Alpha1971 wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:Here's the thing, if IQ plays himself into a max deal, it's a win win for us. Because all of a sudden he could be the centerpiece in a trade for a star this season. or we simply have us a great young player.

if we had signed him for 4/100m or so, and he blew up, well trading him wouldn't be an option for another year.

Base year compensation makes sign and trades awfully difficult. Even Quick gets the max, his outgoing salary would be half of that while the team he goes to still has to have enough cap space to absorb his salary.

that would have applied if we extended him, but now it doesnt apply he's much easier to trade

It applies to Bird and Early Bird Rights. Even IQ did accept a qualifying offer, he would have a no trade clause anyway and he becomes unrestricted. There's a reason you don't see as many sign and trades. If we trade him now, he's still only making $4M. It kind of makes salary matching difficult.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2022/06/hoops-rumors-glossary-base-year-compensation-2.html

The BYC rules apply to a player who meets all of the following criteria in a sign-and-trade:

He is a Bird or Early Bird free agent.
His new salary is worth more than the minimum.
He receives a raise greater than 20%.
His team is at or above the cap immediately after the signing.
If the player meets those criteria and is included in a sign-and-trade deal, his outgoing salary for matching purposes is considered to be his previous salary or 50% of his new salary, whichever is greater. For the team he is being signed-and-traded to, his incoming figure for matching purposes is his full new salary.

right now he's easier to trade because its just $4m to match +/- 150%, nothing tricky. obviously if we're trading him for a star we have Evan as salary filler. or it could be an RJ + IQ trade for a star as well.

Might be easier to trade but does it make it more likely we get a player on his level ? We could have traded IQ and Fournier already if we had wanted to already. What's the plan for real... Don't think the front office knows, they are punting until later.

i mean if IQ reaches another level this season he could be the centerpiece for a star. where as previously he would have just been a sweetener or add on.

RJ is looking good too, if those 2 elevate their games that's a heck of a trio with Brunson.

Alpha1971 wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:Here's the thing, if IQ plays himself into a max deal, it's a win win for us. Because all of a sudden he could be the centerpiece in a trade for a star this season. or we simply have us a great young player.

if we had signed him for 4/100m or so, and he blew up, well trading him wouldn't be an option for another year.

Base year compensation makes sign and trades awfully difficult. Even Quick gets the max, his outgoing salary would be half of that while the team he goes to still has to have enough cap space to absorb his salary.

that would have applied if we extended him, but now it doesnt apply he's much easier to trade

It applies to Bird and Early Bird Rights. Even IQ did accept a qualifying offer, he would have a no trade clause anyway and he becomes unrestricted. There's a reason you don't see as many sign and trades. If we trade him now, he's still only making $4M. It kind of makes salary matching difficult.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2022/06/hoops-rumors-glossary-base-year-compensation-2.html

The BYC rules apply to a player who meets all of the following criteria in a sign-and-trade:

He is a Bird or Early Bird free agent.
His new salary is worth more than the minimum.
He receives a raise greater than 20%.
His team is at or above the cap immediately after the signing.
If the player meets those criteria and is included in a sign-and-trade deal, his outgoing salary for matching purposes is considered to be his previous salary or 50% of his new salary, whichever is greater. For the team he is being signed-and-traded to, his incoming figure for matching purposes is his full new salary.

right now he's easier to trade because its just $4m to match +/- 150%, nothing tricky. obviously if we're trading him for a star we have Evan as salary filler. or it could be an RJ + IQ trade for a star as well.

Might be easier to trade but does it make it more likely we get a player on his level ? We could have traded IQ and Fournier already if we had wanted to already. What's the plan for real... Don't think the front office knows, they are punting until later.

i mean if IQ reaches another level this season he could be the centerpiece for a star. where as previously he would have just been a sweetener or add on.

True but we could have extended he really shows out and he still is a centerpiece in a trade within t him potentially going into the season and saying " I would have stayed but now you have to trade me ". He is out homegrown pick we developed he should mean more to us then anyone else.

if we extended him it would be very difficult to trade him this season due to the way extensions work.

