Woj: RJ Barrett, Knicks Finalizing 4-Year Rookie Extension Worth Up to $120M

[cgf]

As a Knicks fan I hope you’re right. I have my doubts tho

As an aside, great name. The 94 warriors were one of my favorite teams of all time to watch. Rookie Cwebb, young Sprewell, Chris mullin. Enjoyed the heck out of that team. Barkley was just on another level in that playoff series though

Do you think his shooting improves just from better teammates? (Brunson, potentially Mitchell) I haven't seen enough of him at all to have any opinion. His 2nd year shooting numbers bumped up nicely from rookie year with slightly higher usage, then went down last year with another bump in usage. So maybe some improvement is not too much to expect, especially if he's taking ~16 FGA per game.

Yes, I think it does. RJ is not a consistent creator on offense, and really should never be the first or second option. If I were the Knicks coaching staff, now that we have Brunson--our best pg in years--I'd be making sure RJ works on taking (and hitting) catch-and-shoot 3s. (I.e., what the Warriors coaching staff did with Wiggins--to great result.) Just improving in this one area will help a lot.

Even last season, with him struggling across the board and our issues at the point, RJ hit 37% on C&S 3s...and the year before he was at 41%. RJ needs to continue building out his skillset the way he has been; C&S in his first offseason, his handle & ability to get to the rim last offseason, either his finishing at the rim or his off-the-bounce shooting this summer and the other next summer, then we'll start to get a better idea of what we've got in RJ.

[taikibansei]

Do you think his shooting improves just from better teammates? (Brunson, potentially Mitchell) I haven't seen enough of him at all to have any opinion. His 2nd year shooting numbers bumped up nicely from rookie year with slightly higher usage, then went down last year with another bump in usage. So maybe some improvement is not too much to expect, especially if he's taking ~16 FGA per game.

Yes, I think it does. RJ is not a consistent creator on offense, and really should never be the first or second option. If I were the Knicks coaching staff, now that we have Brunson--our best pg in years--I'd be making sure RJ works on taking (and hitting) catch-and-shoot 3s. (I.e., what the Warriors coaching staff did with Wiggins--to great result.) Just improving in this one area will help a lot.

Even last season, with him struggling across the board and our issues at the point, RJ hit 37% on C&S 3s...and the year before he was at 41%. RJ needs to continue building out his skillset the way he has been; C&S in his first offseason, his handle & ability to get to the rim last offseason, either his finishing at the rim or his off-the-bounce shooting this summer and the other next summer, then we'll start to get a better idea of what we've got in RJ.

His 3p shooting last year regressed, particularly from the corner (where he takes 25% of them). More to the point, RJ should never take another shot from between 3 feet to the 3P line again. They make up 1/3 of his shots, and he hits them at a .303 clip. No more mid-range shots, fix his corner 3, and work on C&S...and we'll have a very good player.

[MalonesElbows]

For those criticizing the deal, are you saying the Knicks should let their best draft pick in recent memory walk rather than extend him?

There is this thing called restricted free agency. Apparently the Knicks decided he was an all star though, so need to test that.

[Pointgod]

Bingo. Key words: worth up to RJ settled for $65 million less than the rookie max. And if he does get $120 million, Knicks will have made an absolute steal as RJ will then have met all the built-in incentives.

The way I evaluate whether a contract is an overpay or not is two things. Will it limit future flexibility and will it be hard to trade later on down the line? I’d say Barrett’s contract is a no on both ends so I don’t see an issue with the extension. There might have been a team will to max him next year.

I think that conclusion's mostly right and that this is a fine move for the Knicks, but you're still leaving out the risk here. The risk isn't that he's a nice starter who's slightly overpaid but is still tradeable--the risk is that he remains a mediocre player who takes up a good chunk of cap space as the team's plans move past him. It's not the worst thing in the world and probably won't cripple the franchise, but it should be factored in. When you're committing solid starter $ to a player who hasn't put together a good season yet, and whose trajectory has been very up and down, only seems fair to include the possiblity that he ends up short of 'solid starter.'

