Official Immanuel Quickley Thread

[bboyskinnylegs]

Read on Twitter

[ArthurVandelay]

The big problem is a lot of people still think it's a 2009 cap. The cap is going to be 142 million next year. 25 mill into a cap that size is only 17%, which is a very reasonable amount to pay to a solid starting guard.

Vassell just got 5/135. He's averaging 18/3/3 with splits of 46/36/81.
McDaniels just got 5/136. He's averaging 11/2/1 with splits of 51/37/75.

That's the going rate for good young players coming off their rookie deals.

If you don't want to pay that kind of money, you're never going to sign anyone to extension.

Yeah the money is wild.

I can still remember when Hot Rod John Williams was the first $6,000,000 man. Wild how far we've come.

[Boardbreaker]

Read on Twitter

[ItsDanger]

IQ on a rookie contract is good value. Paying full market rate is at best neutral. Your objective shouldn't be getting "fair value". That leads to mediocre team building. Otherwise, you must generate value elsewhere. On a limited roster, that is difficult

Nice. TWO is already hating on anyone who is not on a rookie contract again

Cant wait for y'all to turn on Scottie in 12 months to.

You use hating and similar emotional arguments too often. I'm presenting a purely financial perspective.

[James_Raptors]

You're both right.

First, it's a tiny sample size, and a new role, on a new team for IQ.
So reading anything out of those 12 games is (mostly) trivial and meaningless.

Secondly, stars have earned our trust. We've seen them do amazing things, consistently, so when they have a few games of sub par play (by their standards) there's no need to panic because it's just a blip.

The difference between Fairview's post, and your post, realball, is that Fairview has replaced emotion, with non emotional cold hard stats. It's easy to get caught up in a tiny sample size, with a virtual unknown (new role, team, roster, like i said) like IQ and worry about how he'll respond. The reality is we don't know and probably won't have a good idea "what he is" for another full season. He'll be paid , as an UFA, based upon "potential", and it's perfectly normal that in that first year of contract he may be fair value or even dip a bit below. We'll see how that plays out, but the idea is that in year's 2, 3 and so on, he could potentially outplay his contract if he develops into the better player we hope he will become. If Immanuel was a finished product we wouldn't be having these discussions. His value is fluid, and ever changing.

Be patient realball, no need to get worked up or make hasty judgements. We've seen very little of his game and the team has had little time to practice and gel. Furthermore, players like Steph, Luka, Lillard, et al have had time to play many seasons with teams that have (tried) to build around them (caveat with Portland, perhaps, but I digress...). And on those teams they are superstars. We know what those players can do. There's a level of trust with them. In fact, when their numbers start dropping off it tends to be a sign that their career's are winding down, or maybe the team that was built around them is no longer as talented, or simply aging.

Compared to the Raptors and IQ is a piece and we're still trying to figure out how good he'll be. But these things take time, so let's not overreact to tiny sample sizes, and let them play the game. We'll see what we have with these 3 over the next season or so. And then we can make proper, calm calculated assessments.

[TravisScott55]

His injury explains why he's looked so off recently

[TOStateofMind]

Can the guy play for at least half a season on a new team before proclaiming things, jesus lol.

[LoveMyRaps]

Read on Twitter

The tank is so on.

[OakleyDokely]

Do we really want to spend $25 million on another Fred is the question.

...I mean, yes? That's excellent value. And he's also much younger than Fred and much better than Fred was at 24.

is it 2009 and nobody told me?

We're in a nba world right now where OG is going to make 40 and guys like Herro, Poole, Grant are at 30+

25 mill for IQ over 4-5 years would be a damn good deal.

[James_Raptors]

Do we really want to spend $25 million on another Fred is the question.

...I mean, yes? That's excellent value. And he's also much younger than Fred and much better than Fred was at 24.

is it 2009 and nobody told me?

We're in a nba world right now where OG is going to make 40 and guys like Herro, Poole, Grant are at 30+

25 mill for IQ over 4-5 years would be a damn good deal.

And barring major injury or some weird shenanigans, a very tradeable asset.

[OakleyDokely]

...I mean, yes? That's excellent value. And he's also much younger than Fred and much better than Fred was at 24.

is it 2009 and nobody told me?

We're in a nba world right now where OG is going to make 40 and guys like Herro, Poole, Grant are at 30+

25 mill for IQ over 4-5 years would be a damn good deal.

And barring major injury or some weird shenanigans, a very tradeable asset.

The best recent comparable for IQ is probably Vassell who signed a 5/135 deal. Anything under that is a win.

People who think he's getting under 20 haven't been paying attention to the market.

[Chandan]

Darko: Dennis, it's time to dazzle.

