Bulls re-sign Josh Giddey - 4/100- no options, fully guaranteed

[Stratmaster]

So the 6'9" guy who outrebounds players taller and bigger than him, successfully drives into contact in the lane dribbling around point guards lacks strength and quickness? I am arguing that stating athleticism is a detriment for Giddey is completely false. I could agree on average. But average athleticism doesn't make him less than a horrible, 20 million player.

Again, the numbers show he was the most disruptive defensive player on the team. He had the most "STOCKS", the best DBPM, the 2nd best DWS, and the 2nd most defensive rebounds per game. Like all stats, but especially defensive ones, those need to be taken in context. Regardless, someone who is getting blocks, steals and rebounds is doing something right defensively, even if they are doing other things wrong. All of this certainly doesn't indicate a "horrible" player defensively regardless of your subjective opinion.

47% from the field and 38% from 3 are not "terrible shooting", sorry. those are the fulls eason numbers, not cherry-picking the hot streak only.

But again, you have successfully morphed the conversation away from what started it ( the discussion of "worst case scenario" and you backing up the negative opinion I responded to) and now deflect by saying "it doesn't matter". I guess it only mattered for as long as you thought you could defend the position.

Okay, why do you think Giddey is not a consensus, obvious max player / superstar?

Because if it isn't his athleticism, defense, and shooting, I have no idea what else it would be.

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

[League Circles]

So the 6'9" guy who outrebounds players taller and bigger than him, successfully drives into contact in the lane dribbling around point guards lacks strength and quickness? I am arguing that stating athleticism is a detriment for Giddey is completely false. I could agree on average. But average athleticism doesn't make him less than a horrible, 20 million player.

Again, the numbers show he was the most disruptive defensive player on the team. He had the most "STOCKS", the best DBPM, the 2nd best DWS, and the 2nd most defensive rebounds per game. Like all stats, but especially defensive ones, those need to be taken in context. Regardless, someone who is getting blocks, steals and rebounds is doing something right defensively, even if they are doing other things wrong. All of this certainly doesn't indicate a "horrible" player defensively regardless of your subjective opinion.

47% from the field and 38% from 3 are not "terrible shooting", sorry. those are the fulls eason numbers, not cherry-picking the hot streak only.

But again, you have successfully morphed the conversation away from what started it ( the discussion of "worst case scenario" and you backing up the negative opinion I responded to) and now deflect by saying "it doesn't matter". I guess it only mattered for as long as you thought you could defend the position.

Okay, why do you think Giddey is not a consensus, obvious max player / superstar?

Because if it isn't his athleticism, defense, and shooting, I have no idea what else it would be.

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

[dougthonus]

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

No, I'm saying his obvious weaknesses are athleticism, defense, and shooting. If he was good at those things, I think he'd be a max player.

I think he's 25M player because he's not good at those specific things. I'm asking what flaws you think he has since you don't think athleticism, defense, and shooting are his flaws.

Please stop wildly interpreting words I say into things I don't remotely say or mean.

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

In the first half of last season, which was the timeline mentioned, he played like that. He averaged 12/7/6 and a -6.5 +/- while teams targeted him in the fourth quarter causing us to bench him, and he himself discussed at length his defensive deficiencies while on offense teams didn't guard him when he was off ball and would often give him 8 feet of space at the 3 point line even when on ball.

I'm arguing the extreme, because he fit the extreme. If you think otherwise fair enough, no point arguing about it further.

[Stratmaster]

Okay, why do you think Giddey is not a consensus, obvious max player / superstar?

Because if it isn't his athleticism, defense, and shooting, I have no idea what else it would be.

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

No, it isn't. Define "athletic". What physical attributes do you consider when making that assessment and rank them in importance.

[Stratmaster]

Okay, why do you think Giddey is not a consensus, obvious max player / superstar?

Because if it isn't his athleticism, defense, and shooting, I have no idea what else it would be.

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

just because we did this once before, and it was so much fun, here is what AI says about "Is Josh Giddey athletic?". AI is generally a compilation (aka consensus") of opinions.

"Yes, Josh Giddey is generally considered an athletic player, though his athleticism is characterized more by agility, court vision, and passing ability rather than pure explosive power. He demonstrates impressive skills such as making difficult passes, securing rebounds, executing steals, and driving through traffic to finish or set up teammates. While some may perceive a lack of "athletic pop" in his game compared to other players, his ability to push the ball down the court, his versatility on defense, and his successful completion of impressive plays, like a dunk after a drive, highlight his athleticism"

Ther eis a tendency for us to think that if we believe in something, that makes it a consensus.

[dougthonus]

Ther eis a tendency for us to think that if we believe in something, that makes it a consensus.

There is also a tendency to think something is a consensus if every expert that make a living covering a topic agrees.

