Nov 1, 2014; Minneapolis, MN, USA; Minnesota Timberwolves guard
Ricky Rubio(9) drives past Chicago Bulls guard
Kirk Hinrich(12) during the third quarter at Target Center. The Bulls defeated the Timberwolves 106-105. Mandatory Credit: Brace Hemmelgarn-USA TODAY Sports
In today’s installment of his column, Morten Jensen recaps the NBA rookie contract extension deadline that came and went this past weekend
More from Sir Charles In Charge
- LeBron James working to assemble super team for USA Basketball in 2024
- Dillon Brooks proved his value to Houston Rockets in the 2023 FIBA World Cup
- NBA Trade Rumors: 1 Player from each team most likely to be traded in-season
- Golden State Warriors: Buy or sell Chris Paul being a day 1 starter
- Does Christian Wood make the Los Angeles Lakers a legit contender?
The October 31st deadline for extensions off NBA rookie contracts came and went with some surprises, most notably Ricky Rubio getting $56 million over four years, which at this point looks very optimistic for Minnesota. Rubio is a terrific defender, strong passer and rebounder, and he’ll always have a size advantage at the point guard position. But as has been the case all throughout his career in the NBA, Rubio just can’t generate a lot of scoring off his own. His jumper remains shaky, he doesn’t finish around the rim well, and it’s impossible to put him in a scoring role and rely on him for long stretches.
Fourteen million per year is steep for Rubio, even with the enhanced cap looming in the near distance. It won’t necessarily handcuff Minnesota, but they could have gambled and let him hit the open market. Rubio has the disadvantage of having his flaws being heavily exposed in both the media and through general perception that teams chasing him could quite possibly hit the breaks and ponder if he’s worth such a deal. Would Rubio have been offered more than $56 million in an open market? Possibly. But given the depth at the point guard position in today’s NBA, the Wolves would have been able to cross off several teams.
Ruling: Premature signing.