[James_Raptors]

is it 2009 and nobody told me?

We're in a nba world right now where OG is going to make 40 and guys like Herro, Poole, Grant are at 30+

25 mill for IQ over 4-5 years would be a damn good deal.

And barring major injury or some weird shenanigans, a very tradeable asset.

The best recent comparable for IQ is probably Vassell who signed a 5/135 deal. Anything under that is a win.

People who think he's getting under 20 haven't been paying attention to the market.

Or that he was asking $25 mill in NY.
I've said since day 1 of the trade, the price tag will be $25-$27 mill per.
Well, technically I believe I said I was leaning towards $27 mill.

[StopitLeo]

Do we really want to spend $25 million on another Fred is the question.

...I mean, yes? That's excellent value. And he's also much younger than Fred and much better than Fred was at 24.

is it 2009 and nobody told me?

We're in a nba world right now where OG is going to make 40 and guys like Herro, Poole, Grant are at 30+

25 mill for IQ over 4-5 years would be a damn good deal.

People really need to consider salaries in terms of their relative percentage of the cap and not the absolute number.

Moving forward we will have something like:

Barnes 25-30% (max)
Quickley 20%
Barrett 18%
Poeltl 14%
Dick 3%
Non-taxpayer MLE 9%

That’s a good salary structure for a team in our current stage of rebuilding.

20% for Quickley might seem high but we are investing in him as our lead guard moving forward.

[Fairview4Life]

Do we really want to spend $25 million on another Fred is the question.

...I mean, yes? That's excellent value. And he's also much younger than Fred and much better than Fred was at 24.

is it 2009 and nobody told me?

We're in a nba world right now where OG is going to make 40 and guys like Herro, Poole, Grant are at 30+

25 mill for IQ over 4-5 years would be a damn good deal.

I will never forget arguing in a long thread about how Amir's 4 year/28 million dollar deal was actually good, and not bad, like most people were yelling about.

[realball]

You're both right.

First, it's a tiny sample size, and a new role, on a new team for IQ.
So reading anything out of those 12 games is (mostly) trivial and meaningless.

Secondly, stars have earned our trust. We've seen them do amazing things, consistently, so when they have a few games of sub par play (by their standards) there's no need to panic because it's just a blip.

The difference between Fairview's post, and your post, realball, is that Fairview has replaced emotion, with non emotional cold hard stats. It's easy to get caught up in a tiny sample size, with a virtual unknown (new role, team, roster, like i said) like IQ and worry about how he'll respond. The reality is we don't know and probably won't have a good idea "what he is" for another full season. He'll be paid , as an UFA, based upon "potential", and it's perfectly normal that in that first year of contract he may be fair value or even dip a bit below. We'll see how that plays out, but the idea is that in year's 2, 3 and so on, he could potentially outplay his contract if he develops into the better player we hope he will become. If Immanuel was a finished product we wouldn't be having these discussions. His value is fluid, and ever changing.

Be patient realball, no need to get worked up or make hasty judgements. We've seen very little of his game and the team has had little time to practice and gel. Furthermore, players like Steph, Luka, Lillard, et al have had time to play many seasons with teams that have (tried) to build around them (caveat with Portland, perhaps, but I digress...). And on those teams they are superstars. We know what those players can do. There's a level of trust with them. In fact, when their numbers start dropping off it tends to be a sign that their career's are winding down, or maybe the team that was built around them is no longer as talented, or simply aging.

Compared to the Raptors and IQ is a piece and we're still trying to figure out how good he'll be. But these things take time, so let's not overreact to tiny sample sizes, and let them play the game. We'll see what we have with these 3 over the next season or so. And then we can make proper, calm calculated assessments.

Dude, you are projecting like crazy. I am not the emotional one here for criticizing a player. I have no reason to be critical of the team I root for, you and Fairview have every reason to become emotional for players on your team. I am taking this small sample size at face value, not making up hypothetical situations up where IQ makes half a shot every other game and becomes a different player.

Look in the mirror dude, you're preaching "patience" and "good vibes" and telling me to stop being emotional. I am completely fine with us giving IQ a big contract, because it's not like we have a choice. But I'm not going to pretend like he's living up to the expectations either, just because the rest of you have your heads in the clouds.

[James_Raptors]

You're both right.

First, it's a tiny sample size, and a new role, on a new team for IQ.
So reading anything out of those 12 games is (mostly) trivial and meaningless.

Secondly, stars have earned our trust. We've seen them do amazing things, consistently, so when they have a few games of sub par play (by their standards) there's no need to panic because it's just a blip.

