The Hornets and Michael Kidd-Gilchrist are reportedly putting the finishing touches on a four-year, $52MM contract extension for the small forward. The 21-year-old out of the University of Kentucky has had an inconsistent NBA career thus far, with him struggling to improve upon his shaky outside game over the past three campaigns. But Kidd-Gilchrist has been working hard behind the scenes to improve upon that aspect of his game, according to coach Steve Clifford, who said, “He’s totally changed his shooting mechanics really more than any player I’ve ever seen. It’s increased his confidence level. His whole leadership, assertiveness on the court and his understanding of the game has come out more for his teammates as he’s gotten more confident.”
While Kidd-Gilchrist apparently has his coach’s support, the results in the stat sheet haven’t been as readily apparent. The player’s field goal percentage from the 2014/15 season was 46.5%, down from the 47.3% of his shots he connected on back in 2013/14. Of course, Clifford was likely referring to Kidd-Gilchrist’s improved shooting form, which will hopefully garner the player and team better results moving forward. The forward did manage to notch career bests in points (10.9) and rebounds last season (7.6), though his campaign was cut short thanks to an ankle injury he suffered at the end of March.
Despite his debatable offensive skills, Kidd-Gilchrist’s defensive abilities are some of the best at his position in the entire league. The Hornets were 27-28 in 2014/15 with him in the lineup and just 7-18 without him on the court. “Last year he was a really good individual defender and a very solid team defender. But now he’s much more verbal and takes much more of a lead in organizing our defense,” Clifford said of Kidd-Gilchrist. “I think he is one of the few guys in this league who has the ability to make it hard on many of the primary scorers.”
This brings me to the topic of the day: Is Michael Kidd-Gilchrist worth the $13MM annually he is set to make on his contract extension?
In today’s NBA, where outside shooting is a major focus, is a throwback type of player like Kidd-Gilchrist worth that level of financial investment? A defensive stopper like Kidd-Gilchrist can change an opponent’s strategy on a nightly basis, which is arguably just as valuable as dropping 20 points a night in the league. The other factor that needs to be considered when weighing the value of any new contract is the impending salary cap explosion that is set to occur next offseason. The economics of deals and how they are viewed are certainly going to change over the next few seasons as a result, which could potentially make $13MM per season for the young forward seem like a bargain.
What do you think? Is $13MM in line with what Kidd-Gildchrist is worth on the open market? If he were to hit unrestricted free agency, what sort of offers do you think he would draw? Take to the comments section below to weigh in with your thoughts and opinions. We look forward to what you have top say.
Note: Since these Shootarounds are meant to be guided by you the reader, we certainly welcome your input on the topics we present. If there is something you’d like to see pop up here for a discussion, shoot us a message at hoopsrumorsmailbag@gmail.com.
I’m not sure he’s proven that he can be the type of player we’ve seen garner 13MM a year, but I think it’s a worthy risk for the Hornets to take.
If he doesn’t develop into anything more, he’s an overpaid role player who’ll need to have shooters around him at to stay on the court. If he develops a jump shot, he could be a top 20 player and we’ll be talking about the value in his contract like we’ve done with Curry’s current deal.
I don’t think we’ll ever see him become the sort of bargain Curry is, but the extension does have potential to become quite economical as it matures. I think this one will be on the low end of rookie scale extensions as time goes by, the rough equivalent of the four-year, $42MM that Alec Burks got from the Jazz last fall.
MKG is the type of player who I would trade for future assets (first-round pick + X) while he’s still on his rookie deal if I were a GM.
He is definitely “worth” the extension he received, if our definition of “worth” is, “Would other teams pay him that?” or “What would he get on the open market?” So by that definition, Charlotte’s front office should be praised.
The problem is that you can’t win an NBA title paying $13M a year to a wing player who can’t shoot. MKG’s flaws make it virtually impossible to have an elite offense with him playing 35 minutes per game.
So, when teams sign players like that to their expensive, eight figure 2nd or 3rd contracts – good players, but ones with deep flaws that would get exposed in a playoff series against a great opponent – they are essentially “locking themselves in” to a tier that is below championship contender.
Perhaps there’s nothing wrong with that. Only 5 or so teams enter every year as a true championship contender. MKG will help them make the playoffs, and he is a hard worker and a good player.
I’m just not a fan of locking in a future fate of “playoff team, but non-contender.” For the 25 teams that don’t fall into the championship contender category, I much prefer the team-building strategy of Boston and Philly – continue acquiring assets, hope you hit on a few, and stay flexible and young. It’s why I had no problem with Philly’s MCW trade. If you’ve decided “this guy isn’t a star,” and your team is far away from being great, it makes sense long-term to trade that guy for a future asset, before you’re forced into the unenviable position Charlotte just faced of a.) paying him long-term and locking in mediocrity, or b.) losing him for nothing in FA.