Austin Reaves Discussion: How Much Is He Worth?

Night and day situation.

Bron and Klutch lost their footing in the front office by that point. Lakers have been expecting him to retire for the past 4 years but Bron keeps kicking father time's a**. If Bron was 27 years old and he or Rich Paul told Rob to jump, he'd ask how high (and will Rambis catch me? ).

Secondly, we're still in the trying to impress and keep our new star. Long way to go there.

Third, Rob always wants someone to share the blame pie if it goes belly up.

Fourth, Rob ain't calling all the shots anymore. He's got a new boss who's going to be more involved who talks to Luka on the regular.

If you don't think the team will give Luka any and everything he asks for that they can, then you're kidding yourself. And for the record, that's exactly what any team with a top 3-4 player in their prime will do.

 

still not sure why people are thinking 30m is a remotely possible figure. setting yourself up for disappointment, and, unfortunately for me, years worth of b****ing.

if we even open with a 30m offer, i think we run the risk of him pulling a nash and taking a higher but still below market offer from chicago or bkn without even giving us the chance to counter.

the more i read the discourse, the more this reminds me of that (disastrous) nash situation. "you can't win with nash and dirk", "sure, he's an allstar-level player, but he's a bad defender, so you're better off with role players", "nash gets picked on defensively in the playoffs", "nash can't handle the physicality of playoff defense". i mean, same exact stuff. read a (nba) history book.

ask mark cuban if he wants that one back.

you don't overthink this. you offer reaves the max at the opening of free agency, but present him with some scenarios where you ask him "hey, if you would be willing to take $X, we might be able to land X player. if you take a declining contract, it might help us avoid some apron stuff in the future. but if you just want max, that's also fine!"

 

Meh..Reaves aint going to no Chicago or Brooklyn, for a few more million. If they offered him 30, he'd counter with 35. and then settle for 32.

I think this, " Austin can just take his ball elsewhere" stuff, is amusing..not realistic.

 

i think misunderstanding unrestricted free agency is amusing.

"see, we'll just trade reaves to sacramento for..." no. reaves isn't under contract. you'll trade him nowhere he doesn't want to go. this isn't kawhi trade demand stuff, where you can test the player's resolve. there is no contract to trade.

there are at least two teams with the ability to just sign him to his max. there are probably several others who can either create the flexibility or present a scenario to his agent that involves him getting max money to play there (requiring us to participate in a S&T). what's funny is that the latter suggestion will everyone here claiming they then need US to agree. well, the reverse is true for everyone's reaves trade scenarios.

 

You are overestimating the potential "bidding war" for Austin Reaves IMO. Seriously Who? Why? Chicago already has Josh Giddy locked up, at 25M for the next 3 seasons, why should they pay Reaves 40M?

If Brooklyn wanted some star power, they could absorb the bulk of JA's salary in a trade. It's not like it's a slam dunk, that either of those teams are lining up, to throw all this money at him.

Then the obvious thing is..maybe Austin wants to play with Luka. So you are making assumptions, about how "offended" he might be in the first place.

 

because they're totally different players who play different positions, and having two really good young guards is better than having one? because reaves is far and away the best FA on the market, and you might be left with space-rental options otherwise?

you think using space for ja makes more sense than for reaves? if so, btw, we could totally let reaves walk and just absorb ja. memphis would pack his bags for him. terrible idea, of course. but bkn also knows this.

he's not taking a 25% discount on his only big nba contract just so he can play with luka. he's already played with lebron and luka. the experience has been had.

 

Again Why does Chicago need Reaves specifically? Who said shooting guard was thier number 1 priority? They can trade for AD if they wanted, what puts Austin to the head of their list? Their new GM is talking about defensive minded guys..is that Reaves?

I don't know what Brooklyn wants..what makes you think it's Reaves? To be thier 1st or 2nd option? He hasn't been that here, Morant sells tickets, he's still young too. We don't know who these teams are targeting. All we know is they have enough money to pay Austin; that doesn't mean he's thier top target.

Now you presume to speak for Austin like you are his agent? Maybe he likes LA, Luka, the Lakers, a chance to be in the playoffs every year on a team aspiring to compete for chips. That might be worth a hypothetical 25% discount. It's hypothetical because you don't know what someone else is willing to pay him.

My impression of Austin since we got him, doesn't jive with the guy, that's going to throw a fit and bounce, because he felt disrespected by a less than max offer.

 

Some people are acting like Luka and Austin are tied at the hip after a couple months. Luka just got done playing with Kyrie, one of his closest friends in the league, and even that didn't stop Dallas from making massive organizational moves around him over the years.

