The New York Knicks have declined to pick up point guard Shane Larkin's third-year option. They've also decided against offering Iman Shumpert a contract extension. Both moves are yet another indication that the organization hopes to add significant talent in free agency this summer.
The two moves became official at midnight Friday, which was the deadline to both extend and pick up options for players on their rookie contracts. Now that his option hasn't been picked up, Larkin will become an unrestricted free agent this summer. Larkin can still re-sign with the Knicks but only for up to the amount of the option that was declined, which is $1,675,320.
Shumpert likely will become a restricted free agent, assuming the Knicks make him a qualifying offer by June 30.
Deciding against extending Shumpert and declining Larkin's option are both risks. Larkin and Shumpert could have strong seasons and end up signing with other teams in free agency.
Obviously, that's a risk the Knicks are willing to take. It is also another sign that the organization is making free agency in 2015 and 2016 a top priority. Had they opted to pick up Larkin's option or extend Shumpert, the transaction would have eaten into their cap space in the summer of 2015 and, in Shumpert's case, 2016.
With the contracts for Amar'e Stoudemire and Andrea Bargnani set to expire, the Knicks are expected to have enough cap space to sign a max-salary player this summer.
Marc Gasol, Greg Monroe and Rajon Rondo, among others, are expected to test the market in the 2015 offseason.
Depending on how the Knicks spend their money this summer and how the new TV contract impacts the salary cap, New York might be able to chase max free agents in summer 2016, when Kevin Durant is expected to be available.
Question: Do you think the Knicks should have picked up Shane Larkin's option? What about extending Iman Shumpert? Do you think it's wise that they are risking losing Larkin and Shumpert in the hope of landing a potential free agent?
You can follow Ian Begley on Twitter.