[League Circles]

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

just because we did this once before, and it was so much fun, here is what AI says about "Is Josh Giddey athletic?". AI is generally a compilation (aka consensus") of opinions.

"Yes, Josh Giddey is generally considered an athletic player, though his athleticism is characterized more by agility, court vision, and passing ability rather than pure explosive power. He demonstrates impressive skills such as making difficult passes, securing rebounds, executing steals, and driving through traffic to finish or set up teammates. While some may perceive a lack of "athletic pop" in his game compared to other players, his ability to push the ball down the court, his versatility on defense, and his successful completion of impressive plays, like a dunk after a drive, highlight his athleticism"

Ther eis a tendency for us to think that if we believe in something, that makes it a consensus.

I use AI a ton every day. It's absolutely ridiculously bad and contradictorily a huge portion of the time.

Athleticism to me primarily describes quickness, especially quickness in changing directions, as well as speed and strength, primarily "quick twitch" strength such as that used for jumping.

If you think Giddey is an average athlete for a 6'-8" nba player, go ahead and list the 6'-8" Bulls in recent seasons that you consider more and less athletic than Giddey.

Giddey is very skilled, and he may perhaps be an underrated athlete, but he's absolutely unequivocally below average athlete for a 6'-8' NBA player.

Again, to Doug's point that you keep dodging, if he's elite at multiple important skills (which he is), and no worse than average in most others (as you claim), why isn't he being pursued as much closer to a max player?

[League Circles]

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

just because we did this once before, and it was so much fun, here is what AI says about "Is Josh Giddey athletic?". AI is generally a compilation (aka consensus") of opinions.

"Yes, Josh Giddey is generally considered an athletic player, though his athleticism is characterized more by agility, court vision, and passing ability rather than pure explosive power. He demonstrates impressive skills such as making difficult passes, securing rebounds, executing steals, and driving through traffic to finish or set up teammates. While some may perceive a lack of "athletic pop" in his game compared to other players, his ability to push the ball down the court, his versatility on defense, and his successful completion of impressive plays, like a dunk after a drive, highlight his athleticism"

Ther eis a tendency for us to think that if we believe in something, that makes it a consensus.

See how easy this is:

It is impossible to provide an exact percentage of NBA players of a specific height who are more or less athletic than Josh Giddey, because athleticism is a subjective trait that scouts do not measure using public metrics. However, based on scouting reports and analysis, the consensus among evaluators is that most NBA players who are also 6'8" would be considered more athletic than Giddey.
Why Josh Giddey is not considered a top-tier athlete
Scouting reports from his draft year and throughout his career have consistently identified his lack of elite explosiveness and quickness as a significant weakness, even with his size. His primary strengths lie in his high basketball IQ, passing, and craftiness, not his physical gifts.
Specific athletic limitations include:
Average explosiveness: Giddey is not a particularly explosive player and is not known for his above-the-rim finishing.
Lack of lateral quickness: Scouts note his average lateral quickness and upright defensive stance, which causes issues when guarding quicker players.
Neutral wingspan: Giddey is listed at 6'8" but has a wingspan that is either reported as neutral (6'8") or slightly negative, which limits his defensive and finishing abilities compared to other players his height.
Below-average finishing at the rim: Despite his height, his finishing percentages at the rim have been considered poor for his position compared to his peers.
Most 6'8" NBA players are more athletic
The NBA features the most athletically gifted basketball players in the world. As a general rule, any player who is singled out for their lack of elite athleticism compared to his peers is going to rank in the bottom percentile.
The majority of players 6'8" or taller possess superior length, explosiveness, and lateral quickness. Giddey's athleticism is widely seen as below average for his position in the NBA, not just for his height. This means a substantial majority of the league's 6'8" players would be rated as more athletic by scouts.
What portion would be considered less athletic?
A very small percentage of players would be considered less athletic than Giddey, and most of these players are typically:
Older veterans whose athletic abilities have declined significantly.
Specialized players whose primary role does not rely on athleticism (e.g., floor-spacing shooters).
Players whose athleticism is limited by injuries or other physical limitations.

[League Circles]

So we are back to the "either he is horrible and not worth 20 mil or he is a max player superstar" argument?

Again, there are all kinds of rungs in the later between those 2. Unlike you, I am not arguing an extreme here. I am arguing he is average athletically (speaking relative to players his size) and defensively and shot adequately. You are arguing he is horrible at those things.

Average at those skills, combined with his elite skills and his bball IQ is nowhere near a "horrible non-impact player worth less than 20 mil". He is not, and never has been, that guy.

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

just because we did this once before, and it was so much fun, here is what AI says about "Is Josh Giddey athletic?". AI is generally a compilation (aka consensus") of opinions.

