Blogs suck and are color many aspects.
When to sign mitch long term? He broke his foot and really did little last year, by the time he showed up this season it makes sense for him to wait.
The bulls if they got his rights would also be locked to just 55 over 4 years. What did the offer or we just assume knicks were “Stupid as always”? They really going to trade and pay that for a back up beyond this season when they have vooch?
Maybe Detroit wants him and will pay him over the extension amount. Why not wait until free agency?
Remember this guy misses a lot of games, came in and took 25 games to get his legs. What if the foot broke again?
Why can’t fans remember all this and not “We should have signed him becuase we knew he’d exceed all seasons and not break”.
This hindsight idiocy suggested by blogs is why many of us don’t read that shit. It leaves out too much.
All we get is “Knicks might let him walk” and is colored to seem like all the facts don’t matter. They do.
As much as I love Mitch I’m warming up to using him as bait in a sign and trade for Brunson or Dinwiddie
I love Mitch but I’m willing to go to war with a platoon of Noel/Sims/sign a buy low FA like Cauley-Stein and a much needed upgrade at PG.
The Knicks FO have to sign MitchRob .. Why? Noel's performances are not dependable after 7 minutes of playing time. And coach Thibs haven't given rookie Sims consistent playing time to evaluate his performance over MitchRob.
Philc1 wrote:As much as I love Mitch I’m warming up to using him as bait in a sign and trade for Brunson or Dinwiddie
I love Mitch but I’m willing to go to war with a platoon of Noel/Sims/sign a buy low FA like Cauley-Stein and a much needed upgrade at PG.
thats not much love. Those guys are trash
Kemet wrote:The Knicks FO have to sign MitchRob .. Why? Noel's performances are not dependable after 7 minutes of playing time. And coach Thibs haven't given rookie Sims consistent playing time to evaluate his performance over MitchRob.
You play sims so he can get used to nba speed and timing. Right now sims is not on Mitch level, but thibs needs to play him off the bench, during this stretch run to the draft.
fishmike wrote:Philc1 wrote:As much as I love Mitch I’m warming up to using him as bait in a sign and trade for Brunson or Dinwiddie
I love Mitch but I’m willing to go to war with a platoon of Noel/Sims/sign a buy low FA like Cauley-Stein and a much needed upgrade at PG.
thats not much love. Those guys are trash
Beggars can’t be choosers. And both are way better than watching Alec Burks play pg 45 minutes a night
blkexec wrote:Kemet wrote:The Knicks FO have to sign MitchRob .. Why? Noel's performances are not dependable after 7 minutes of playing time. And coach Thibs haven't given rookie Sims consistent playing time to evaluate his performance over MitchRob.
You play sims so he can get used to nba speed and timing. Right now sims is not on Mitch level, but thibs needs to play him off the bench, during this stretch run to the draft.
Agree totally. I think Sims has shown a lot of potential he just needs more time to develop his game. He’s strong, he’s athletic he just needs to learn all the nuances and that comes with playing
So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:
But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
And this has to include a S&T where we get back assets by giving the 5th year vs. the 4 if I recall my facts correctly. That also helps with getting players to a team that is at or over the cap.
franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
ONE Of the offers wasn't close to the max? Am I reading this right?
Meaning a lot of the offers were perhaps close to the max?
Isn't this just the usual back and forth? What am I missing?
One has to understand a time line that started with him out with a broken foot and took 2 months to get in shape and stay healthy.
one has to understand his injury was a non contact one and might be potentially chronic. Has anyone around here seen his xrays andd properly evaluated the injury in the context of a 7 footer athlete who relies on his athletic prowess than fundamentals?
Does his work ethic demonstrate a commitment to not just improve but also prevent injuries?
Does his off court character consistent and able to handle a big salary?
We learned from KP the answer was NO.
Most of you are looking at Mitches last 6 weeks and now like “Knicks gonna fuck this up like they always do”.
Any team that would bid on him will be looking at the same data and want to see those same xrays and know all about him.
Capella go this money a few years ago when the prototype Center seemed to be defined a bit different. This year we have multiple centers /7footers as MVP candidates which is changing the game. Mitch still has yet to show any offensive game or FT prowess.
YOu don’t get starter money if you can’t be on the court the last 5 minutes of a playoff game being FT liability.
That FT form he has looks awful. Looks like he don’t even care? LOL
I hope we can derive value from him but there is Simms who defensively has come a long way this season and has the body to do well.
He won’t be starting material next season.
Mitch might not be our long term asset but at the very least if we keep him his contract has to be tradable.
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
ONE Of the offers wasn't close to the max? Am I reading this right?
Meaning a lot of the offers were perhaps close to the max?
Isn't this just the usual back and forth? What am I missing?
we probably should have offered the $48M/4 years from the first of the season, recovery no withstanding. There is a bit of hindsight to my statement, for sure- but professionals around the team should have been better positioned to know we'd be where we are with him. Given NBA salaries, this might have been the prudent thing had we been able to sign him. I like him, he seems like a nice guy with some upside still to his game.
But if you are his agent, right now what are you saying? Wait until you are a FA, I'll get you more money.
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
ONE Of the offers wasn't close to the max? Am I reading this right?
Meaning a lot of the offers were perhaps close to the max?
Isn't this just the usual back and forth? What am I missing?
we probably should have offered the $48M/4 years from the first of the season, recovery no withstanding. There is a bit of hindsight to my statement, for sure- but professionals around the team should have been better positioned to know we'd be where we are with him. Given NBA salaries, this might have been the prudent thing had we been able to sign him. I like him, he seems like a nice guy with some upside still to his game.
