“I mean, this all boils down to how to define “low-ball,” and I hardly think the kind of “opt-in + extend off the opt-in number” scenario I was talking about is a “low-ball” offer. By definition, the first year of the extension would be more than $32.4M.”

Julius Randle is slated to make around 20% of the cap in 2025-26 if he opts in. That would be somewhere around the 50th highest salary in the league, and would actually decline in that ranking as a percentage of the cap (8% raises vs. 10% increases in the cap) You are suggesting that a player who was well on his way to a 2nd straight all-NBA slot in his mid-prime should settle for a salary in the same range as guys like IQ, Tyler Herro, Khris Middleton, and CJ McCollum. I consider that an egregious low-ball offer. If I were Randle’s agent, I would tell Leon to stick it and immediately threaten to opt out. If it turned out that I got less as a free agent, I’d live with it.

“…there’s still a wide array of possible constructions, but I don’t think, say, $32.4M in 2025-2026 combined with an extension with that begins with an 8% raise and then stagnates, totaling around 5/~$172M constitutes “low-balling”

That would amount to a 4 year/$139M extension. That is a low-ball offer. I would tell Leon “Good luck replacing my “better than Mikal Bridges” production for that money.

“It’s difficult to talk about this with you because you take all of the well-trodden, uncontroversial critiques of Randle very personally, but at the end of the day my opinion of him aligns pretty well with the consensus: he is a very good player whose flaws make him an awkward fit on a lot of teams, such that many teams would prefer a worse overall player that’s easier to fit into a lineup.”

I don’t take it personally, just pointing out that the current well-trodden, uncontroversial, consensus critiques of Randle carry about as much weight with me as the well-trodden, uncontroversial, consensus critiques of summer 2022 when nearly this entire board, including you, felt that Randle should be dumped because he sucked and that his impending extension was an albatross waiting to happen. I think that the assumption that there will be no market for him if he opts out is as ludicrous as the critique back then that his first all-NBA season was an empty-arena outlier, or that he wouldn’t emotionally recover from the whole thumbs down debacle and being pilloried in the press, or that he was in some sort of physical decline, or that he wouldn’t adapt to being off the ball more and handing the reins to Jalen Brunson. All of those opinions turned out to be dead wrong.

After seeing what iHart, IQ, and OG got paid, not to mention Siakam and others, Randle has every right to be insulted by any offer that is less than Brunson money at the very least. There would be zero incentive for him to opt in and accept that deal.

I will reiterate: I like him, am optimistic about his ability to contribute to winning at a high level on this team, and would be happy to see us lock him in. There’s nothing inconsistent between those things and thinking there’s not a robust market out there for him at two-digit AAVs that begin with a 3 (or 4).

But you didn’t respond to my question about what you think he will ultimately get paid in 2026-27. You said you would offer him, what, $35M? What would you do if he said no to that and demanded $40M? Would you be okay with him opting out and testing the market? It’s an important question, isn’t it? If your answer is that you would call his bluff, then your above statement seems pretty inconsistent to me. As I said, the issue is whether Leon can replace his production for whatever cap room/assets he has left after letting Randle walk for nothing. What would your plan B look like?

You also said that you can’t think of a team that would offer him $32.4M in 2025-26. That implies that the Knicks would have the leverage to low-ball him based on market conditions, doesn’t it?

I mean, this all boils down to how to define “low-ball,” and I hardly think the kind of “opt-in + extend off the opt-in number” scenario I was talking about is a “low-ball” offer. By definition, the first year of the extension would be more than $32.4M.

Obviously there’s still a wide array of possible constructions, but I don’t think, say, $32.4M in 2025-2026 combined with an extension with that begins with an 8% raise and then stagnates, totaling around 5/~$172M constitutes “low-balling” Julius Randle.

It’s difficult to talk about this with you because you take all of the well-trodden, uncontroversial critiques of Randle very personally, but at the end of the day my opinion of him aligns pretty well with the consensus: he is a very good player whose flaws make him an awkward fit on a lot of teams, such that many teams would prefer a worse overall player that’s easier to fit into a lineup.

I think Julius Randle is a better overall player than Mikal Bridges. I think Mikal Bridges’ trade value is exponentially higher for these reasons.

It seems like you really want to argue with someone who thinks Julius Randle sucks or whatever, but that ain’t me so you’ll have to wait for E to emerge from the shadows. I will reiterate: I like him, am optimistic about his ability to contribute to winning at a high level on this team, and would be happy to see us lock him in. There’s nothing inconsistent between those things and thinking there’s not a robust market out there for him at two-digit AAVs that begin with a 3 (or 4).

Well worth watching Femke Bol’s end leg in the mixed 4×400. It’s very what the fuck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFnhTDr0qQQ