This feels like it should be a bigger deal. RJ Barrett, a former No. 3 pick who’s employed in the NBA’s largest market, is eligible for an extension that has not been signed. Ja Morant and Zion Williamson are the only members of Barrett’s draft class to average more points through their first three seasons than his 17.5 per game, and Darius Garland is right behind them at 17.4. Over the past two weeks, the other three were rewarded with a five-year max contract by their respective organizations, while Barrett and the Knicks reportedly aren’t close to an agreement any time soon.
To be fair, New York’s hesitation—they have until mid-October to iron something out—is understandable. This isn’t an easy decision. If the Knicks don’t want to commit at least $193 million to Barrett through 2028, he’ll become a restricted free agent next summer, injecting a dose of uncertainty into a partnership that could be bolted down right now.
Before we get into the financial pros and cons for both sides, an obvious question must be asked: Is Barrett worth it? Morant is a supernova whose team had the second-best record in the league last season. When healthy, Zion is a candidate to become the eighth wonder of the world. Garland just made his first All-Star team and is a quintessential modern point guard.
Barrett has more questions about him than those three do. There’s no singular aspect of his game that wraps itself around your imagination or makes future success seem undeniable. De’Aaron Fox and Michael Porter Jr. were given designated player extensions that felt somewhat questionable when they happened. But Fox had his blinding speed and MPJ his boiling jumper. Barrett is less spectacular. He could top out as a perennial All-Star or the second option on a team that can’t win a playoff series. There’s a world where he blossoms into a premier two-way wing, while in another his development as a playmaker and shot creator plateaus sooner than later.
Bill Streicher/USA TODAY Sports
The case to give him the max is steeped in traditional benchmarks and a hopeful trajectory that’s partially based on his impressive pedigree. Barrett was pegged for greatness a long time ago but hasn’t lost any self-awareness or humility, even as opposing stars (like Jimmy Butler) anoint him the future face of Knicks basketball.
He turned 22 a few weeks ago and just averaged 20.0 points per game. He’s 6'6" and powerful with a modest 6'10" wingspan; only 20 players in NBA history have logged more minutes than Barrett through his age-21 season, and he scored at least 30 points in 11 games last year, which was more than all players 21 or younger. “I think experience is the best teacher, and he’s gained a lot from his experiences,” Tom Thibodeau said last season. “He’s been through the league a few times. He’s starting to understand how to attack.”
Only 14 players took more free throws; 13 of them made the All-Star team (Harrison Barnes being the lone exception). After the All-Star break, Barrett averaged 24.2 points, 6.2 rebounds and 3.8 assists per game with one of the highest usage rates in the league. Barrett’s representatives may/should digest all that and refuse anything below a designated player maximum extension.
The case against giving it is simple, though: He’s inefficient. Outside of hitting 42.4% of his corner threes as a sophomore, Barrett has not been an adept shooter or scorer from anywhere on the court. Last year hardly any wings, combo guards or forwards finished with a lower effective field goal percentage than Barrett (minimum 1,000 minutes). Despite tallying about 600 more minutes than anyone in his draft class, Barrett ranks 16th among them in win shares (one spot below Cody Martin), and several other advanced stats frown at his production.
He took a ton of shots at the basket—which is great!—but didn’t convert them once he got there. There were 111 players who attempted at least 200 shots in the restricted area last season, and only LaMelo Ball’s field goal percentage was worse than Barrett’s 54.9%. Similarly, 54 players took at least 250 shots on drives to the hoop, and none had a lower field goal percentage than Barrett’s 41.7%. (The percentage of threes Barrett took from the corner dropped from 42.7% to 24.8% last year, which helps explain why his overall three-point percentage fell.)
According to Synergy Sports, 64 players conducted at least 500 pick-and-rolls last season. Barrett’s 0.847 points per possession was second worst among them. (Only Thunder rookie Josh Giddey was less effective.) Barrett’s assist rate (14.9) was below Malik Monk and Wendell Carter Jr., just barely above Jordan Clarkson. None of this supports giving Barrett a max contract, and it’d be perfectly understandable if the Knicks decided to press pause on any negotiation until they see evidence that he can grow in all the areas a franchise cornerstone needs to.
Context matters, too, though. Barrett’s surroundings were far from ideal last year. According to BBall Index’s lineup metrics, groups he played in graded out as an F for spacing and finishing ability last season. Plays like the one seen below were common:
A hefty four-year contract is possible as a compromise—à la Jaylen Brown—but should the Knicks want to lock Barrett in for five years they have to give the max; if he takes a major leap next season it would be additional security for a Knicks organization that, before Mitchell Robinson’s four-year, $60 million deal, hadn’t re-signed a first-round draft pick since Charlie Ward. (Morant and Williamson’s five-year max extensions did not have a player option in the fifth year.)
As a player New York should try to build around as their foundational stepping stone, it’s hard to see Barrett taking what the Knicks just gave Jalen Brunson or Julius Randle last August. There’s enough reason to think Barrett will be better than both over the next few years; a max extension can have positive value on the trade market, too. And even if the Knicks don’t give Barrett the max this summer, they still won’t have meaningful cap space for the next couple of offseasons. His cap hold is more than $30 million regardless, on top of new deals with Brunson, Robinson and Isaiah Hartenstein, plus Randle’s albatross and whatever comes next for Obi Toppin, Immanuel Quickley, Quentin Grimes, etc. (Cam Reddish is also on this team!)
For the Knicks, there’s simultaneously little pressure and real incentive to avoid an outcome that may be riskier than a maximum contract may be. The NBA moves fast. There’s a chance no extension puts a sour taste in Barrett’s mouth that lasts until he becomes an unrestricted free agent five years from now (à la Gordon Hayward). Phoenix’s deteriorating relationship with Deandre Ayton is a cautionary tale, as is what happened between the Spurs and Kawhi Leonard. If the Knicks are atrocious next season and Barrett grows disenchanted with the organization’s direction, what’s stopping him from seeking a sign-and-trade or inking an unfavorable offer sheet with any number of teams that have a ton of cap space and would love to fold in a rising star.
Connected to this entire discussion are rumors of pending trade negotiations between the Knicks and Jazz for Donovan Mitchell. It’s possible New York can put together an offer that doesn’t include Barrett, but after getting all those draft picks for Rudy Gobert, Danny Ainge may want a blue-chip player in return the next time he makes a blockbuster trade. If that’s Barrett, it’s much easier to trade him on that current rookie-scale contract. A designated player extension would take him off the board.
Nothing about this situation is straightforward. The Knicks don’t want Andrew Wiggins 2.0, but they also don’t want to damage—however mildly—the most important player relationship they have. While other trades, extensions and contract signings have dominated the NBA offseason, Barrett’s future earnings are low-key a fascinating dynamic.
