knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

He hired him before the draft. They couldn't offer a contract yet.

So why are you attempting to tie both together? Unless you believe the Knicks never offered a contract because of Lin's new agent, this line of thought is not making sense.

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

He hired him before the draft. They couldn't offer a contract yet.

So why are you attempting to tie both together? Unless you believe the Knicks never offered a contract because of Lin's new agent, this line of thought is not making sense.

Nix said he was convinced Lin would take a fair offer from the Knicks. If that is the case why hire a new agent just before the start of free agency.

it's well documented the new firm would be handling all of Lin's business, not just his new contract. Once again, why didnt the Knicks offer a contract? Thats the question. The players association fought for you to keep two of your players, but only offer one a deal. Sorry man, the Knicks are the issue here. Players switch agents all the time.

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

He hired him before the draft. They couldn't offer a contract yet.

So why are you attempting to tie both together? Unless you believe the Knicks never offered a contract because of Lin's new agent, this line of thought is not making sense.

Nix said he was convinced Lin would take a fair offer from the Knicks. If that is the case why hire a new agent just before the start of free agency.

it's well documented the new firm would be handling all of Lin's business, not just his new contract. Once again, why didnt the Knicks offer a contract? Thats the question. The players association fought for you to keep two of your players, but only offer one a deal. Sorry man, the Knicks are the issue here. Players switch agents all the time.

What was reported was that they wanted him to get a deal and they would match it. The premise was it would allow Lin to make more money than the Knicks could offer him. At the time I believe it was seen as a favor to Lin.

I serious hope you dont believe this.

It was the game plan at the time..The CBA didn't allow us to pay Lin over a certain amount and he wanted more money..The plan was to have him get another offer then we would match it..Houston thought the Knicks would not match 8 mil per but Woodson opened his mouth to say we would match a billion dollars...Then Lin and Houston had the contract restructured to include the poison pill that would cost the Knicks dearly because of our cap situation at the time...

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

He hired him before the draft. They couldn't offer a contract yet.

So why are you attempting to tie both together? Unless you believe the Knicks never offered a contract because of Lin's new agent, this line of thought is not making sense.

Nix said he was convinced Lin would take a fair offer from the Knicks. If that is the case why hire a new agent just before the start of free agency.

it's well documented the new firm would be handling all of Lin's business, not just his new contract. Once again, why didnt the Knicks offer a contract? Thats the question. The players association fought for you to keep two of your players, but only offer one a deal. Sorry man, the Knicks are the issue here. Players switch agents all the time.

What was reported was that they wanted him to get a deal and they would match it. The premise was it would allow Lin to make more money than the Knicks could offer him. At the time I believe it was seen as a favor to Lin.

I serious hope you dont believe this.

It was the game plan at the time..The CBA didn't allow us to pay Lin over a certain amount and he wanted more money..The plan was to have him get another offer then we would match it..Houston thought the Knicks would not match 8 mil per but Woodson opened his mouth to say we would match a billion dollars...Then Lin and Houston had the contract restructured to include the poison pill tghat would cost the Knicks dearly because of their cap situation...

The Knicks could have offered 4/24....they offered 0.

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

He hired him before the draft. They couldn't offer a contract yet.

So why are you attempting to tie both together? Unless you believe the Knicks never offered a contract because of Lin's new agent, this line of thought is not making sense.

Nix said he was convinced Lin would take a fair offer from the Knicks. If that is the case why hire a new agent just before the start of free agency.

it's well documented the new firm would be handling all of Lin's business, not just his new contract. Once again, why didnt the Knicks offer a contract? Thats the question. The players association fought for you to keep two of your players, but only offer one a deal. Sorry man, the Knicks are the issue here. Players switch agents all the time.

I think we disagree here. One last thing to think about though. If you are signing a fair offer from the Knicks why sit out of USA Basketball in addition to hiring a new agent?