But if you are his agent, right now what are you saying? Wait until you are a FA, I'll get you more money.
You offer a guy a 4 year deal without knowing the extent of his foot problem while also watching him gain 20-30lbs he shouldn't have?
If they could, do you think it would be prudent for NOP to offer Zion a 4 year extension at his max?
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
ONE Of the offers wasn't close to the max? Am I reading this right?
Meaning a lot of the offers were perhaps close to the max?
Isn't this just the usual back and forth? What am I missing?
we probably should have offered the $48M/4 years from the first of the season, recovery no withstanding. There is a bit of hindsight to my statement, for sure- but professionals around the team should have been better positioned to know we'd be where we are with him. Given NBA salaries, this might have been the prudent thing had we been able to sign him. I like him, he seems like a nice guy with some upside still to his game.
But if you are his agent, right now what are you saying? Wait until you are a FA, I'll get you more money.
this is literally all based on assumptions. The bottom line is the best play for Mitch is to play the season, do as well as you can you can look for the best offer and the ceiling is what Clint Capella got, not 4/$48. If I am Mitch I want $15mm a year, and I can ensure some teams would pay more. There's not a lot of teams that Mitch doesnt help immediately. He's a commodity.
Don't mind letting Mitch walk TBH
fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
ONE Of the offers wasn't close to the max? Am I reading this right?
Meaning a lot of the offers were perhaps close to the max?
Isn't this just the usual back and forth? What am I missing?
we probably should have offered the $48M/4 years from the first of the season, recovery no withstanding. There is a bit of hindsight to my statement, for sure- but professionals around the team should have been better positioned to know we'd be where we are with him. Given NBA salaries, this might have been the prudent thing had we been able to sign him. I like him, he seems like a nice guy with some upside still to his game.
But if you are his agent, right now what are you saying? Wait until you are a FA, I'll get you more money.
this is literally all based on assumptions. The bottom line is the best play for Mitch is to play the season, do as well as you can you can look for the best offer and the ceiling is what Clint Capella got, not 4/$48. If I am Mitch I want $15mm a year, and I can ensure some teams would pay more. There's not a lot of teams that Mitch doesnt help immediately. He's a commodity.
I know he has had trouble with his agents - but absolutely 100% the advise would have been, play out the year, get big money. Maybe if offered day 1, 4 years or 3 years with PO might have had appeal to Mitch as he has had a bumpy first couple years with injuries.
Mitch might have been the one who wanted to wait?
fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
ONE Of the offers wasn't close to the max? Am I reading this right?
Meaning a lot of the offers were perhaps close to the max?
Isn't this just the usual back and forth? What am I missing?
we probably should have offered the $48M/4 years from the first of the season, recovery no withstanding. There is a bit of hindsight to my statement, for sure- but professionals around the team should have been better positioned to know we'd be where we are with him. Given NBA salaries, this might have been the prudent thing had we been able to sign him. I like him, he seems like a nice guy with some upside still to his game.
But if you are his agent, right now what are you saying? Wait until you are a FA, I'll get you more money.
this is literally all based on assumptions. The bottom line is the best play for Mitch is to play the season, do as well as you can you can look for the best offer and the ceiling is what Clint Capella got, not 4/$48. If I am Mitch I want $15mm a year, and I can ensure some teams would pay more. There's not a lot of teams that Mitch doesnt help immediately. He's a commodity.
I think 4 years, $48M is about right. That's Timelord money and is in line with the tier of player Mitch is. But it only takes one desperate team.
Nalod wrote:Mitch might have been the one who wanted to wait?
More than likely - what would your advice be if you were an agent? Be healthy, do a good job- and you can be looking at Fred Van Vleet type money - 4-5 years $20M per! I think at least, no? Not reasonable?
BigDaddyG wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:So apparently, we started offering less than the max we can prior to June 30th:But a source familiar with the talks said one of New York’s offers wasn’t close to the max that the club can offer Robinson via extension.
http://knickerblogger.net/sny-source-kni...
How can the conversation go now. TO me, it's telling Mitch at this point, we'll take care of you - we want to keep you a Knick. It's $48M now, and after June 30th, we'll make sure you can't say no to our offer.
ONE Of the offers wasn't close to the max? Am I reading this right?
Meaning a lot of the offers were perhaps close to the max?
Isn't this just the usual back and forth? What am I missing?
we probably should have offered the $48M/4 years from the first of the season, recovery no withstanding. There is a bit of hindsight to my statement, for sure- but professionals around the team should have been better positioned to know we'd be where we are with him. Given NBA salaries, this might have been the prudent thing had we been able to sign him. I like him, he seems like a nice guy with some upside still to his game.
But if you are his agent, right now what are you saying? Wait until you are a FA, I'll get you more money.
this is literally all based on assumptions. The bottom line is the best play for Mitch is to play the season, do as well as you can you can look for the best offer and the ceiling is what Clint Capella got, not 4/$48. If I am Mitch I want $15mm a year, and I can ensure some teams would pay more. There's not a lot of teams that Mitch doesnt help immediately. He's a commodity.
I think 4 years, $48M is about right. That's Timelord money and is in line with the tier of player Mitch is. But it only takes one desperate team.
Omer Asik got a $60 million deal 7 years ago. Mitch is gonna get paid on the open market probably not by us since he’s not CAA
