xavier wrote:

Nalod wrote:That he is on his 6th agent tells me he has not been happy with his money.

This is actually the biggest mystery to me in this whole story. Mitch was the second round pick and got a pretty standard contract accordingly. It is not at all disputed that his game surpassed the value of that contract, but he is neither the first nor the last.

I mean, I don’t understand what he could have been “dissatisfied” with his agents about so far. If someone on the side made him think that some kind of “raise” in the middle of a valid contract was realistic, then he doesn’t quite understand exactly how things work.

I think it comes down to him being a starting center for the Knicks, living in NY, and he isn't rich or set for life. He's still a year away from getting the security he probably wants. If injuries prevented him from furthering his career, he would have to do something else with his life because he doesn't have the money to last. Knicks might have a good opportunity to lowball him on an extension, and he may have to take it. 3 years 30 mil is a bargain for Mitch, and can Mitch really turn that down? That contract sets he and his family up for life, and that's the most important thing for these guys.

Knixkik wrote:

xavier wrote:

Nalod wrote:That he is on his 6th agent tells me he has not been happy with his money.

This is actually the biggest mystery to me in this whole story. Mitch was the second round pick and got a pretty standard contract accordingly. It is not at all disputed that his game surpassed the value of that contract, but he is neither the first nor the last.

I mean, I don’t understand what he could have been “dissatisfied” with his agents about so far. If someone on the side made him think that some kind of “raise” in the middle of a valid contract was realistic, then he doesn’t quite understand exactly how things work.

I think it comes down to him being a starting center for the Knicks, living in NY, and he isn't rich or set for life. He's still a year away from getting the security he probably wants. If injuries prevented him from furthering his career, he would have to do something else with his life because he doesn't have the money to last. Knicks might have a good opportunity to lowball him on an extension, and he may have to take it. 3 years 30 mil is a bargain for Mitch, and can Mitch really turn that down? That contract sets he and his family up for life, and that's the most important thing for these guys.

Everything you wrote is correct, but I hope Mitch is aware that no agent could change anything there. NBA contracts simply work that way. When you’re a free agent, you can condition some things, but when you have a valid contract or you’re a rookie, you can’t really change much, whether you play well or badly.

xavier wrote:

Everything you wrote is correct, but I hope Mitch is aware that no agent could change anything there. NBA contracts simply work that way. When you’re a free agent, you can condition some things, but when you have a valid contract or you’re a rookie, you can’t really change much, whether you play well or badly.

The problem with Mitch is that he often acts irrationally when making life decisions. How this plays out in his contract negotiations with the Knicks remains to be seen. Instances where players burn bridges with their teams because they feel they are being low-balled, only to have to agree to even less money elsewhere, have not been uncommon. But offering less money for longer term security to an injured player could also be lose-lose proposition. Either he never gets back to pre-injury form, in which case you are saddled with his long contract, or he recovers fully, but feels underpaid and underappreciated, which could also lead him to underperform. It is a delicate balance to strike. If the NBA allowed two-way player-team options or more flexibility with incentives, would have been easier to solve cases like these.