Like you said 'he's making Jalen Brunson money but has a higher upside than Jalen Brunson' so what's the problem--but skipped the part where Brunson is a couple tiers better than him currently, and that might remain the case going forward.

I think it’s unfair to say that Barrett might end up a mediocre player. He’s already shown to be an above average player. Even if he doesn’t improve, he’s already a 20,5,5 player. His biggest challenge will be his efficiency. Here are a list of players who will make 25 million next season but less than 30 million.

Over 25 million
Draymond Green, Al Horford, Demar Derozan, Jalen Brunson, Kyle Lowry, Chris Paul, Jalen Brown, Kevin Love, Jaren Jackson Jr,

Over 30 million
Gordon Hayward, Donovan Mitchell, Daaron Fox, Bam, Jayson Tatum, Ayton, SGA, Michael Porter

There are quite a few guys making over 25 million that I’d rather have RJ a over next year due to age and room for growth. Of the guys making 30 million next year only Tatum and Bam have made an all NBA team so if Barrett actually reaches that 30 million mark he actually would have earned it unlike of the guys on the list. I don’t see an issue with this extension when you take the context of what other players are getting paid. I think for this be a bad contract he’d either have to sustain a majority injury or see his scoring dip well below 20 points on very poor efficiency.

[Rockazoids]

The Knicks finally re-signed/extended a first round pick. What has it been? Over 25 years?

It was Charlie Ward in 1999.

New FO, who did you want them to resign?
Kevin Knox
Frank Ntilikina
Porzingis
Tim Hardaway Jr.
Hell next year DAL will probably bring in Kevin Knox too. Seems like they like the NYK 1 round picks.

[KnicksGadfly]

For those criticizing the deal, are you saying the Knicks should let their best draft pick in recent memory walk rather than extend him?

There is this thing called restricted free agency. Apparently the Knicks decided he was an all star though, so need to test that.

Are you willfully ignorant? RJ actually has to hit several high benchmarks to earn his full 120 million.

[TwitterFingers]

Gut feeling I think he’s trade bait to Utah

[TwitterFingers]

For those criticizing the deal, are you saying the Knicks should let their best draft pick in recent memory walk rather than extend him?

There is this thing called restricted free agency. Apparently the Knicks decided he was an all star though, so need to test that.

Or they locked him up to trade him. Bobby Marks said there’s no trade moratorium on him

[dc]

As a Knicks fan I hope you’re right. I have my doubts tho

As an aside, great name. The 94 warriors were one of my favorite teams of all time to watch. Rookie Cwebb, young Sprewell, Chris mullin. Enjoyed the heck out of that team. Barkley was just on another level in that playoff series though

Thank you.

I started following the NBA in 1991. Living in Brazil at the time, and in the pre-internet age, it was not easy to find games and news about the players. There were times when I knew about a trade 3 months later after it happened, lol.

But I though that rooting for Jordan was like cheating, so I just followed the sports as a whole.

3 years later I decided to search for a team to follow more closely... Webber and Sprewell were definitely a huge factor for me choosing the Warriors. And I didn't change allegiance since then, even in the dark days.

I remember Barkley in that series. Played hard and took no bull from anyone. Simple and deadly combination for a great player, no?

Cheers.

People forget the 93-94' Warriors were perhaps the unluckiest team in terms of injury. Right after they swung the trade for Webber, Tim Hardaway and Sarunas Marciulionis both tore their ACLs over the summer (in light of players getting injured over this summer). Then Mullin injured his had in a pre-season game and missed most of the year.

Avery Johnson was kind of an emergency acquisition and he played pretty well in replacement of Hardaway, but a fully healthy Warriors team that year with a rookie Webber would've been a damn fun team to watch. I mean, they were pretty fun to watch as it was, but they would've been one of the more intriguing/entertaining teams of the decade had they been fully healthy. Too bad, as everything went downhill after Cohan completed his purchase of the team and then Ric Bucher got famous from the Nellie-Webber fiasco.

