Jimbo5 wrote:Any news regarding the negotiations with Mitch? Whats the FO consensus about mitch, do they want him back? The last time Thibs wanted a player back (Bullock) the FO ignored him and they let him go. Will they do the same with Mitch?

If the knicks let Mitch walk, who do you want to replace him? Is Sims ready to fill the void? Im very intrigued by Nick Claxton. Is there a way tje knicks can replace Mitch with Claxton?

Knicks got good usage out of MRob. They didn't spend a high pick. They spent a little more money than slotting but that contract was still a bargain. And now they have his full Bird Rights if a possible sign and trade emerges.

MRob is hurt a lot and he's not a threat from three point range. I think many people are overestimating his actual market value. Dedicated rim protectors/quasi rim runners/lob threats, in the bargain bins of FA in the Tier 5 range aren't exactly plentiful but they aren't exactly scarce either.

Of course Thibs wants MRob back, he doesn't want to force Randle/Toppin out there together night after night.

Knicks gave out a ton of MCCs last offseason ( Middle Class Contracts) I said not to do it, I said that's a quick way for a team to **** itself against it's long term cap sheet and flexibility and then there the Knicks did it. They ****ed themselves.

Bad spending last offseason pretty much locks out the Knicks from giving MRob a contract at the AAV and length he doesn't deserve according to the actual marketplace.

One of the red flags with Noel is he was playing for three straight years on minimum deals. Meaning he was pushing himself past pain and smaller injuries to try to gain a long term deal. Once he got that deal, he decided to heal up on the team's dime and time who gave him the extension. Knicks made their bed at pivot when they resigned Noel and gave Randle that head shaking extension.

Now the hope is to try to sign and trade MRob for something/anything of value.

houston20 wrote:I am not paying 60 to 100 million if mitch robinson asking for that he can leave that is way to much for 8 points and 8 rebounds. The knicks do have some leverage because this draft has lot solid bigs like mark williams, orlando robinson, walker kessler, kofi ****burn and also jalen duren. I still think its and over pay but fair deal if the knicks give 4 years 48 million dollars to mitch robinson.

It's not the draft that is going to collapse MRob's market value. It's that many teams are running small ball 5s as their primary center and keeping one or maybe two cheap big body types for hard contact or when they face a rough matchup like an Embiid. That means Tier 4 and Tier 5 of FA will have some available rim runner/lob threat/rim protector types. Will they be elite? Probably not. Will they be serviceable? That's the more important question.

You don't need a traditional big who can give you 35 minutes a game. You need a quasi enforcer big body who can give you 15 minutes and six hard fouls.

MRob at 12-18 million AAV, the range people are talking here, on a long term deal, is not his likely market value.

Put it this way, I've been posting here for years now. When I say a player is not worth X amount of money, how often does that spin opposite of my projections? MRob, from a market based perspective is not worth 12-18 million AAV. Does that mean he won't get it? Well you only need one team to outbid themselves for something stupid to happen.

If the Knicks and Leon Rose give MRob a 12-18 million AAV on a long term deal, that's bad roster management and that's bad cap management. I would say they won't do something that nutty, but then again they drafted Toppin and they signed a bunch of guys to Middle Class Contracts last offseason.

The best scenario is to sign and trade MRob for anything. A couple of late 2nds. The rights to some fringe Euro stash. A new washing machine. The secret recipe for making cabbage "steaks" that taste like real meat.

I can tell you right now if the Knicks sign MRob to a long term deal, he's going to baby every last single injury and ding and scratch he has for the entire duration. Players are starting to figure out if they play sparingly by gaming the system, they save their legs to try for another long term contract if they just show up and try hard the last year of their current deal.That's what Kawhi Leonard is doing. He's literally milking his situation to keep his legs fresh enough for another end of career long term deal. The shift from the Over36 to the Over38 Rule changed the entire dynamic of how players are trying to angle for the most money possible.

HoustonSprewell84 wrote:

houston20 wrote:I am not paying 60 to 100 million if mitch robinson asking for that he can leave that is way to much for 8 points and 8 rebounds. The knicks do have some leverage because this draft has lot solid bigs like mark williams, orlando robinson, walker kessler, kofi ****burn and also jalen duren. I still think its and over pay but fair deal if the knicks give 4 years 48 million dollars to mitch robinson.

