Bonn1997 wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Like him, but to be honest he is a fringe rotation player on a bad team.

How do you know that?

It prevents us from getting any veteran PG help for now.

How do you know that?

Watched him play. He wouldn't see anything but garbage minutes on most NBA teams. Veteran PG help requires money. Something which we no longer have.

Right, so you can project the career of all rookies based on their first seasons.

That's a marketable skill that should earn you a pretty good living.

This is stupid. Bottom line is today he wouldn't do much but warm benches on most teams.

Why? Because of his shooting? That's the only thing he didn't do well. There may have been teams that judged him more from his college shooting and wanted him and dismissed his poor NBA shooting. You really can't say much from 200 shots. He showed enough overall that I think most teams would wait for a larger sample of shot attempts. That's not to say I like the contract. I think it's an adequate signing.

The shooting is kind of a big deal. It's not just bad, it's sub Brandon Jennings bad. I doubt teams dismiss NBA stats and ficus on college stats. He was fine at passing and D, but none of it was incredible. The question is can u picture any other team signing him to this contract? Do you think he has any trade value? Most people will answer no and no.

But 200 shots is way too small sample. You can take any good nba shooter and they've probably had stretches of 200 shots with a low shooting percentage. And actually his 2 point shooting was not that bad for a rookie just breaking into the league (45%). It's really just a sample of 86 3 pointers that you're judging him on. He should have made about 6 more 3 pointers last season.

Perhaps but you don't give a contract like that in the hopes he can shoot vs NBA defenses. Or at least you don't if you're not the Knicks.

reub wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Like him, but to be honest he is a fringe rotation player on a bad team.

How do you know that?

It prevents us from getting any veteran PG help for now.

How do you know that?

Watched him play. He wouldn't see anything but garbage minutes on most NBA teams. Veteran PG help requires money. Something which we no longer have.

Right, so you can project the career of all rookies based on their first seasons.

That's a marketable skill that should earn you a pretty good living.

This is stupid. Bottom line is today he wouldn't do much but warm benches on most teams.

Why? Because of his shooting? That's the only thing he didn't do well. There may have been teams that judged him more from his college shooting and wanted him and dismissed his poor NBA shooting. You really can't say much from 200 shots. He showed enough overall that I think most teams would wait for a larger sample of shot attempts. That's not to say I like the contract. I think it's an adequate signing.

The shooting is kind of a big deal. It's not just bad, it's sub Brandon Jennings bad. I doubt teams dismiss NBA stats and ficus on college stats. He was fine at passing and D, but none of it was incredible. The question is can u picture any other team signing him to this contract? Do you think he has any trade value? Most people will answer no and no.

But he shot well in college so there's hope.

Agree 100%. In college he played more off the ball, catch and shoot.

I have no doubt his shooting will improve big time. Zero.

Until we prove that we can make a few good decisions this will occur. I get it.

fishmike wrote:

Nalod wrote:We really bent out of shape on this kids deal?
Small sample kid know doubt and anyting the knicks do we doubt.
If spurs gave this to him we'd be envious.
If Philly does it we say "Smart, building with yoot!!!"
Bostond does this its "Man, they will trade him for a protected 1st rounder"
Knicks do it, we like "Man, we outbid ourselves"!!!!!

Until we prove that we can make a few good decisions this will occur. I get it.

its incredible. The circle jerk that goes on around here and everyone knows they could have done it better. Rob Baker made it through the D league and has worked with every coach in the org.

By the way, Langston Galloway and his 8ppg, 2rebs and 1.something assist signed with the Pistons for 3/$21mm but EVERYONE KNOWS WE BIG AGAINST OURSELVES. Cause things sound so much better in caps or when you pretend to have info you dont.

I am glad they like him enough to bring him back. If every guard on the team has to beat out Ron Baker for minutes than he's worth the $4mm. Easy.

