MS wrote:This was a tremendous error. The second mistake of the offseason. Giving Obi to a rival wasn’t smart either.

Immanuel Quickley has averaged 21.7 points, 5.0 rebounds and 4.9 assists in 27 games as a starter in his career. That’s not taking into his defensive rating which is amongst the highest in the league.

He’s the guy we need on the bench and the only guy we have that consistently fills it up, was the third best player on the team. This should have been done a long time ago!

to be fair, most of those starter stats were accumulated in meaningless April games when the games didn't matter anymore. Obi's "starter" stats are insane too for the same reason, but when Obi actually started for Randle mid season in games that mattered and were contested, his numbers were nowhere near what he did in those April games.

franco12 wrote:I don't understand anyone thinking he will get less money than he would have gotten now. $25m would be cheap.

There is always someone there to over pay

quickly is a strong defender. He has an amazing handle. He can get anywhere he wants on the court with the dribble. He plays at a different speed, nitendo speed.

His shot isn't broken like RJ. He can pass the ball.

So are we going to end up like Dallas letting Brunson go?

The only way this makes sense to me is if we are planning to trade him and having him unsigned gives us some kind of advantage.

I agree with you about Q having value and also would have preferred they locked him up however there isn't always someone who will/can overpay. Most contracts that get signed are teams re-signing their own guys only teams with cap space will be able to offer Q big money. That market can and has gone dry in the past even for good players. I wouldn't be surprised if someone tries to poach Q but its not a given.

Clean wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

Clean wrote:Cool with me. I am good with not paying the reported 25mil a year he wanted due to his piss poor playoffs. We need to avoid another Randle situation. So if he plays well this year and also does well in the playoffs then I don't mind paying him what he wants. If he plays bad in the playoffs again then his number comes down. Regular season stats no longer impress me. Randle showed me that they are useless come playoff time.

I'm no Randle apologist but his contract seems pretty cost effective for his production. While he sucked a couple years back against Atlanta, he basically played last season's playoffs on one foot.

Yeah I don’t get it. Randle is great value at his contract. Rarely misses games and gets us far in the regular season. I get the playoff struggles, but he’s still underpaid. Randle played in the playoffs through an ankle injury that required offseason surgery. Hard to criticize this time.

I don't want to derail this thread but let me explain my thought process. He is a great value depending on what you value. If you just want good regular season stats and someone who won't be constantly injured then he is perfect for you.

If you want someone who will not be easy to throw off their game. Someone who is efficent. Someone who knows how to play within the flow of an offense. Someone who knows what style of play that is in his best interest to play. Someone who does not constantly get lost on defense. Someone who has nothing else to pivot to when team starts gameplanning for him in important games then that contract no longer seems like a great value.

People put too much stock in regular season where teams don't gameplan for you. When I was not sold on Quick as a PG his main issue was breakingdown the defense and poor shooting%. He fixed it in the regular season last year. Once people gameplanned for him in the playoffs he was having those same issues.

What you described is what Randle is being paid to be. He’s being paid like a 3rd option on a good team. And Regular season matters because of matchups. Randle’s regular season consistency got the Knicks into position to play Cleveland in the first round. Otherwise they may play a team they can’t beat. Once you get to the playoffs Randle is more a decoy than anything. It’s got to be Brunson (and possibly another star to be named later.)

He's remaining a Knick either way!

Nalod wrote:Maxey and others did not get extended. Curious list really.
IQ was not alone.
And.....He is still on this team so lets not pretend he is gone.

Notice many former first round picks were waived this week. Obi is a good player and if knicks could have gotten more don't you think it would have been done?
Not like Obi was extended either by Indy. Why? I don't know. either his ask was too much, or indy is in "wait and see".

As for IQ, he has not put a full season together. I dig the runner up 6th man thing but he wanted starter money? I respect that. Knick might be better to spend more once he has shown his ceiling then speculate and the poison pill thing that is the cap lock that makes it hard to trade.
Maxey not getting his might also have to with a trade scenario.

And WTF is Toronto doing? Siakim will be UFA and OG can opt out.