If anything, ownership is going to be even MORE obsessed with maximizing the Luka window long term. If they think Austin is part of that, great. If they think he's the best trade chip to improve the roster materially, he's gone.

Honestly, this is basically how the Dodgers operate too. They care about stars, chemistry, relationships, all of that... until there's a bigger move that gives them a better chance to win a title. Then sentiment goes out the window fast. That's just how smart organizations operate when the expectation is championships, not sentimental roster building.

Nobody outside of Luka himself is untouchable if this team keeps getting bounced in the 2nd round.

 

did you ask why a team would want reaves at 41m per over AD at 60?

and they may not prioritize him. but they could.

i'm really not sure the point you're making. none of this means you have leverage, nor would it necessarily be wise to use it.

i notice it's crickets in the real situation in which we have leverage, btw--lebron can't get an offer over full mle from any winning team. why not set a firm ceiling on his offer at 16m per? i know why! same reason here.

when's the time that a player in his prime gave up 25% of what would be their biggest contract?

everyone thought nash was a nice guy who loved dallas and dirk.

 

And how many championships did Nash win I forget?

 

If Rob was truthful about getting younger more athletic Luka centric players he would trade AR and accomplish that but as JSM said this is about keeping Luka happy above all else.

 

I get both. I do agree with abeer approach, your first offer is something around the max and then you ask him if he would consider less if it would help us get player X. I wouldn't low ball him

But I also don't think he would get that offended by it to the point of going to those teams and potentially lose playoff experience during his prime.

I've seen plenty of interviews with him and he is really not your normal NBA millionaire. He really just likes to play basketball and golf (literally!!!), he doesn't fancy a luxury life nor seeks it. This while growing his NBA career in LA which could have changed him at some point after growing up in a small town in Texas.

At 30 or 40 mil he will get at least 150 million guaranteed contract to continue to play for the Lakers the next 5 years during his prime and alongside Luka. I'm pretty sure that's all he wants.
Now, again, this doesn't mean you lowball him and I don't think we do. He's a great character and the Lakers and Rob value that a lot. I think it's another reason we might bring back Rui, Rob and Jeannie like him and I think that matters to them. Jeannie protects a lot the "Laker identity" and both are straight up guys who won't damage the Lakers name in any on or off the court drama.

Back to AR, the challenge is that whatever we pay him doesn't impact this offseason because we will sign him last because his cap hold is 20.9 million, so lower than his future contract. Meaning any discount he gives us will only matter the following years, specifically next year when we potentially re-up some of the guys we sign now. So actually AR may be in tandem with Bron's contract where we shave for example 5 million off of AR so we can give 5 million more to Bron next season while staying below the apron. Something along those lines.

If it's not for that, there's no point of saving on AR's contract other than "potential flexibility" and "guaranteed owner's pocket savings" which aren't that good selling points for him to accept a lower amount

 

don't care? i'm not a ricky bobby basketball fan. nash won two mvps and anchored one of the league's best teams for years while the mavs used that money on erick dampier and didn't win a ring until they dug out from this mistake.

 

Some people think they know what Luka needs more than Luka himself knows.

Some people don't seem to understand how Austin is a Luka centric player the way 2024 Kyrie was. You need that kind of player next to Luka even if some of it looks redundant. That's part of the point, for when Luka gets doubled, and to relieve pressure and help him get doubled less. The successful Luka builds have had this. Getting the right other players around Luka + Austin is far more important than trying to upgrade Austin. And trying to trade Austin for other players would leave us with an even harder hole to fill.

 

lol, maybe if someone else says it people will agree?

 

I don't know what Luka needs..Dallas got dog stomped in the Finals. I was absolutely not afraid one bit, of facing Dallas in the playoffs, before the big trade either. I didn't think they were all that special last season, they had thier turn, and made a little run in the previous campaign.This budding Western Conference Dynasty crap ,was absolutely not some kind of given.

So from my perspective, this Dallas "blueprint" doesn't mean jack s***. They didn't get the job done in the Finals .

7 consecutive teams have won the Western Conference, in the last 7 seasons. It very well may be 8th this season.

So this " Luka build" centered around what Dallas did, doesn't necessarily hype me up at all.

Back to Austin..Hell yeah Chicago would most likely prefer AD. He's the friggin better player, home grown, and seems to be exactly what the new GM wants.

 

That would depend on who you trade for wouldn’t it

 

So this isn’t about championships it’s about feel good stories? Just want to be clear?

 

So first your comp was the senior citizen version of Bron (albeit still great) and then you pivot to comparing this to the Dallas situation with a front office so inept they they lost their jobs over the outcome.

Completely different sport that operates completely different from the NBA. 26/28 man roster is pretty different from a 15 man roster too.

Want to compare it to an inept NFL team next? Browns?