IDK, I don't think there's any bad feelings with IQ and the FO. I think he genuinely likes it here.

nycericanguy wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:Here's the thing, if IQ plays himself into a max deal, it's a win win for us. Because all of a sudden he could be the centerpiece in a trade for a star this season. or we simply have us a great young player.

if we had signed him for 4/100m or so, and he blew up, well trading him wouldn't be an option for another year.

Base year compensation makes sign and trades awfully difficult. Even Quick gets the max, his outgoing salary would be half of that while the team he goes to still has to have enough cap space to absorb his salary.

that would have applied if we extended him, but now it doesnt apply he's much easier to trade

It applies to Bird and Early Bird Rights. Even IQ did accept a qualifying offer, he would have a no trade clause anyway and he becomes unrestricted. There's a reason you don't see as many sign and trades. If we trade him now, he's still only making $4M. It kind of makes salary matching difficult.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2022/06/hoops-rumors-glossary-base-year-compensation-2.html

The BYC rules apply to a player who meets all of the following criteria in a sign-and-trade:

He is a Bird or Early Bird free agent.
His new salary is worth more than the minimum.
He receives a raise greater than 20%.
His team is at or above the cap immediately after the signing.
If the player meets those criteria and is included in a sign-and-trade deal, his outgoing salary for matching purposes is considered to be his previous salary or 50% of his new salary, whichever is greater. For the team he is being signed-and-traded to, his incoming figure for matching purposes is his full new salary.

right now he's easier to trade because its just $4m to match +/- 150%, nothing tricky. obviously if we're trading him for a star we have Evan as salary filler. or it could be an RJ + IQ trade for a star as well.

Might be easier to trade but does it make it more likely we get a player on his level ? We could have traded IQ and Fournier already if we had wanted to already. What's the plan for real... Don't think the front office knows, they are punting until later.

i mean if IQ reaches another level this season he could be the centerpiece for a star. where as previously he would have just been a sweetener or add on.

True but we could have extended he really shows out and he still is a centerpiece in a trade within t him potentially going into the season and saying " I would have stayed but now you have to trade me ". He is out homegrown pick we developed he should mean more to us then anyone else.

if we extended him it would be very difficult to trade him this season due to the way extensions work.

IDK, I don't think there's any bad feelings with IQ and the FO. I think he genuinely likes it here.

May not have any bad feelings that's true. Teams extend RFA all the time. But anyway element of risk has been introduced that didn't need to have been. People are people and when pride and money are involved anything can happen. Isn't the idea that some star will become disgruntled and available to trade for the entire premise for the front office to acquire a star in the future ??? Might be waiting for such situation to arise on another team but being blind to it occuring in your own house.

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:IQ might be getting the Brunson treatment that Dallas gave him. Underestimate IQ at our peril. Sign him and as long as he is heslthy he is worth it.

I mean, if you choose to ignore that Jalen Brunson was an UFA and IQ will be an RFA, then yeah, the analogy is near perfect.

The point is that Dallas had Brunson evaluated with a predetermined value and that prevented them from treating him as a top priority. They alienated him as a result. Knicks can be alienating IQ now to where he may force his way out off the team and the team will suffer as a result.

Insofar as anyone can tell, none of what you are describing is happening. Literally the opposite.

How do you know ? You know what's going on behind the scenes ?

I don't. It's you who has started the pronouncements, I'm just following what I see through the media.

How did you come to your conclusions?

I speculated that an organization can make a player disgruntled which happens during the negotiation process as a potential risk of not extending IQ. That's all. Players get bitter at organizations all the time. It was you who " Literally said that's not going to happen ". My statement was conjecture about something the lack of the extension allows now. You responded with a definite response that this " Literally won't happen " So I ask you how you know that ?

Because IQ told us so. Because all of the important players have told us this. Repeatedly. The FO has tried to operate this way (and you def need to make some jumps of conclusion without making some wild conjecture), it's why they also move Obi to a good situation for nada. They are showing us how they operate. Same with the Josh Hart weirdness with his contract. And how they engaged RJ and Randle before him. You can get a sense of it.