Katz surveyed FO members around the league for an article near the end of the year and Obi's value averaged to around 11 mil. He will make 7 this year and will have earned about 23 million for his career after this season. He has a starting job now and a big opportunity to increase his value. with his history and the opportunity he has this season, I don't think Obi Toppin was looking to sign an extension. His extension wouldn't have been a big increase over what makes now (7 to maybe 10?). He is looking to increase his value. In the same article, Q value was assessed at 20 mil with most FO guys saying he would get 4/80. The Knicks just signed Josh Hart to an extension that is almost that exact figure (4/81). Josh is a bench player. He is also an 8-year vet who hasn't put together a season better than the one IQ just had. If I represented IQ and he wasn't interested in a discount I'd want 25 given the deal they just gave to Josh. That said I'm not mad at the Knicks for letting IQ go to RFA. He's not totally proven and they can still keep him. Personally, I don't think letting guys play out their contract should be seen as an insult and I wouldn't extend guys early unless I was pretty sure or thought I was getting a dicount. For example, I would have made RJ play it out. IQ I would have extended for 20 but maybe he wanted more and even if he didn't I see it from both sides.

nycericanguy wrote:

EwingPSD wrote:

Nalod wrote:Maxey and others did not get extended. Curious list really.
IQ was not alone.
And.....He is still on this team so lets not pretend he is gone.

Notice many former first round picks were waived this week. Obi is a good player and if knicks could have gotten more don't you think it would have been done?
Not like Obi was extended either by Indy. Why? I don't know. either his ask was too much, or indy is in "wait and see".

As for IQ, he has not put a full season together. I dig the runner up 6th man thing but he wanted starter money? I respect that. Knick might be better to spend more once he has shown his ceiling then speculate and the poison pill thing that is the cap lock that makes it hard to trade.
Maxey not getting his might also have to with a trade scenario.

And WTF is Toronto doing? Siakim will be UFA and OG can opt out.

Katz surveyed FO members around the league for an article near the end of the year and Obi's value averaged to around 11 mil. He will make 7 this year and will have earned about 23 million for his career after this season. He has a starting job now and a big opportunity to increase his value. with his history and the opportunity he has this season, I don't think Obi Toppin was looking to sign an extension. His extension wouldn't have been a big increase over what makes now (7 to maybe 10?). He is looking to increase his value. In the same article, Q value was assessed at 20 mil with most FO guys saying he would get 4/80. The Knicks just signed Josh Hart to an extension that is almost that exact figure (4/81). Josh is a bench player. He is also an 8-year vet who hasn't put together a season better than the one IQ just had. If I represented IQ and he wasn't interested in a discount I'd want 25 given the deal they just gave to Josh. That said I'm not mad at the Knicks for letting IQ go to RFA. He's not totally proven and they can still keep him. Personally, I don't think letting guys play out their contract should be seen as an insult and I wouldn't extend guys early unless I was pretty sure or thought I was getting a dicount. For example, I would have made RJ play it out. IQ I would have extended for 20 but maybe he wanted more and even if he didn't I see it from both sides.

Hart's contract was really 5/94m, he opted in to $13m as a favor to allow us to sign DDV.

I think the Knicks would have gladly paid IQ more than the 18-19m per year they paid Hart. But how much more is the question?

I think 4/100m would have been fair for IQ, but with the Vassell and Jaden contracts who knows how much IQ wanted, wouldn't be surprised if he wanted 4/130m or so. but maybe we just wanted to keep trade options open. We shall see.

Hart's extension it is really 4 for 81 but whatever. You could be right about IQ asking for a big big # but I think it is possible they didn't foresee IQ playing as well as he did to close last season and his play created one of those "good problems". Right now Hart and IQ are both really good bench players. 20 and 25 million a year for two bench players is a lot. Grimes is eligible for an extension after this season as well. If QG puts up 15 on 40% from 3 with while being an elite on ball defender what are we going to give him? I haven't done the math but the team could get very expansive quickly and the CBA handcuffs you once pay roll gets too high. I feel like when we traded for Hart IQ was viewed as more expendable then he is now and the team is trying to figure out how to deal with a "good problem".