the position of power, have far more experience with negotiations. My kids are older than Giddey. I've probably defended AK as much or more than anyone in this forum over the years. This is a business relationship, between parties that are hoping to work together for years, maybe even many years. Checked out Giddey's current agent, not impressed.

So maybe I'm personally biased. I think Giddey wants to be here, at least for now. Organization, team is kind of like a family. AK is Dad. I truly hope the plan is not to wait until the last minute and pray the 22yr old makes the first move. At some point, SOMEBODY has to make the first move, right? Or will it just be all or nothing, no negotiations?

Go to any AI, and input this prompt:
The Chicago Bulls are negotiating with Josh Giddey. Josh Giddey has a demand of 30M dollars per year. The Chicago Bulls have made an offer of 20M per year. Most experts think 25M per year is the max fair number for both sides. Both sides want to agree to a deal and need each other. There is significant time pressure one month away to get a deal done because Giddey's qualifying offer will expire. There is no time pressure to get a deal done before that. What strategy should each side use to try to maximize the outcome? Should either side engage early or should both sides wait?

Ran it through all the major AIs, and while their answers vary slightly from "wait until the last minute" to "start engaging a week or two early", none suggest engaging now, and none suggest your logic. They all will tell you the maximal negotiating strategy for both sides is to wait.

Since you don't want to believe any of my explanations, all of the different AIs will give you very robust answers as to why this is happening.

[Ice Man]

I think you're over complicating things. There are so few players that have his numbers only because there are so few people that will hit the rebound and assist mark, but that really isn't all that meaningful on the court. It's a magic stat that makes him more unique and that other super duper stars have done because they're awesome, but he is lacking the traits that make those guys super awesome.

Yep. Those numbers screens can be helpful, but not in this case. No team would bench any of those comparison guys during the playoffs of their third year in the league. So pretty clearly, Giddey is missing something (or things) that those guys possessed.

That said, I am on Team Giddey.

[dougthonus]

See, the waiting until the last minute is the part I don't get. How long before the deadline? A day? 2 days? A week?

October 1st is the deadline for Giddey to accept his QO from memory, *edit* as per below... this can also be extended

July 13 was the last day we could withdraw it (not that we would).

The game of chicken still has a while to go... and technically can go like up until March 1.

Qualifying offers expire on Oct. 1, but can be extended. However, the extension of a qualifying offer cannot go past March 1. If the deadline passes and the qualifying offer is neither withdrawn nor accepted, the player continues to be a restricted free agent. Teams and players are free to negotiate a new contract after the qualifying offer expires as the deadline only affects the player’s ability to accept his qualifying offer.

Players can always accept the qualifying offer and play the following season under its terms. This is sometimes done to ensure unrestricted free agency in the following offseason.

https://www.nba.com/news/free-agency-explained

It’s important to note that the October 1 deadline isn’t necessarily a hard and fast one — it can be pushed back as long as the team and player agree, and that can be done multiple times. For example, the two sides may initially agree to delay the deadline back to Oct. 15, then two weeks later decide to push it back again to November 1. However, that date can’t be postponed indefinitely…

March 1: Very last day for a restricted free agent to accept his qualifying offer; deadline for an RFA to sign an offer sheet

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2025/08/key-dates-deadlines-for-restricted-free-agents.html

FWIW, I suggested withdrawing the QO on July 13th so he had no leverage to force me into a contract I didn't want. If we couldn't come to a long term agreement, I'd just pivot to a full rebuild and help him on a S&T. The only thing I really don't want is the QO.

I wouldn't extend the QO if I'm the Bulls, unless I'm extending it for like 1 day because we're deep in negotiations and about to finalize something. That said, I'm willing to walk away from Giddey if the contract doesn't land where I want, I doubt the Bulls are. That said, I'd also be willing to engage and up my offer considerably from where we currently are too (and would guess the Bulls will do the same when time pressure hits).

[League Circles]

The "full season numbers he is worth $30M" is a pretty wild take from Sam Vecenie. It's certainly the big point of contention for all Giddey opinions and why it's such a divisive topic.

Factually speaking there are only a few players who have approached Giddey's ppg/rpg/apg #s at his age:
- Luka Doncic (far exceeded ppg)
- Oscar Robertson (far exceeded ppg)
- Lebron (far exceeded ppg)
- Magic Johnson
- Joker
- Ben Simmons

If you throw in the 38% 3P shooting, that certainly eliminates Simmons & Magic.

So Giddey is definitely worse than the first 3, and about on par with the second 3. Two are HOFers, 1 is a bust. But even as a bust Simmons had shown enough at an early age to get a 5 year max contract.

Bulls standing hard at $20M pretty much assumes he's not like any of the others and definitely 99% in the Ben Simmons career trajectory...in which case why is he even on the team? Waive him and move on. As I've said before, there is no such thing in the NBA as a $20M team leader. Does not exist anymore than an industry leading CTO making $50k. If you're sure the player is worth $20M, then you don't want that player period.

As pointed out by Marks, the average NBA starting PG (including all the terrible ones) make $36M. If Giddey is worth $20M, he's a bench PG at the very best, so he's not important to the team. S&T him to GS and get a 2nd rounder or something, sell it for more cash. The internal logic of the Bulls makes no sense here.

You make some good points, but correct, the Bulls are definitely not seeing him. As a team leader, or if so only as a coleader on a team with at least half a dozen guys of that caliber. And yes, 20 mil means all they're CERTAIN of is that he'll be at least a really good bench PG (which I agree with as far as certainty), but none of that suggests that we should dump for him an almost certainly absolutely worthless 2nd round pick.

Bottom line, I don't think counting stats like ppg, rpg and apg really do or should have any impact on grading a player. They're so context dependent and just not a good measure of a player. But yes Simmons is a good warning sign in terms of committing big money to a flawed point. If it doesn't work out then it REALLY doesn't work out. I've always said, the Bulls are pricing him in a way that it doesn't absolutely destroy their next 4 years if he plays like a bench player and they have to demote him.