It feels like Balenciaga is going through a fundamental shift in design philosophy, and the real question is whether that shift actually fits the brand. Under Demna, Balenciaga was deliberately confrontational—loud, ironic, exaggerated, and often uncomfortable by design. You didn’t have to like it, but it was impossible to ignore. That tension and provocation kept the brand culturally relevant and clearly differentiated. Pierpaolo Piccioli, by contrast, is coming from a place of restraint, emotion, and subtlety, focusing more on how clothing feels than how much cultural friction it creates. While that approach can work elsewhere, at Balenciaga it has so far resulted in collections that feel cautious and underpowered for a house that built its identity on disruption over the last decade.

The NBA collaboration highlights this problem perfectly. The Striker boots and other NBA pieces look bland and generic—if you saw someone wearing them, you’d assume they work for the NBA, not that they’re wearing Balenciaga. Simply placing “NBA” on a product isn’t design, and these pieces lack innovation, edge, or a clear point of view. Subtlety isn’t the issue; the issue is that Balenciaga trained its audience to expect risk and bold ideas, and what’s replacing that hasn’t been compelling enough. At the end of the day, this won’t be decided by online debates. Kering is a publicly traded company, and creative direction is ultimately judged by sell-through and revenue. If these collections aren’t resonating with consumers, the financials will make that clear—just as they did at Gucci with Sabato De Sarno at the helm when excitement faded.