[Catchall]

Read on Twitter

[HotelVitale]

The way I evaluate whether a contract is an overpay or not is two things. Will it limit future flexibility and will it be hard to trade later on down the line? I’d say Barrett’s contract is a no on both ends so I don’t see an issue with the extension. There might have been a team will to max him next year.

I think that conclusion's mostly right and that this is a fine move for the Knicks, but you're still leaving out the risk here. The risk isn't that he's a nice starter who's slightly overpaid but is still tradeable--the risk is that he remains a mediocre player who takes up a good chunk of cap space as the team's plans move past him. It's not the worst thing in the world and probably won't cripple the franchise, but it should be factored in. When you're committing solid starter $ to a player who hasn't put together a good season yet, and whose trajectory has been very up and down, only seems fair to include the possiblity that he ends up short of 'solid starter.'

Like you said 'he's making Jalen Brunson money but has a higher upside than Jalen Brunson' so what's the problem--but skipped the part where Brunson is a couple tiers better than him currently, and that might remain the case going forward.

I think it’s unfair to say that Barrett might end up a mediocre player. He’s already shown to be an above average player. Even if he doesn’t improve, he’s already a 20,5,5 player. His biggest challenge will be his efficiency.

I think for this be a bad contract he’d either have to sustain a majority injury or see his scoring dip well below 20 points on very poor efficiency.

'Mediocre' might sound too harsh but I honestly didn't think anyone had Barrett as already an above average starter right now--thought everyone tabbed him as a promising player who's been getting major developmental minutes despite struggles/ups and downs. His efficiency is the most famous struggle and it is indeed a problem: 48%, 53.5%, and 51% TS for his career is pretty rough, bottom 20 in the whole league among the top 200ish guys in mpg last year, mostly just rookies and D specialists sharing that basement with him. It's not an exaggeration to call him one of the least efficient players in the league so far.

But his volume also isn't particularly great. People keep quoting how he's a 20 pt scorer but he also played 35mpg the last two years, one of the highest marks in the league. So his actual per-minute production isn't that great--among those same 200 players he's 33rd in points per minute and pretty much the same as some meh guys like Kelly Oubre, Reggie Jackson, etc. Also not sure where you got that he's a 20/5/5 guy, he's never averaged more than 3.1 dimes per 36 (vs 2.2 career TOs per 36). And again he's been getting tons of minutes and touches to do this, and has been enabled to keep firing away despite some of the league's worst efficiency.

Also don't think any of the advanced stats have him clocked as being a top-100 or so player so far and many probably have him down well beneath that. Don't want to put too much on that, but it does support the other contexts that he hasn't been a good NBA player so far.

Anyway, I don't mean to lay into him and have no agenda here, and RJ's young and sometimes does look really nice when I've caught him (though other times doesn't). Just don't see any reason to say he's already clearly a top-50ish guy and has no chance of failing to live up to $26m+ per year. Seems like it's way more the case that he's got a good chance of improving but still needs to to not be a flop on this deal.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

Well let’s see if Danny Ainge gets close to that value from another team.

[hardenASG13]

For those criticizing the deal, are you saying the Knicks should let their best draft pick in recent memory walk rather than extend him?

There is this thing called restricted free agency. Apparently the Knicks decided he was an all star though, so need to test that.

I've heard of it. This is what guys like Barrett make now. He could also be an all star next year and cost them more, too, if he were to hit RFA. He's got clear room to improve and showed signs last year, already scoring 20ppg.

[MrGoat]

Barrett's kind of at that awkward point where he's good enough you know he's going to be expensive, but not so good yet that you're not sure if you're going to regret it later. Cap keeps going up so not a terrible deal I guess and avoids an Ayton and Suns situation

[Bob Ross]

For those criticizing the deal, are you saying the Knicks should let their best draft pick in recent memory walk rather than extend him?