The Knicks have IQ on a RFA basis, so none of what you point to with Brunson holds to any of this because they are entirely different situations. And this is not an Ayton type thing; it's at the opposite end of spectrum.

Martin, I can fully and humbly admit that I'm just the guy talking BS about the team in the barber shop. I don't know anything more then anyone else just talking for entertainment. Just speculating. Might be wrong and might be right and we will find out later. Your also a guy in the barber shop talking as much BS as everyone else. Yet, you don't realize your just talking crap and you think your crap is informed and doesn't stink. You have no greater insight or knowledge then anyone else but boy you like to believe you do. Every barber shop got that person too. You answered with several paragraphs of nothing this front office tells how they operate that's true. They are risk averse, indecisive, and protecting what future assets that they don't trade unless a deal is perfect... Obi that trade for nada proved nothing good for the front office and it is more worrisome. I just think you have become an apologist for everything the FO does at this point or doesn't do. Said in friendship and with a sense of humor aiight ✌️✌️✌️✌️ this is all just peoples opinions you can't in my opinion dispute my conjecture with you conjecture and claim yours is more factual.

Alpha1971, I had previously asked you several time over a direct Yes/No question to help you understand some salary cap stuff you obviously had never heard of, and you couldn't get past that moment.

There are a lot things you can learn about an organization and how it operates along the way, you just need to pay attention. It's what some people do all day long.

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:IQ might be getting the Brunson treatment that Dallas gave him. Underestimate IQ at our peril. Sign him and as long as he is heslthy he is worth it.

I mean, if you choose to ignore that Jalen Brunson was an UFA and IQ will be an RFA, then yeah, the analogy is near perfect.

The point is that Dallas had Brunson evaluated with a predetermined value and that prevented them from treating him as a top priority. They alienated him as a result. Knicks can be alienating IQ now to where he may force his way out off the team and the team will suffer as a result.

Insofar as anyone can tell, none of what you are describing is happening. Literally the opposite.

How do you know ? You know what's going on behind the scenes ?

I don't. It's you who has started the pronouncements, I'm just following what I see through the media.

How did you come to your conclusions?

I speculated that an organization can make a player disgruntled which happens during the negotiation process as a potential risk of not extending IQ. That's all. Players get bitter at organizations all the time. It was you who " Literally said that's not going to happen ". My statement was conjecture about something the lack of the extension allows now. You responded with a definite response that this " Literally won't happen " So I ask you how you know that ?

Because IQ told us so. Because all of the important players have told us this. Repeatedly. The FO has tried to operate this way (and you def need to make some jumps of conclusion without making some wild conjecture), it's why they also move Obi to a good situation for nada. They are showing us how they operate. Same with the Josh Hart weirdness with his contract. And how they engaged RJ and Randle before him. You can get a sense of it.

The Knicks have IQ on a RFA basis, so none of what you point to with Brunson holds to any of this because they are entirely different situations. And this is not an Ayton type thing; it's at the opposite end of spectrum.

Martin, I can fully and humbly admit that I'm just the guy talking BS about the team in the barber shop. I don't know anything more then anyone else just talking for entertainment. Just speculating. Might be wrong and might be right and we will find out later. Your also a guy in the barber shop talking as much BS as everyone else. Yet, you don't realize your just talking crap and you think your crap is informed and doesn't stink. You have no greater insight or knowledge then anyone else but boy you like to believe you do. Every barber shop got that person too. You answered with several paragraphs of nothing this front office tells how they operate that's true. They are risk averse, indecisive, and protecting what future assets that they don't trade unless a deal is perfect... Obi that trade for nada proved nothing good for the front office and it is more worrisome. I just think you have become an apologist for everything the FO does at this point or doesn't do. Said in friendship and with a sense of humor aiight ✌️✌️✌️✌️ this is all just peoples opinions you can't in my opinion dispute my conjecture with you conjecture and claim yours is more factual.

Alpha1971, I had previously asked you several time over a direct Yes/No question to help you understand some salary cap stuff you obviously had never heard of, and you couldn't get past that moment.

