Josh Giddey and the Chicago Bulls got their first win of the season in an upset over the Milwaukee Bucks on Friday, October 24.
They got their first win of the season thanks to strong performances from Coby White (team-high 35 points, 6 rebounds, 5 assists, 4 steals) and others, including Zach LaVine.
LaVine finished the 133-122 affair with 25 points on 60% shooting with 5 rebounds, 2 blocks, and 1 turnover. He connected with Giddey on several plays. Giddey shared a screenshot of the two celebrating the win with a short message on Instagram.
“First of many,” Giddey typed over the image, which LaVine originally shared.
How many games the duo will play together is a source of intrigue. Giddey is a part of the Bulls’ long-term plans despite the two sides failing to reach an agreement on a long-term contract extension by the deadline, per Bleacher Report’s Jake Fischer on October 25.
Bulls’ Lack of Meaningful’ Contract Talks With Josh Giddey a ‘Surprise’ for Insider
Giddey will be a restricted free agent after this season, assuming the Bulls extend the qualifying offer.
The Bulls would then have the right of first refusal if he signed an offer sheet with another team.
They would also receive compensation if they did not match the offer. But all of that would only matter if they did not want to keep him. He was the lone piece in the return package for fan and coaching staff favorite Alex Caruso.
“Josh Giddey, from what I understand … there was never really any meaningful negotiations there, which was a surprise to me,” ESPN’s Brian Windhorst told colleague Bobby Marks on “The Hoop Collective” podcast on October 23. “I thought the Bulls were going to be under some amount of pressure to get him done because they had traded Alex Caruso for him. I was talking to one executive the other day, and they thought Alex Caruso’s value was two first-round picks basically.
“First-round picks in this day and age are fungible. They’re not all created equal, so. But, basically, he thought the equivalent of trading two firsts for Josh Giddey. And when you make a deal like that, you wanna – you’re basically saying this is our starting point guard.”
Windhorst noted the “issue” Immanuel Quickley (five years up to $175 million) and Jalen Suggs (five years, $150 million) getting new contracts from the Toronto Raptors and Orlando Magic, respectively, created for other teams looking to extend their guards.
“If you’re Josh Giddey, maybe you don’t get Quickley money. But you’re certainly going to want that Suggs-level money, and they never even got anywhere close from what I’m told. So that’s certainly something to watch.”
LaVine Bought Into New-Look Bulls Amid Trade Rumors
Like Giddey, LaVine’s situation also bears monitoring. LaVine has been the subject of trade rumors for two seasons. He opened Bulls media day espousing his commitment to the team. But the Bulls’ plans have remained unchanged as they seek to find a new home for him.
“Guard Zach LaVine has shown signs of looking more like the All-Star he was in 2021 and 2022 than the guy who seemed disgruntled with his situation and coach Billy Donovan last season, and that’s a great sign,” The Chicago Sun-Times’ Joe Cowley wrote on October 21. “Trading him with three years and $138 million left on his contract will be hard enough for the Bulls; they don’t need him to be pouty, too.”
LaVine shared a post on Instagram before the season opener that, fittingly, featured a lock emoji. He explained his mindset which has shown since the team opened training camp.
“What I always come back to is, at [the] end of the day, we’re playing a kid’s game. People would love to have our problems,” LaVine said, per Chicago Sports Network’s K.C. Johnson on October 18. “This is a job and business. But we have an opportunity not a lot of people have. Let’s take advantage.”
Though a small simple size of two games, LaVine is averaging 26 points which would be the second-highest mark of his career. His 72.3% true shooting mark would also be a new personal best.
The Bulls need him to continue these early trends and boost his trade value.
0 Comments