Yup. I don't get the reactions either. 4M a year for 2 years is not that much in this new NBA landscape. You want to show free agents that your team will reward you financially if you work hard.

ccinflushing wrote:This Ron Baker situation is a lot more complicated than it appears on the surface. As a non bird Gilbert Arenas restricted free agent, the Knicks could match an offer sheet using cap space or one of their available exceptions (in this case, the room exception). They could only match using the room exception if the contract was 2 years or less at the room level. Otherwise, they would have to dip into existing cap space - which introduces a fair bit of uncertainty as to what their cap space might be. Retaining Baker was clearly a priority and in the end they opted for certainty as to available cap space by coming to an agreement first thing on a 2 year room exception deal.

This, at the least, indicate some cap management savvy even if you don't agree with the Hardaway signing.

NYKBocker wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Nalod wrote:We really bent out of shape on this kids deal?
Small sample kid know doubt and anyting the knicks do we doubt.
If spurs gave this to him we'd be envious.
If Philly does it we say "Smart, building with yoot!!!"
Bostond does this its "Man, they will trade him for a protected 1st rounder"
Knicks do it, we like "Man, we outbid ourselves"!!!!!

Until we prove that we can make a few good decisions this will occur. I get it.

its incredible. The circle jerk that goes on around here and everyone knows they could have done it better. Rob Baker made it through the D league and has worked with every coach in the org.

By the way, Langston Galloway and his 8ppg, 2rebs and 1.something assist signed with the Pistons for 3/$21mm but EVERYONE KNOWS WE BIG AGAINST OURSELVES. Cause things sound so much better in caps or when you pretend to have info you dont.

I am glad they like him enough to bring him back. If every guard on the team has to beat out Ron Baker for minutes than he's worth the $4mm. Easy.

Yup. I don't get the reactions either. 4M a year for 2 years is not that much in this new NBA landscape. You want to show free agents that your team will reward you financially if you work hard.

dude he played 28 games, and we won 2 games with him as a starter, less than 7 games with him in the rotation, less not forget he was a restricted FA, salary could have been matched.

It's like we went to a auction and outbid ourselves..

Why didn't he take a pay cut or home town discount so we could sign a vet pg?

Chandler wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Like him, but to be honest he is a fringe rotation player on a bad team.

How do you know that?

It prevents us from getting any veteran PG help for now.

How do you know that?

Watched him play. He wouldn't see anything but garbage minutes on most NBA teams. Veteran PG help requires money. Something which we no longer have.

Right, so you can project the career of all rookies based on their first seasons.

That's a marketable skill that should earn you a pretty good living.

This is stupid. Bottom line is today he wouldn't do much but warm benches on most teams.

Why? Because of his shooting? That's the only thing he didn't do well. There may have been teams that judged him more from his college shooting and wanted him and dismissed his poor NBA shooting. You really can't say much from 200 shots. He showed enough overall that I think most teams would wait for a larger sample of shot attempts. That's not to say I like the contract. I think it's an adequate signing.

The shooting is kind of a big deal. It's not just bad, it's sub Brandon Jennings bad. I doubt teams dismiss NBA stats and ficus on college stats. He was fine at passing and D, but none of it was incredible. The question is can u picture any other team signing him to this contract? Do you think he has any trade value? Most people will answer no and no.

But 200 shots is way too small sample. You can take any good nba shooter and they've probably had stretches of 200 shots with a low shooting percentage. And actually his 2 point shooting was not that bad for a rookie just breaking into the league (45%). It's really just a sample of 86 3 pointers that you're judging him on. He should have made about 6 more 3 pointers last season.

Perhaps but you don't give a contract like that in the hopes he can shoot vs NBA defenses. Or at least you don't if you're not the Knicks.

Wrong. You do give it especially if you're confident his shooting will go up

If you wait for his fg% to be 45-50% you're now paying 10+ a year.

Yeah I'm sure he'll be shooting 50%. You are delusional. Again, would any other team trade any asset for him? Would any other team have signed him to the contract? No they wouldn't.

SupremeCommander wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Nalod wrote:We really bent out of shape on this kids deal?
Small sample kid know doubt and anyting the knicks do we doubt.
If spurs gave this to him we'd be envious.
If Philly does it we say "Smart, building with yoot!!!"
Bostond does this its "Man, they will trade him for a protected 1st rounder"
Knicks do it, we like "Man, we outbid ourselves"!!!!!