There are a lot things you can learn about an organization and how it operates along the way, you just need to pay attention. It's what some people do all day long.

That's salary cap stuff is your bluff. What does that have to do anything right now with anything. Give me a break. Front office might want to keep as many options as it can inorder to not make a clear choice now. They should have extended IQ now or should have traded him all the rest is dancing around hoping a big deal comes around. That's not a plan. Plus, I don't understand all nuances of the salary cap and I don't care to learn.vi am not getting paid to do so. Knicks have staff paid millions to know the cap and make trades and acquisitions. But for the last three years we have traded for Rose, Reddish, and Hart. we have traded picks lots of second rounders and signed the GMs Godson. All your doing with the references to the cap is bluffing that your opinion is more valuable. Stop defending the choices the front office makes the choices they have made especially this off-season and with IQ were not part of a grand plan just them punting and waiting.

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

martin wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:IQ might be getting the Brunson treatment that Dallas gave him. Underestimate IQ at our peril. Sign him and as long as he is heslthy he is worth it.

I mean, if you choose to ignore that Jalen Brunson was an UFA and IQ will be an RFA, then yeah, the analogy is near perfect.

The point is that Dallas had Brunson evaluated with a predetermined value and that prevented them from treating him as a top priority. They alienated him as a result. Knicks can be alienating IQ now to where he may force his way out off the team and the team will suffer as a result.

Insofar as anyone can tell, none of what you are describing is happening. Literally the opposite.

How do you know ? You know what's going on behind the scenes ?

I don't. It's you who has started the pronouncements, I'm just following what I see through the media.

How did you come to your conclusions?

I speculated that an organization can make a player disgruntled which happens during the negotiation process as a potential risk of not extending IQ. That's all. Players get bitter at organizations all the time. It was you who " Literally said that's not going to happen ". My statement was conjecture about something the lack of the extension allows now. You responded with a definite response that this " Literally won't happen " So I ask you how you know that ?

Because IQ told us so. Because all of the important players have told us this. Repeatedly. The FO has tried to operate this way (and you def need to make some jumps of conclusion without making some wild conjecture), it's why they also move Obi to a good situation for nada. They are showing us how they operate. Same with the Josh Hart weirdness with his contract. And how they engaged RJ and Randle before him. You can get a sense of it.

The Knicks have IQ on a RFA basis, so none of what you point to with Brunson holds to any of this because they are entirely different situations. And this is not an Ayton type thing; it's at the opposite end of spectrum.

Martin, I can fully and humbly admit that I'm just the guy talking BS about the team in the barber shop. I don't know anything more then anyone else just talking for entertainment. Just speculating. Might be wrong and might be right and we will find out later. Your also a guy in the barber shop talking as much BS as everyone else. Yet, you don't realize your just talking crap and you think your crap is informed and doesn't stink. You have no greater insight or knowledge then anyone else but boy you like to believe you do. Every barber shop got that person too. You answered with several paragraphs of nothing this front office tells how they operate that's true. They are risk averse, indecisive, and protecting what future assets that they don't trade unless a deal is perfect... Obi that trade for nada proved nothing good for the front office and it is more worrisome. I just think you have become an apologist for everything the FO does at this point or doesn't do. Said in friendship and with a sense of humor aiight ✌️✌️✌️✌️ this is all just peoples opinions you can't in my opinion dispute my conjecture with you conjecture and claim yours is more factual.

Alpha1971, I had previously asked you several time over a direct Yes/No question to help you understand some salary cap stuff you obviously had never heard of, and you couldn't get past that moment.

There are a lot things you can learn about an organization and how it operates along the way, you just need to pay attention. It's what some people do all day long.

That's salary cap stuff is your bluff. What does that have to do anything right now with anything. Give me a break. Front office might want to keep as many options as it can inorder to not make a device choice now. They should have extended IQ now or should have traded him all the rest is dancing around hoping a big deal comes around. That's not a plan. Plus, I don't understand all nuances of the salary cap and I don't care to learn.vi am not getting paid to do so. Knicks have staff paid millions to know the cap and make trades and acquisitions. But for the last three years we have traded for Rose, Reddish, and Hart. we have traded picks lots of second rounders and signed the GMs Godson. All your doing with the references to the cap is bluffing that your opinion is more valuable. Stop defending the choices the front office makes the choices they have made especially this off-season and with IQ were not part of a grand plan just them punting and waiting.