This is exactly what I was going to say, couldn’t of said it better.

fishmike wrote:

HoustonSprewell84 wrote:

houston20 wrote:I am not paying 60 to 100 million if mitch robinson asking for that he can leave that is way to much for 8 points and 8 rebounds. The knicks do have some leverage because this draft has lot solid bigs like mark williams, orlando robinson, walker kessler, kofi ****burn and also jalen duren. I still think its and over pay but fair deal if the knicks give 4 years 48 million dollars to mitch robinson.

This is exactly what I was going to say, couldn’t of said it better.

who are you saving that money for? Does letting Mitch walk and drafting one of those guys make the Knicks better?

No, the goal is to get back into the playoffs next year not do another “true rebuild”

TripleThreat wrote:

Jimbo5 wrote:Any news regarding the negotiations with Mitch? Whats the FO consensus about mitch, do they want him back? The last time Thibs wanted a player back (Bullock) the FO ignored him and they let him go. Will they do the same with Mitch?

If the knicks let Mitch walk, who do you want to replace him? Is Sims ready to fill the void? Im very intrigued by Nick Claxton. Is there a way tje knicks can replace Mitch with Claxton?

Knicks got good usage out of MRob. They didn't spend a high pick. They spent a little more money than slotting but that contract was still a bargain. And now they have his full Bird Rights if a possible sign and trade emerges.

MRob is hurt a lot and he's not a threat from three point range. I think many people are overestimating his actual market value. Dedicated rim protectors/quasi rim runners/lob threats, in the bargain bins of FA in the Tier 5 range aren't exactly plentiful but they aren't exactly scarce either.

Of course Thibs wants MRob back, he doesn't want to force Randle/Toppin out there together night after night.

Knicks gave out a ton of MCCs last offseason ( Middle Class Contracts) I said not to do it, I said that's a quick way for a team to **** itself against it's long term cap sheet and flexibility and then there the Knicks did it. They ****ed themselves.

Bad spending last offseason pretty much locks out the Knicks from giving MRob a contract at the AAV and length he doesn't deserve according to the actual marketplace.

One of the red flags with Noel is he was playing for three straight years on minimum deals. Meaning he was pushing himself past pain and smaller injuries to try to gain a long term deal. Once he got that deal, he decided to heal up on the team's dime and time who gave him the extension. Knicks made their bed at pivot when they resigned Noel and gave Randle that head shaking extension.

Now the hope is to try to sign and trade MRob for something/anything of value.

I don’t see how the contracts we gave in FA were that bad. FA market straight up sucks. It sucks this year and will probably suck next year. If you want someone, you gotta trade for them and you can’t do that with just a bunch of small contracts. Kemba, Burks, and Noel got 1 more year left. Fournier is providing value at his contract, and the jury is stil out on Randle.

Side note: What do you think of giving RJ his big extension?

TripleThreat wrote:

TPercy wrote:Side note: What do you think of giving RJ his big extension?

RJB is not a "Franchise Max" type player. He's not in the Curry/Doncic/Jokic/etc range. A guy who can help you win a title as the lead player and also can anchor your team's marketing.

RJB's push/pull is if he's a "Market Max" player. Can he anchor your team's marketing and can you get your fanbase to support a team built around said player, even though he won't likely get you to contender status. Think like Kemba Walker with Charlotte when he was a far better player. Or a high end version would be like a prime Mitch Richmond.

I think the Knicks are pretty much in a corner here. They haven't had a draft pick, a high one, pan out in so long, that trading RJB would incite the entire fan base. Also not resigning him is too difficult to sell. RJB will want the max. I can see the Knicks giving it to him based on circumstances around all those years of doing so poorly.

If you take the marketing aspect and the long time losing aspect away, is RJB worth the max against actual production value? No.

If I was the Knicks GM and I had total control over the roster, would I give RJB the max? No. But my goal is winning a championship. It's perfectly OK for teams to have other goals ( i.e. a fun team to watch like the SSOL Suns or a perennial mid exit playoff team like the Grit And Grind Grizzlies)

But I think the Knicks will give it to him anyway.

Yeah I figured. I'm kind of on the same boat as well. Objectively looking at the numbers, he's no franchise cornerstone but rather a valuable piece that you build with. I see upside of a two way second option on a playoff team but as it stands he's yet to fully put it together. Need to see way more efficiency(55-56+TS) and consistency on D. As much as I love RJ, I fear another Wiggins situation inbound.

SupremeCommander wrote:I feel like re-upping Mitch locks this team in... I am not bullish on keeping the band together

It all depends on the price. But yeah, you can't lock Mitch into a crazy deal. I wouldn't blame the organization for letting him go, but I would give them hell for not getting anything back.