The difference between Fairview's post, and your post, realball, is that Fairview has replaced emotion, with non emotional cold hard stats. It's easy to get caught up in a tiny sample size, with a virtual unknown (new role, team, roster, like i said) like IQ and worry about how he'll respond. The reality is we don't know and probably won't have a good idea "what he is" for another full season. He'll be paid , as an UFA, based upon "potential", and it's perfectly normal that in that first year of contract he may be fair value or even dip a bit below. We'll see how that plays out, but the idea is that in year's 2, 3 and so on, he could potentially outplay his contract if he develops into the better player we hope he will become. If Immanuel was a finished product we wouldn't be having these discussions. His value is fluid, and ever changing.

Be patient realball, no need to get worked up or make hasty judgements. We've seen very little of his game and the team has had little time to practice and gel. Furthermore, players like Steph, Luka, Lillard, et al have had time to play many seasons with teams that have (tried) to build around them (caveat with Portland, perhaps, but I digress...). And on those teams they are superstars. We know what those players can do. There's a level of trust with them. In fact, when their numbers start dropping off it tends to be a sign that their career's are winding down, or maybe the team that was built around them is no longer as talented, or simply aging.

Compared to the Raptors and IQ is a piece and we're still trying to figure out how good he'll be. But these things take time, so let's not overreact to tiny sample sizes, and let them play the game. We'll see what we have with these 3 over the next season or so. And then we can make proper, calm calculated assessments.

Dude, you are projecting like crazy. I am not the emotional one here for criticizing a player. I have no reason to be critical of the team I root for, you and Fairview have every reason to become emotional for players on your team. I am taking this small sample size at face value, not making up hypothetical situations up where IQ makes half a shot every other game and becomes a different player.

Look in the mirror dude, you're preaching "patience" and "good vibes" and telling me to stop being emotional. I am completely fine with us giving IQ a big contract, because it's not like we have a choice. But I'm not going to pretend like he's living up to the expectations either, just because the rest of you have your heads in the clouds.

See, you were doing good, until the end.

The point is you shouldn't have any expectations based upon a 12 game sample size, and you just admitted you do.
As for me, specifically, I'm even keel. Not to high, not too low. Been following the ABA/NBA for roughly 50 years, so I know the drill.
You just don't like being told you're wrong. Cool. But arguing against that factoid doesn't magically make you correct, it just screams denial. You clearly have no basic understanding of how to assess a player if you're using 12 game sample sizes to ascertain anything at all. It's literally meaningless and a waste of a post and our time.

[YogurtProducer]

You're both right.

First, it's a tiny sample size, and a new role, on a new team for IQ.
So reading anything out of those 12 games is (mostly) trivial and meaningless.

Secondly, stars have earned our trust. We've seen them do amazing things, consistently, so when they have a few games of sub par play (by their standards) there's no need to panic because it's just a blip.

The difference between Fairview's post, and your post, realball, is that Fairview has replaced emotion, with non emotional cold hard stats. It's easy to get caught up in a tiny sample size, with a virtual unknown (new role, team, roster, like i said) like IQ and worry about how he'll respond. The reality is we don't know and probably won't have a good idea "what he is" for another full season. He'll be paid , as an UFA, based upon "potential", and it's perfectly normal that in that first year of contract he may be fair value or even dip a bit below. We'll see how that plays out, but the idea is that in year's 2, 3 and so on, he could potentially outplay his contract if he develops into the better player we hope he will become. If Immanuel was a finished product we wouldn't be having these discussions. His value is fluid, and ever changing.

Be patient realball, no need to get worked up or make hasty judgements. We've seen very little of his game and the team has had little time to practice and gel. Furthermore, players like Steph, Luka, Lillard, et al have had time to play many seasons with teams that have (tried) to build around them (caveat with Portland, perhaps, but I digress...). And on those teams they are superstars. We know what those players can do. There's a level of trust with them. In fact, when their numbers start dropping off it tends to be a sign that their career's are winding down, or maybe the team that was built around them is no longer as talented, or simply aging.

Compared to the Raptors and IQ is a piece and we're still trying to figure out how good he'll be. But these things take time, so let's not overreact to tiny sample sizes, and let them play the game. We'll see what we have with these 3 over the next season or so. And then we can make proper, calm calculated assessments.

Dude, you are projecting like crazy. I am not the emotional one here for criticizing a player. I have no reason to be critical of the team I root for, you and Fairview have every reason to become emotional for players on your team. I am taking this small sample size at face value, not making up hypothetical situations up where IQ makes half a shot every other game and becomes a different player.

Look in the mirror dude, you're preaching "patience" and "good vibes" and telling me to stop being emotional. I am completely fine with us giving IQ a big contract, because it's not like we have a choice. But I'm not going to pretend like he's living up to the expectations either, just because the rest of you have your heads in the clouds.