Until we prove that we can make a few good decisions this will occur. I get it.

its incredible. The circle jerk that goes on around here and everyone knows they could have done it better. Rob Baker made it through the D league and has worked with every coach in the org.

By the way, Langston Galloway and his 8ppg, 2rebs and 1.something assist signed with the Pistons for 3/$21mm but EVERYONE KNOWS WE BIG AGAINST OURSELVES. Cause things sound so much better in caps or when you pretend to have info you dont.

I am glad they like him enough to bring him back. If every guard on the team has to beat out Ron Baker for minutes than he's worth the $4mm. Easy.

Yup. I don't get the reactions either. 4M a year for 2 years is not that much in this new NBA landscape. You want to show free agents that your team will reward you financially if you work hard.

dude he played 28 games, and we won 2 games with him as a starter, less than 7 games with him in the rotation, less not forget he was a restricted FA, salary could have been matched.

It's like we went to a auction and outbid ourselves..

Why didn't he take a pay cut or home town discount so we could sign a vet pg?

besides the obvious that Baker wasn't very good, my frustration of the deal can really be summarized by the fact that that money should have went to retain Justin Holliday. We wouldn't have needed to pay THJ twice as much as he's worth then. We would have been able to sign a veteran point outright

nykshaknbake wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

NYKBocker wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Nalod wrote:We really bent out of shape on this kids deal?
Small sample kid know doubt and anyting the knicks do we doubt.
If spurs gave this to him we'd be envious.
If Philly does it we say "Smart, building with yoot!!!"
Bostond does this its "Man, they will trade him for a protected 1st rounder"
Knicks do it, we like "Man, we outbid ourselves"!!!!!

Until we prove that we can make a few good decisions this will occur. I get it.

its incredible. The circle jerk that goes on around here and everyone knows they could have done it better. Rob Baker made it through the D league and has worked with every coach in the org.

By the way, Langston Galloway and his 8ppg, 2rebs and 1.something assist signed with the Pistons for 3/$21mm but EVERYONE KNOWS WE BIG AGAINST OURSELVES. Cause things sound so much better in caps or when you pretend to have info you dont.

I am glad they like him enough to bring him back. If every guard on the team has to beat out Ron Baker for minutes than he's worth the $4mm. Easy.

Yup. I don't get the reactions either. 4M a year for 2 years is not that much in this new NBA landscape. You want to show free agents that your team will reward you financially if you work hard.

dude he played 28 games, and we won 2 games with him as a starter, less than 7 games with him in the rotation, less not forget he was a restricted FA, salary could have been matched.

It's like we went to a auction and outbid ourselves..

Why didn't he take a pay cut or home town discount so we could sign a vet pg?

besides the obvious that Baker wasn't very good, my frustration of the deal can really be summarized by the fact that that money should have went to retain Justin Holliday. We wouldn't have needed to pay THJ twice as much as he's worth then. We would have been able to sign a veteran point outright

This. Now we are capped out and probably have the worst PG staffing in the league.

But I thought everyone wanted to tank? Having one of the least talented pg rotations should help the cause...no?

fishmike wrote:

markvmc wrote:ccinflushing explained on p.3 why the contract amount was higher than might be expected. Here it is again for anyone who missed it.

ccinflushing wrote:This Ron Baker situation is a lot more complicated than it appears on the surface. As a non bird Gilbert Arenas restricted free agent, the Knicks could match an offer sheet using cap space or one of their available exceptions (in this case, the room exception). They could only match using the room exception if the contract was 2 years or less at the room level. Otherwise, they would have to dip into existing cap space - which introduces a fair bit of uncertainty as to what their cap space might be. Retaining Baker was clearly a priority and in the end they opted for certainty as to available cap space by coming to an agreement first thing on a 2 year room exception deal.

This, at the least, indicate some cap management savvy even if you don't agree with the Hardaway signing.

So it makes sense to keep the player and it makes sense in terms of the cap.

Apparently so.