"Yes, Josh Giddey is generally considered an athletic player, though his athleticism is characterized more by agility, court vision, and passing ability rather than pure explosive power. He demonstrates impressive skills such as making difficult passes, securing rebounds, executing steals, and driving through traffic to finish or set up teammates. While some may perceive a lack of "athletic pop" in his game compared to other players, his ability to push the ball down the court, his versatility on defense, and his successful completion of impressive plays, like a dunk after a drive, highlight his athleticism"

Ther eis a tendency for us to think that if we believe in something, that makes it a consensus.

You asked " is Josh Giddey athletic ". Of course hes6 athletic!!! He's an nba player. Here is what I asked it:

" what percentage of NBA players that are also 6'-8' would be considered by scouts and team executives around the league as being more and less athletic than Josh Giddey?"

[sco]

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

just because we did this once before, and it was so much fun, here is what AI says about "Is Josh Giddey athletic?". AI is generally a compilation (aka consensus") of opinions.

"Yes, Josh Giddey is generally considered an athletic player, though his athleticism is characterized more by agility, court vision, and passing ability rather than pure explosive power. He demonstrates impressive skills such as making difficult passes, securing rebounds, executing steals, and driving through traffic to finish or set up teammates. While some may perceive a lack of "athletic pop" in his game compared to other players, his ability to push the ball down the court, his versatility on defense, and his successful completion of impressive plays, like a dunk after a drive, highlight his athleticism"

Ther eis a tendency for us to think that if we believe in something, that makes it a consensus.

You asked " is Josh Giddey athletic ". Of course hes6 athletic!!! He's an nba player. Here is what I asked it:

" what percentage of NBA players that are also 6'-8' would be considered by scouts and team executives around the league as being more and less athletic than Josh Giddey?"

I think you guys made fair points. That said, give me a skilled/crafty guy 10 out of 10 guys over the quick guy with hops. That said, I do give him credit for strength that may be underappreciated given his ability to get to the rim effectively and rebound at elite levels for his size.

[jnrjr79]

What Doug is saying is that if he wasn't pretty bad in a couple of key things, his elite skills would make him a max or near max player, which is true IMO.

It's just obvious consensus and really easy to see by the eye test that Josh Giddey is a significantly below average athlete for a 6'8" NBA player.

just because we did this once before, and it was so much fun, here is what AI says about "Is Josh Giddey athletic?". AI is generally a compilation (aka consensus") of opinions.

"Yes, Josh Giddey is generally considered an athletic player, though his athleticism is characterized more by agility, court vision, and passing ability rather than pure explosive power. He demonstrates impressive skills such as making difficult passes, securing rebounds, executing steals, and driving through traffic to finish or set up teammates. While some may perceive a lack of "athletic pop" in his game compared to other players, his ability to push the ball down the court, his versatility on defense, and his successful completion of impressive plays, like a dunk after a drive, highlight his athleticism"

Ther eis a tendency for us to think that if we believe in something, that makes it a consensus.

You asked " is Josh Giddey athletic ". Of course hes6 athletic!!! He's an nba player. Here is what I asked it:

" what percentage of NBA players that are also 6'-8' would be considered by scouts and team executives around the league as being more and less athletic than Josh Giddey?"

Yeah, the question of athleticism is relative to your peers in the sport. Of course Josh Giddey is athletic for a human being. An ultramarathoner is also an elite athlete in a specific context, but would be a terrible NBA athlete.

[DropStep]

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but Kuminga apparently just got an offer that is a few pennies more than Giddey in AAV (although with that team option on the end). Maybe they thought he would care that he "won" his little competition with Giddey. Apparently he didn't, in any event.

[kodo]

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but Kuminga apparently just got an offer that is a few pennies more than Giddey in AAV (although with that team option on the end). Maybe they thought he would care that he "won" his little competition with Giddey. Apparently he didn't, in any event.

Interesting. Shams said it's only $48M guaranteed, so $52M less guaranteed money than what Giddey got. Chicago has also made it clear Giddey will be a top player if not the #1 player on the team which matters a lot to players (if money is even).

Overall I think it's a lot less commitment to Kuminga than what Chicago offered to Giddey.

[dougthonus]

I think you guys made fair points. That said, give me a skilled/crafty guy 10 out of 10 guys over the quick guy with hops. That said, I do give him credit for strength that may be underappreciated given his ability to get to the rim effectively and rebound at elite levels for his size.

FWIW, he has historically not been a good finisher at the rim nor does he historically have a good reputation of drawing fouls our out muscling players, and has been perceived as a guy whom can be pushed around physically on defense, so I'm not sure about his strength.

I think this one is a bit harder to gauge than burst / quickness / hops which is pretty obvious from the eye test, but I don't perceive Giddey as someone whom has strength as an advantage. Maybe it's more of a neutral category than a flat out negative, but I would guess it is in the neutral to negative territory.

[DropStep]

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but Kuminga apparently just got an offer that is a few pennies more than Giddey in AAV (although with that team option on the end). Maybe they thought he would care that he "won" his little competition with Giddey. Apparently he didn't, in any event.