Nah dude, it's your barely lack of trying. After that, it's a waste of time cause you aren't showing an interest in actual learning.

Martin it's very apparent it's very important for you to feel your the teacher and more informed. That's great. I don't buy it, respectfully. None of the moves the Knicks have done last off-season with Obi, DDV and now IQ have been predetermined and predestined. They could have gone in different directions. Different paths could have been followed. Your only defending what they have done and their rationale, which is what exactly ? That they are keeping their options open to make a future big deal right ? What deal the next deal they will monitor and determine it's not economical enough ? Maybe I should call you Martin Rose. All you try to do is score little points by bolding a line here or there but it's all your bluster. But it's all 👍 I still think your great.

Nalod wrote:Brock Allers sits there all freaking day thinking about who to pay whom, and if not us, who will want to or can pay IQ more and under what circumstances. THey playing chess on 3 dimensions. We playing Orthello smoking weed.

Does that mean all good ideas execute? Of course not. Team lose players all the time. How we get Two time All NBA Randle and Brunson FOR FREE?
Certainly Nola could have done a "Sign and trade" (its an antiquated idea given the CBA) or gotten 2 second round picks, right?
You think on "Ultimate MaverKnicks.com" Someone is ranting that they should-woulda-coulda traded brunson and gotten a first round pick? Damn skippy sure they do.

This vs. "Conjecture in the barbershop" were we talk like we in the room where it happens. If you want to talk like that, just add "Its my thinking", or "My logic speaks to"....Etc etc.

But to put things out there like you in the know is not the same.

Raptors with FVV. Sure they would have liked to have signed him long term but they had a number in mind? One that could be tradable also.
Fred had other thoughts. He got a crazy 83mm for 2 year deal. This year he is the 15th highest paid player in the league. Im not certain Toronto or FVV himself thought his free agency would come to that, but it did.

As for IQ, we might lose him for nothing. I don't know what we were offering or he was asking, but we can match it. If someone team wants to go full stupid on him, we'll then there won't be much to do about it in the future.

How did I put something out there in an a matter other then this is my opinion or this is just my thinking ? That's all we do as fans. This is true for all of us, amateurs talking crap for entertainment. Just some us admit it plain and simple. And in the world of sports talk until a deal actually comes down and consummated we can speculate as to why all we like. That's what we all do. I'm just being very skeptical of what the front office has done in the near past. But anyway Knicks fellow fan. Hope they surprise me. But I am getting Cashman vibes all of a sudden from the Front office. Maybe in the past I have down played my doubt out of a willingness to give them the benefit of the doubt. Yet, this front office is indecisive and just continueing to punt choices down the road. They don't have plan I fear.

Knixkik wrote:Last night is proof you keep IQ unless you can get a star for him in a trade.

What was his entire playoff performance last year proof of?

LivingLegend wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Last night is proof you keep IQ unless you can get a star for him in a trade.

What was his entire playoff performance last year proof of?

That he was young? And has room to grow?

LivingLegend wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

Chandler wrote:am i the only that thinks this has the earmarks of IQ being positioned as a trade chip?

No you’re not

My understanding is that Knicks not signing IQ allows him to be traded during the season where if they had extended him he couldn’t be moved until the summer - I would agree he’s at least been earmarked as a key piece that could be part of a bigger package in a trade during the season.

His cap numbers with an extension gets really hard to move him. He can be traded, but its hard. Now one can trade IQ and Evan for $22mil combined salary! A bargain.
Naturally Quick and his agent might state their number and perhaps new team would meet it after the season. For all we know Knicks and Quick have a hand shake deal that gives him his ask if he hits certain parameters. I believe Teams get a window before RFA hits? Small one?

Knicks have a good track record paying its players. Again, we don't know what Quick was asking, or knicks were offering.