Now you're basically questioning the extent of his injury. Lots of players skip scrimmages. He wasnt going to be on Team USA....lol.

knickscity wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

He hired him before the draft. They couldn't offer a contract yet.

So why are you attempting to tie both together? Unless you believe the Knicks never offered a contract because of Lin's new agent, this line of thought is not making sense.

Nix said he was convinced Lin would take a fair offer from the Knicks. If that is the case why hire a new agent just before the start of free agency.

it's well documented the new firm would be handling all of Lin's business, not just his new contract. Once again, why didnt the Knicks offer a contract? Thats the question. The players association fought for you to keep two of your players, but only offer one a deal. Sorry man, the Knicks are the issue here. Players switch agents all the time.

What was reported was that they wanted him to get a deal and they would match it. The premise was it would allow Lin to make more money than the Knicks could offer him. At the time I believe it was seen as a favor to Lin.

I serious hope you dont believe this.

It was the game plan at the time..The CBA didn't allow us to pay Lin over a certain amount and he wanted more money..The plan was to have him get another offer then we would match it..Houston thought the Knicks would not match 8 mil per but Woodson opened his mouth to say we would match a billion dollars...Then Lin and Houston had the contract restructured to include the poison pill tghat would cost the Knicks dearly because of their cap situation...

Sorry man, not true at all. Firstly the 8 mil was because Houston was under the cap...it's a hold, not his actual pay. What he signed is what he made and if the Knicks had matched they would be paying what his contracts was. The first offer was poison pilled as well...two years worth. 5/5/9/9/. vs 5/5/15.

The Knicks could have offered 4/24....they offered 0.

All good questions. Rarely in N.B.A. history has a single player’s free agency inspired so much passion and confusion as Jeremy Lin’s three-way dance with the Knicks and Houston Rockets did. With Lin now gone, we attempt to sort it all out.

Q.

Linsanity was the most enjoyable period of Knicks basketball in a decade. Why did the Knicks conclude that he should go?
A.

The short answer: money. Lin signed an offer sheet for three years and $25.1 million with the Rockets, which is reasonable on its face. But the third year contains a balloon payment, or “poison pill,” of $14.9 million. Because the Knicks will be over the N.B.A.’s luxury-tax threshold, Lin’s salary would have cost them an additional $35 million or more in penalties paid to the league. As popular as Lin is, and as great as he was in February, it was tough to justify a $50 million bill for a single player, especially one who has started just 25 games.
Q.

How can a single salary create such a large tax hit?
A.

Lin’s salary was not the sole culprit. The Knicks are already projected to be over the tax line in 2014-15, because of the combined salaries of Carmelo Anthony ($24.4 million), Amar’e Stoudemire ($23.4 million) and Tyson Chandler ($14.6 million). Lin’s salary merely increased the bill. Under the N.B.A.’s new luxury tax system, the penalties climb for every $5 million increment over the tax threshold (which is currently $70 million).
Q.

Then how can the Rockets afford Lin’s contract?
A.

Under N.B.A. rules, the Rockets — as the team making the original offer — are charged a simple average of the salary, $8.4 million per year, for salary-cap purposes. In addition, the Rockets’ payroll is well below the cap at the moment, and will likely remain below the tax threshold, so they are not facing any penalties.
Q.

Does this mean Lin wanted to leave?
A.

No, Lin never gave any indication that he wanted to leave New York. It is common for restricted free agents to solicit offers from other teams to drive up their price, even if they prefer to stay. In fact, this was the only way for Lin to maximize his value. It was a smart business move.
Q.

Why didn’t the Knicks simply outbid the Rockets, or lock up Lin sooner?
A.

They couldn’t. The Knicks were not permitted to give Lin an extension during the season. They had to wait for him to become a restricted free agent on July 1. Even then, they were constrained by the N.B.A.’s arcane cap rules. The most they could offer was $28.75 million over five years, or — to compare apples to apples — $16.13 million over three years. Only a rival team with cap room could give Lin the balloon payment. Again, for Lin to maximize his value, he had to play the market. Also, no contracts could be signed from July 1-10, so the Knicks had to wait while Lin tested the market.
Q.

