In the fast-paced world of the NBA, player comparisons often serve as a way to contextualize potential and performance. For Oklahoma City Thunder fans, one player comparison might feel uncomfortably familiar: Josh Giddey and Cameron Payne. Both entered the league as promising prospects, but questions about development, fit, and eventual trade value linger. As whispers of discontent surrounding Giddey grow, the Thunder could be walking down a path similar to the one the Chicago Bulls traversed when they acquired Cameron Payne—a miscalculation that served as a cautionary tale in team-building strategy.
Cameron Payne, a 14th overall pick by the Thunder in 2015, arrived in Oklahoma City with high hopes. A quick-footed guard with strong college numbers at Murray State, Payne was billed as a complementary playmaker to support Russell Westbrook. However, he struggled to find his footing in the NBA, plagued by inconsistency and injuries. After two underwhelming seasons, the Thunder shipped him to the Chicago Bulls in a 2017 deadline trade that, in hindsight, proved disastrous for Chicago.
The Bulls saw Payne as their point guard of the future, but his tenure in Chicago was a disappointment. Payne’s stint was defined by poor shooting, turnovers, and a lack of defensive impact. Chicago waived him in early 2019, and while Payne later resurrected his career as a valuable bench piece for the Phoenix Suns, his time with the Bulls became emblematic of a bad trade: overvaluing potential while undervaluing fit and readiness.
Josh Giddey entered the NBA with far more fanfare than Payne, selected sixth overall by the Thunder in 2021. The Australian guard-forward hybrid dazzled in his rookie season with his playmaking vision, rebounding, and composure for a player so young. Giddey’s size (6’8”) and versatility made him a fascinating piece alongside Thunder star Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, leading many to believe the Thunder had struck gold in the rebuild.
Yet, in his third NBA season, some cracks are beginning to show. Critics have pointed to Giddey’s lack of shooting improvement, particularly from beyond the arc, and his struggles defensively against quicker guards. Furthermore, with Gilgeous-Alexander emerging as a bona fide MVP candidate and Chet Holmgren establishing himself as the team’s defensive anchor, Giddey’s role feels less defined.
This uncertainty has fueled speculation that Oklahoma City might trade Giddey while his value remains high, echoing how they moved Payne when his development stalled.
If the Thunder were to trade Giddey, the parallels to the Bulls’ misstep with Payne would be hard to ignore. Chicago overestimated Payne’s ability to fit into their roster while undervaluing other assets in the trade. Oklahoma City, praised for their savvy front-office moves under Sam Presti, must avoid repeating a similar mistake.
Giddey is undoubtedly a more polished player than Payne was at this stage of his career. However, the Thunder’s surplus of ball-dominant players and Giddey’s limited shooting range present a legitimate concern about his long-term fit. Trading him could bring valuable pieces to round out the roster, but the risk lies in undervaluing his unique skill set—a mistake Chicago regretted when they failed to find Payne’s ideal role.
Comparing Josh Giddey to Cameron Payne is not about equating their talent levels but recognizing how a franchise’s handling of a young player can define their trajectory. The Thunder must tread carefully as they assess Giddey’s fit within their system. While a trade could address immediate needs, it could also haunt them if Giddey blossoms elsewhere—just as Payne did in Phoenix.
NBA history is filled with tales of teams pulling the trigger too soon, misjudging a player’s potential, or overvaluing immediate returns. For the Thunder, avoiding another Payne-like misstep could be the difference between building a championship contender or regretting a move for years to come. Time will tell if Josh Giddey becomes a cornerstone or another “what could have been” story.