There is this thing called restricted free agency. Apparently the Knicks decided he was an all star though, so need to test that.

I've heard of it. This is what guys like Barrett make now. He could also be an all star next year and cost them more, too, if he were to hit RFA. He's got clear room to improve and showed signs last year, already scoring 20ppg.

Restricted free agency doesn't always work out long term. Some guys see it as disrespect i.e. Gordan Hayward and split the first chance they get. After the last 20 years, the Knicks could use some good faith stability

[Laimbeer]

Barrett, Randle, Brunson, and Mitchell for about 95M per through 2026.

[seren]

Barrett, Randle, Brunson, and Mitchell for about 95M per through 2026.

If you think about, it is a bargain. You could probably fit in another max to that group

[GeorgeSears]

I guess that's the going rate for average young players. He has a long way to go in terms of development to live up to being a lottery pick. He didn't really improve last season. He put up more points but it wasn't efficient.

[giberish]

The deal starts at around 17% of the cap. With expected cap increases during the deal it will drop as the deal goes along. Probably more like 15% of the cap during the length of the deal.

15% of the cap isn't all-star money. It's more top-75 money.

Also, the deal isn't for how much to pay past Barrett, it's how much to pay future Barrett, starting in 2023-24. As a young player, Barrett's almost certain to improve (it's just a matter of how much). IMO - baring major injury - it's very unlikely that Barrett won't be a top-75 player in the 2024-27 seasons.

[GSWFan1994]

As a Knicks fan I hope you’re right. I have my doubts tho

As an aside, great name. The 94 warriors were one of my favorite teams of all time to watch. Rookie Cwebb, young Sprewell, Chris mullin. Enjoyed the heck out of that team. Barkley was just on another level in that playoff series though

Thank you.

I started following the NBA in 1991. Living in Brazil at the time, and in the pre-internet age, it was not easy to find games and news about the players. There were times when I knew about a trade 3 months later after it happened, lol.

But I though that rooting for Jordan was like cheating, so I just followed the sports as a whole.

3 years later I decided to search for a team to follow more closely... Webber and Sprewell were definitely a huge factor for me choosing the Warriors. And I didn't change allegiance since then, even in the dark days.

I remember Barkley in that series. Played hard and took no bull from anyone. Simple and deadly combination for a great player, no?

Cheers.

People forget the 93-94' Warriors were perhaps the unluckiest team in terms of injury. Right after they swung the trade for Webber, Tim Hardaway and Sarunas Marciulionis both tore their ACLs over the summer (in light of players getting injured over this summer). Then Mullin injured his had in a pre-season game and missed most of the year.

Avery Johnson was kind of an emergency acquisition and he played pretty well in replacement of Hardaway, but a fully healthy Warriors team that year with a rookie Webber would've been a damn fun team to watch. I mean, they were pretty fun to watch as it was, but they would've been one of the more intriguing/entertaining teams of the decade had they been fully healthy. Too bad, as everything went downhill after Cohan completed his purchase of the team and then Ric Bucher got famous from the Nellie-Webber fiasco.

Yes, I remember that pretty well. As I said in my previous post, I was just beginning to be a Warrior fan, and then everything seemed to go downhill extremely fast.

As I didn't have access to news like today (pre-internet age, of course), that hit me in the forehead in a quite strong way, lol. I was wondering what happened, and most importantly, how it happened so fast.

Even up to now I still wonder what that team could have been... in my dreams, I think that a team with Hardaway, Richmond, Mullin with Sprewell and Webber (yes, all of them together, damnit!) would have been a dynasty. Even if you trade Richmond for Billy Owens, it still would be a quite good team, a contender from my point of view.

Injuries and dysfunction pretty much ruined it all. Then the insufferable Cohan years, the "We Believe" squad, and here we are.

The ride since then was worth it, and something I'd never, ever, EVER thought would happen in my lifetime.

Cheers and thanks for your post.