So why were the Knicks allowed to pay Lin more now?
A.

Because Lin is a restricted free agent, the Knicks had the right to match any offer. Under N.B.A. rules, a team had a three-day window to make that decision once the offer sheet was signed and delivered. That window ended Tuesday night.
Q.

I heard Knicks officials repeatedly say that they would keep Lin, no matter the cost. Last week, Coach Mike Woodson even said Lin would be the starter, ahead of Jason Kidd. What happened?
A.

At the time Woodson spoke, Lin had an offer from Houston worth $19.5 million over three years, including a third-year balloon payment of $9.3 million. Once it became clear that Knicks intended to match that offer, Houston bumped the third year to $14.9 million. That extra $5 million triggered an extra $16.25 million in tax penalties. “So it adds another $21.25 million in consequences,” said Tom Penn, a former assistant general manager for the Portland Trail Blazers who now works as a cap expert for ESPN. As Penn put it, the poison pill became “a lot more poisonous” with that change.
Q.

The N.B.A. usually gives teams an advantage to re-sign its own free agents. So why were the Rockets allowed to offer more than the Knicks?
A.

Cue Gilbert Arenas. In 2002-3, Arenas became a breakout star with the Golden State Warriors, just before becoming a free agent. As a second-round pick, he had been given only a two-year contract and therefore did not have full “Bird” rights, which would have allowed the Warriors to pay him a maximum salary.

Although Arenas was a restricted free agent, the Warriors could not match a big offer because they were over the cap. They lost him to the Washington Wizards, who signed Arenas to a six-year, $60 million deal.

To remedy this, the N.B.A. created the so-called Arenas rule in 2005. Now, even a team with no cap room can match any offer, using either “early Bird” rights or the midlevel exception. However, if a rival team has cap room, it can offer the balloon payment — based on what a player would have made under a “max” deal — in the third year and beyond. The rule was intended to prevent a team from losing a breakout prospect, while still giving the player a chance to make his market rate. Instead, the rule has created the “poison pill” contract, showing once again that in N.B.A. labor deals, the best intentions often have unforeseen consequences.
Q.

Is Lin worth the money and the trouble?
A.

We might not know that for many months, or even years. Lin is just 23 years old and has a very short resume. He hardly played in his first year in the N.B.A., so he is still a virtual rookie. He was an everyday player for just 26 games last season, but it was a pretty spectacular 26 games. He averaged 18.5 points and 7.6 assists, statistics that would place him among the N.B.A.’s top point guards if he sustained them for a full season. That “if” remains the most intriguing, and risky, aspect of this story.
Q.

If Lin is unproven, why are the Rockets so eager to pay him $25.1 million?
A.

The Rockets’ front office, led by General Manager Daryl Morey, has always been higher on Lin than most teams. Houston had Lin for a week in December before waiving him in a payroll move. The Rockets needed cap room at the time to sign Samuel Dalembert, and they already had two starting-caliber point guards, Kyle Lowry and Goran Dragic. They had no need for a third point guard. But over the last two weeks, the Rockets lost Dragic to Phoenix and traded Lowry to Toronto (to acquire a first-round pick that can be used in a Dwight Howard trade). Houston was in dire need of a point guard, and the Rockets view Lin as a solid starter. And because they can average his salary for cap purposes, the contract is not as daunting. The Rockets also have established business ties to China, stemming from Yao Ming’s tenure in Houston, so Lin might have added value on the marketing side.
Q.

Was there any way for the Knicks to keep Lin and minimize their risks?
A.

There were several ways to justify the deal, and even some ways to decrease the financial hit. The Knicks could have kept Lin for two years — at $5 million and $5.4 million — and attempted to trade him by the third year, when his $14.9 million expiring contract could become a commodity. They could have tried to shave the payroll in other ways, although it would have been tough because they presumably want to keep Anthony and Chandler, and because Stoudemire is virtually untradeable.