Interesting. Shams said it's only $48M guaranteed, so $52M less guaranteed money than what Giddey got. Chicago has also made it clear Giddey will be a top player if not the #1 player on the team which matters a lot to players (if money is even).

Overall I think it's a lot less commitment to Kuminga than what Chicago offered to Giddey.

Ah, didn't go to the source on the guaranteed money, just read the RealGM article. Yep, that's way less commitment. Interesting. Maybe they thought the 25.07m annual figure would allow him to save some face in light of Giddey's flat 25.

[nomorezorro]

I think you guys made fair points. That said, give me a skilled/crafty guy 10 out of 10 guys over the quick guy with hops. That said, I do give him credit for strength that may be underappreciated given his ability to get to the rim effectively and rebound at elite levels for his size.

FWIW, he has historically not been a good finisher at the rim nor does he historically have a good reputation of drawing fouls our out muscling players, and has been perceived as a guy whom can be pushed around physically on defense, so I'm not sure about his strength.

I think this one is a bit harder to gauge than burst / quickness / hops which is pretty obvious from the eye test, but I don't perceive Giddey as someone whom has strength as an advantage. Maybe it's more of a neutral category than a flat out negative, but I would guess it is in the neutral to negative territory.

part of the problem with this conversation is that while giddey does potentially have some plus "athletic" traits (largely related to size), it hasn't really mattered for most of his career, because it hadn't manifested itself in his game in any significant way beyond being a plus rebounder for a guard.

but at the same time, a big reason i'm more open than i normally would be to the possibility that there's at least some sustainability to his breakout stretch is that it felt like he *was* finally figuring out how to effectively leverage those physical traits. getting to the rim a lot, drawing fouls, using his length/strength more on defense — these were all functionally new dimensions to his game, which is a more interesting wrinkle than "he's still playing the same way but happens to be making more shots than he used to"

[dougthonus]

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but Kuminga apparently just got an offer that is a few pennies more than Giddey in AAV (although with that team option on the end). Maybe they thought he would care that he "won" his little competition with Giddey. Apparently he didn't, in any event.

Interesting. Shams said it's only $48M guaranteed, so $52M less guaranteed money than what Giddey got. Chicago has also made it clear Giddey will be a top player if not the #1 player on the team which matters a lot to players (if money is even).

Overall I think it's a lot less commitment to Kuminga than what Chicago offered to Giddey.

Ah, didn't go to the source on the guaranteed money, just read the RealGM article. Yep, that's way less commitment. Interesting. Maybe they thought the 25.07m annual figure would allow him to save some face in light of Giddey's flat 25.

This offer seems like their previous offer but with one additional year guaranteed and the PO moved out a year. I'm not sure if that's better or worse for Kuminga depending on how he feels about himself. This deal seems on par with what he was willing to accept from other teams, feels like he's pretty bitter at this point, curious how much of this is genuine anger / unwillingness to deal vs how much is posturing to try and force a better deal / trade.

[Pipp33]

I'm just going to pipe in on the athleticism argument.

2 of the current BEST player sin the world (Jokic and Doncic) are not considered athletic. There's been enough examples of great players (Bird, Nash, Dirk) who aren't what people would consider good examples of having good athleticism, along with many solid NBA players.

Now, I'm not comparing Giddey to those players in the level of NBA player he is, BUT he has shown that he has enough other skills (IQ/Passing/Rebounding) to be a very solid NBA player at minimum. And if he continues to develop and play like he did in the last half of the season, there will be very little discussion on his apparent lack of athleticism. And having a rim protecting presence at the C spot would make this even less of a factor.

There's also countless examples of great athletes that have not had great careers because they lack in other areas, most importantly Bball IQ.

[dougthonus]

I'm just going to pipe in on the athleticism argument.

2 of the current BEST player sin the world (Jokic and Doncic) are not considered athletic. There's been enough examples of great players (Bird, Nash, Dirk) who aren't what people would consider good examples of having good athleticism, along with many solid NBA players.

Now, I'm not comparing Giddey to those players in the level of NBA player he is, BUT he has shown that he has enough other skills (IQ/Passing/Rebounding) to be a very solid NBA player at minimum. And if he continues to develop and play like he did in the last half of the season, there will be very little discussion on his apparent lack of athleticism. And having a rim protecting presence at the C spot would make this even less of a factor.

There's also countless examples of great athletes that have not had great careers because they lack in other areas, most importantly Bball IQ.

FWIW, totally agree. I don't think Giddey's lack of athleticism is a deal breaker in him becoming a great player. If he were able to rework his shooting form and become a Doncic level shooter, he'd be a max player most likely.

[ShouldaPaidBG]

He's already improved his jumper and therefore has proven that he's capable of improving his jumper