Come on man. You are using a 12-game sample size and ignoring the other 253 game of his career and trying to derive conclusions from that.

Serious question - do you think a player who has shot 47% from 2 in his career is suddenly a 38% from 2 guy? Probably not.

[realball]

You're both right.

First, it's a tiny sample size, and a new role, on a new team for IQ.
So reading anything out of those 12 games is (mostly) trivial and meaningless.

Secondly, stars have earned our trust. We've seen them do amazing things, consistently, so when they have a few games of sub par play (by their standards) there's no need to panic because it's just a blip.

The difference between Fairview's post, and your post, realball, is that Fairview has replaced emotion, with non emotional cold hard stats. It's easy to get caught up in a tiny sample size, with a virtual unknown (new role, team, roster, like i said) like IQ and worry about how he'll respond. The reality is we don't know and probably won't have a good idea "what he is" for another full season. He'll be paid , as an UFA, based upon "potential", and it's perfectly normal that in that first year of contract he may be fair value or even dip a bit below. We'll see how that plays out, but the idea is that in year's 2, 3 and so on, he could potentially outplay his contract if he develops into the better player we hope he will become. If Immanuel was a finished product we wouldn't be having these discussions. His value is fluid, and ever changing.

Be patient realball, no need to get worked up or make hasty judgements. We've seen very little of his game and the team has had little time to practice and gel. Furthermore, players like Steph, Luka, Lillard, et al have had time to play many seasons with teams that have (tried) to build around them (caveat with Portland, perhaps, but I digress...). And on those teams they are superstars. We know what those players can do. There's a level of trust with them. In fact, when their numbers start dropping off it tends to be a sign that their career's are winding down, or maybe the team that was built around them is no longer as talented, or simply aging.

Compared to the Raptors and IQ is a piece and we're still trying to figure out how good he'll be. But these things take time, so let's not overreact to tiny sample sizes, and let them play the game. We'll see what we have with these 3 over the next season or so. And then we can make proper, calm calculated assessments.

Dude, you are projecting like crazy. I am not the emotional one here for criticizing a player. I have no reason to be critical of the team I root for, you and Fairview have every reason to become emotional for players on your team. I am taking this small sample size at face value, not making up hypothetical situations up where IQ makes half a shot every other game and becomes a different player.

Look in the mirror dude, you're preaching "patience" and "good vibes" and telling me to stop being emotional. I am completely fine with us giving IQ a big contract, because it's not like we have a choice. But I'm not going to pretend like he's living up to the expectations either, just because the rest of you have your heads in the clouds.

See, you were doing good, until the end.

The point is you shouldn't have any expectations based upon a 12 game sample size, and you just admitted you do.
As for me, specifically, I'm even keel. Not to high, not too low. Been following the ABA/NBA for roughly 50 years, so I know the drill.
You just don't like being told you're wrong. Cool. But arguing against that factoid doesn't magically make you correct, it just screams denial. You clearly have no basic understanding of how to assess a player if you're using 12 game sample sizes to ascertain anything at all. It's literally meaningless and a waste of a post and our time.

I don't have expectations based on a 12 game sample size, I have expectations based on his 200 games played in NY. Which is why I expect him to be as efficient as he was in NY. Clearly you are not following along here.

[YogurtProducer]

Dude, you are projecting like crazy. I am not the emotional one here for criticizing a player. I have no reason to be critical of the team I root for, you and Fairview have every reason to become emotional for players on your team. I am taking this small sample size at face value, not making up hypothetical situations up where IQ makes half a shot every other game and becomes a different player.

Look in the mirror dude, you're preaching "patience" and "good vibes" and telling me to stop being emotional. I am completely fine with us giving IQ a big contract, because it's not like we have a choice. But I'm not going to pretend like he's living up to the expectations either, just because the rest of you have your heads in the clouds.

See, you were doing good, until the end.

The point is you shouldn't have any expectations based upon a 12 game sample size, and you just admitted you do.
As for me, specifically, I'm even keel. Not to high, not too low. Been following the ABA/NBA for roughly 50 years, so I know the drill.
You just don't like being told you're wrong. Cool. But arguing against that factoid doesn't magically make you correct, it just screams denial. You clearly have no basic understanding of how to assess a player if you're using 12 game sample sizes to ascertain anything at all. It's literally meaningless and a waste of a post and our time.

I don't have expectations based on a 12 game sample size, I have expectations based on his 200 games played in NY. Which is why I expect him to be as efficient as he was in NY. Clearly you are not following along here.

Then you should have no problem understanding that the 12 game sample size is way to small to be worried about his next contract or saying he has been "disappointing" or "poor" and realize hes on a brand new team in a brand new role and having a small slump with his within 10 feet game.