The Knicks could not use the “amnesty” provision to remove a salary because they already used it on Chauncey Billups last year. However, the Knicks could have waived Lin under a the league’s new “stretch” provision, which allows a team to cut a player and extend his payments (and cap hit) over multiple years. In Lin’s case, the Knicks could have stretched the $14.9 million payment over three years, at $4.98 million per year. According to a rival executive, that would have cut the Knicks’ tax liability by more than $30 million in 2014-15. However, Lin would have remained on the books for two more years, which could have crimped the Knicks’ potential free-agent signings.

Or the Knicks could simply have looked at this another way: Accept Lin’s contract as a one-time hit, whatever the cost, and then reassess. There was no commitment beyond 2014-15, so the contract would have never been the albatross that, say, Eddy Curry’s was. In fact, all of the Knicks’ priciest players — Anthony, Stoudemire, Chandler and Lin — have deals that expire in 2015. If Lin stumbled, if the lineup crashed and burned, the Knicks could have simply hit the reset button. Now, they can’t.

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

yeah it truly is. you have to wonder, outside of the contractual phase, how much some posters appreciated what we had with lin here. if it wasn't for dolan's ego we would still have had lin on this team and NOBODY can speculate what would have happened had he remained. doesn't stop people from spinning that scenario as negative as possible.

CrushAlot wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:

holfresh wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:My contention at the time was that the Knicks didn't really want Lin. If you REALLY want a player you don't send him out into the market place to get romanced by other teams if you can control it. That's just stupid if you really do control the situation. You negotiate with the player and offer him what you feel he's worth and do your best to lock him down. They basically dared him to go out and find the most money. That's stupid if it's a player you LOVE. Clearly they didn't LOVE Lin. That's OK but don't try to make it sound like you were 110% sold on a guy after you sent him out on the market when you have a chance to lock him up before anyone else. I think Lin was in a grateful mentality originally before they sent him out into the market.
I'm convinced that Lin takes a fair offer from the Knicks if they make it early and don't tell him to go find a contract first.

Agreed 100%, and just won a ruling to be able to do just that. They didnt want him, just that simple....

If you are just going to take a fair offer do you fire your agent to go with a bigger firm to negotiate that deal?

Idk. Lin hired the bigger agent way before free agency though. Not sure how one relates to the other.

He hired him when the season ended and the agent issued a statement that Lin might not return to the Knicks.

Of course, because the Knicks never offered a contract, that part makes total sense. This topic is amazing. Team offers nothing, fans blame the player. The Knicks could have easily offered Lin a deal that wouldnt have killed their tax budget. Now if Lin rejected that, then I could the venom. But they did no such thing.

He hired him before the draft. They couldn't offer a contract yet.

So why are you attempting to tie both together? Unless you believe the Knicks never offered a contract because of Lin's new agent, this line of thought is not making sense.

Nix said he was convinced Lin would take a fair offer from the Knicks. If that is the case why hire a new agent just before the start of free agency.

it's well documented the new firm would be handling all of Lin's business, not just his new contract. Once again, why didnt the Knicks offer a contract? Thats the question. The players association fought for you to keep two of your players, but only offer one a deal. Sorry man, the Knicks are the issue here. Players switch agents all the time.

What was reported was that they wanted him to get a deal and they would match it. The premise was it would allow Lin to make more money than the Knicks could offer him. At the time I believe it was seen as a favor to Lin.

I serious hope you dont believe this.

It was the game plan at the time..The CBA didn't allow us to pay Lin over a certain amount and he wanted more money..The plan was to have him get another offer then we would match it..Houston thought the Knicks would not match 8 mil per but Woodson opened his mouth to say we would match a billion dollars...Then Lin and Houston had the contract restructured to include the poison pill tghat would cost the Knicks dearly because of their cap situation...

Sorry man, not true at all. Firstly the 8 mil was because Houston was under the cap...it's a hold, not his actual pay. What he signed is what he made and if the Knicks had matched they would be paying what his contracts was. The first offer was poison pilled as well...two years worth. 5/5/9/9/. vs 5/5/15.

The Knicks could have offered 4/24....they offered 0.

http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/17/questions-abound-with-lin-in-the-balance/?_r=0

Why did Jeremy Lin want to leave New York? How could the Knicks let him go? What does Gilbert Arenas have to do with all of this? What’s a poison pill? Who do I blame for this mess?

All good questions. Rarely in N.B.A. history has a single player’s free agency inspired so much passion and confusion as Jeremy Lin’s three-way dance with the Knicks and Houston Rockets did. With Lin now gone, we attempt to sort it all out.

Q.

Linsanity was the most enjoyable period of Knicks basketball in a decade. Why did the Knicks conclude that he should go?
A.

The short answer: money. Lin signed an offer sheet for three years and $25.1 million with the Rockets, which is reasonable on its face. But the third year contains a balloon payment, or “poison pill,” of $14.9 million. Because the Knicks will be over the N.B.A.’s luxury-tax threshold, Lin’s salary would have cost them an additional $35 million or more in penalties paid to the league. As popular as Lin is, and as great as he was in February, it was tough to justify a $50 million bill for a single player, especially one who has started just 25 games.
Q.

How can a single salary create such a large tax hit?
A.

Lin’s salary was not the sole culprit. The Knicks are already projected to be over the tax line in 2014-15, because of the combined salaries of Carmelo Anthony ($24.4 million), Amar’e Stoudemire ($23.4 million) and Tyson Chandler ($14.6 million). Lin’s salary merely increased the bill. Under the N.B.A.’s new luxury tax system, the penalties climb for every $5 million increment over the tax threshold (which is currently $70 million).
Q.

Then how can the Rockets afford Lin’s contract?
A.

Under N.B.A. rules, the Rockets — as the team making the original offer — are charged a simple average of the salary, $8.4 million per year, for salary-cap purposes. In addition, the Rockets’ payroll is well below the cap at the moment, and will likely remain below the tax threshold, so they are not facing any penalties.
Q.

Does this mean Lin wanted to leave?
A.

No, Lin never gave any indication that he wanted to leave New York. It is common for restricted free agents to solicit offers from other teams to drive up their price, even if they prefer to stay. In fact, this was the only way for Lin to maximize his value. It was a smart business move.
Q.

Why didn’t the Knicks simply outbid the Rockets, or lock up Lin sooner?
A.

They couldn’t. The Knicks were not permitted to give Lin an extension during the season. They had to wait for him to become a restricted free agent on July 1. Even then, they were constrained by the N.B.A.’s arcane cap rules. The most they could offer was $28.75 million over five years, or — to compare apples to apples — $16.13 million over three years. Only a rival team with cap room could give Lin the balloon payment. Again, for Lin to maximize his value, he had to play the market. Also, no contracts could be signed from July 1-10, so the Knicks had to wait while Lin tested the market.
Q.

So why were the Knicks allowed to pay Lin more now?
A.

Because Lin is a restricted free agent, the Knicks had the right to match any offer. Under N.B.A. rules, a team had a three-day window to make that decision once the offer sheet was signed and delivered. That window ended Tuesday night.
Q.

I heard Knicks officials repeatedly say that they would keep Lin, no matter the cost. Last week, Coach Mike Woodson even said Lin would be the starter, ahead of Jason Kidd. What happened?
A.

At the time Woodson spoke, Lin had an offer from Houston worth $19.5 million over three years, including a third-year balloon payment of $9.3 million. Once it became clear that Knicks intended to match that offer, Houston bumped the third year to $14.9 million. That extra $5 million triggered an extra $16.25 million in tax penalties. “So it adds another $21.25 million in consequences,” said Tom Penn, a former assistant general manager for the Portland Trail Blazers who now works as a cap expert for ESPN. As Penn put it, the poison pill became “a lot more poisonous” with that change.
Q.

The N.B.A. usually gives teams an advantage to re-sign its own free agents. So why were the Rockets allowed to offer more than the Knicks?
A.

Cue Gilbert Arenas. In 2002-3, Arenas became a breakout star with the Golden State Warriors, just before becoming a free agent. As a second-round pick, he had been given only a two-year contract and therefore did not have full “Bird” rights, which would have allowed the Warriors to pay him a maximum salary.

Although Arenas was a restricted free agent, the Warriors could not match a big offer because they were over the cap. They lost him to the Washington Wizards, who signed Arenas to a six-year, $60 million deal.

To remedy this, the N.B.A. created the so-called Arenas rule in 2005. Now, even a team with no cap room can match any offer, using either “early Bird” rights or the midlevel exception. However, if a rival team has cap room, it can offer the balloon payment — based on what a player would have made under a “max” deal — in the third year and beyond. The rule was intended to prevent a team from losing a breakout prospect, while still giving the player a chance to make his market rate. Instead, the rule has created the “poison pill” contract, showing once again that in N.B.A. labor deals, the best intentions often have unforeseen consequences.
Q.

Is Lin worth the money and the trouble?
A.

We might not know that for many months, or even years. Lin is just 23 years old and has a very short resume. He hardly played in his first year in the N.B.A., so he is still a virtual rookie. He was an everyday player for just 26 games last season, but it was a pretty spectacular 26 games. He averaged 18.5 points and 7.6 assists, statistics that would place him among the N.B.A.’s top point guards if he sustained them for a full season. That “if” remains the most intriguing, and risky, aspect of this story.
Q.

If Lin is unproven, why are the Rockets so eager to pay him $25.1 million?
A.

The Rockets’ front office, led by General Manager Daryl Morey, has always been higher on Lin than most teams. Houston had Lin for a week in December before waiving him in a payroll move. The Rockets needed cap room at the time to sign Samuel Dalembert, and they already had two starting-caliber point guards, Kyle Lowry and Goran Dragic. They had no need for a third point guard. But over the last two weeks, the Rockets lost Dragic to Phoenix and traded Lowry to Toronto (to acquire a first-round pick that can be used in a Dwight Howard trade). Houston was in dire need of a point guard, and the Rockets view Lin as a solid starter. And because they can average his salary for cap purposes, the contract is not as daunting. The Rockets also have established business ties to China, stemming from Yao Ming’s tenure in Houston, so Lin might have added value on the marketing side.
Q.

Was there any way for the Knicks to keep Lin and minimize their risks?
A.

There were several ways to justify the deal, and even some ways to decrease the financial hit. The Knicks could have kept Lin for two years — at $5 million and $5.4 million — and attempted to trade him by the third year, when his $14.9 million expiring contract could become a commodity. They could have tried to shave the payroll in other ways, although it would have been tough because they presumably want to keep Anthony and Chandler, and because Stoudemire is virtually untradeable.

The Knicks could not use the “amnesty” provision to remove a salary because they already used it on Chauncey Billups last year. However, the Knicks could have waived Lin under a the league’s new “stretch” provision, which allows a team to cut a player and extend his payments (and cap hit) over multiple years. In Lin’s case, the Knicks could have stretched the $14.9 million payment over three years, at $4.98 million per year. According to a rival executive, that would have cut the Knicks’ tax liability by more than $30 million in 2014-15. However, Lin would have remained on the books for two more years, which could have crimped the Knicks’ potential free-agent signings.

Or the Knicks could simply have looked at this another way: Accept Lin’s contract as a one-time hit, whatever the cost, and then reassess. There was no commitment beyond 2014-15, so the contract would have never been the albatross that, say, Eddy Curry’s was. In fact, all of the Knicks’ priciest players — Anthony, Stoudemire, Chandler and Lin — have deals that expire in 2015. If Lin stumbled, if the lineup crashed and burned, the Knicks could have simply hit the reset button. Now, they can’t.

This. Thanks for posting it.