Austin Reaves Discussion: How Much Is He Worth?

Seeing this and then finding this in an SB Nation Article:

"Reaves’ max contract would be five years, $239 million if he re-signs with the Los Angeles Lakers. If he signs with another team, the most he could get is four years, $178 million."

Makes it feel like we did get a discount from him. I mean we signed him for just a little above what ANY OTHER TEAM could have offered. I guess it's how you look at it, but also the fact that we can essentially sign him last this off-season and go from there is nice. I am guessing for LeBron it would likely be the same situation of signing him last, but still......

Sure, he got signed for a lot, but it was less than what he could have had. And we still believe that he can live up to it, maybe not perfectly but still....and if not, but he's still valuable, then he at least can be traded for good talent too.

Pros and Cons. I feel like more Pros than Cons, but still.....you have to acknowledge it all as is.

 

They gave him $7 million more than what another team could steal him for.
In no way is this an over pay.

 

Lol, okay buddy. Everyone in the NBA subreddit and Lakers subreddit are upset about this overpay but leave it to ya'll in your bubble thinking it's a fantastic deal when it isn't.

Reaves was never going to leave if he got the max from the Lakers so how was this in any way a negotiation? They couldn't negotiate a slightly better deal to retain Reaves?

Which team was offering Reaves the max? After Nets got Randle, pretty sure they were out of the race. So I'm curious as to who the Lakers were bidding against.

 

I mean, a couple of trades and/or signings and I bet he can look amazing with Luka and LeBron and whoever else.

Time will tell.

 

Reaves always had the leverage here IMO as letting him walk would have been catastrophic. Not surprised he got paid.

 

Yeah. All about building around him. If the current guys can't build around him and Luka get a front office who can.

 

Whatever my guy. I have my own opinion and all you crying babies can just b**** and moan all season long.
Enjoy!

 

What would have been perfect to you? 20 Mil a year? Like, at this rate, if you don't believe in his future...there's no amount of money that he could have signed for some people to be happy.

We don't know what his future holds. You say he has to break out. He REALLY could. Has there been any real indication that he hasn't? Like, with him injured and LeBron running the show, we beat the Rockets, and at least didn't get murdered each game in the Sweep to OKC. When most expected us to lose both series in fire and brimstone. Like, the dude can play.

Let's wait and see how the rest of the off-season goes before we assume that we are screwed already. There is so much more time.

 

You scream it's a great deal.

Reaves was never going to leave if he got the max.

How was this a great deal for the Lakers? Everyone was hoping the Lakers could get him at a discount. So no discount = great deal?

You're not making any sense but yes, you do have your own opinion so congratulations for that?

 

I mean.....maybe this is the real off-season test that Mark Walter is giving everyone. "Do it right or get fired in 2 seconds." If not this year, people could easily be hired and fix a lot next off-season too.

Someone has to be applying pressure somewhere.

 

Idk what you're babbling about.

Firstly, who was the Lakers bidding against for Reaves? Nets were 'interested' but once they got Randle, getting Reaves was no longer possible at the max.

So who else was there? Did the Lakers really have to give Reaves the max if no other team was willing to do so?

$20 million? No, but $35-38 million would have been way better than $46 million per year.

Reaves hasn't been great in the last few playoffs and Lakers were 3-0 vs Rockets before Reaves even came back so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove here. Lakers could have won without Reaves versus Rockets but they wanted to give him a few games to settle in before playing versus OKC.

We don't need to wait and see anything... The Lakers can still build out the roster without overpaying Reaves.

 

"Reaves’ max contract would be five years, $239 million if he re-signs with the Los Angeles Lakers. If he signs with another team, the most he could get is four years, $178 million."

Is my brain not mathing? does 239 million=185 million now?

Does 47.8 a year=46.25 a year?

Also, based on the tweets, he isn't getting an even 46.25 a year. It's like 40 and then it goes up from there. So......that sounds like a discount to me.

 

Max contract is what the Lakers could offer Reaves on an annual basis, which this is exactly it. Five years would have added another year but my guess is Reaves agent preferred the four years with a player option because if Reaves does play well, he can opt out and sign a long term five year contract right before he turns 31, which would be his last chance to get a significant contract.

IDK what you're honestly babbling about. Did the Lakers HAVE to give Reaves the max? Let's see which other teams were bidding for Reaves. If no other teams were, then this was obviously an unnecessary overpay.

 

Have to see how it plays out. Obviously him just walking and signing somewhere else would have been a disaster. It's possible that Austin keeps improving a little bit over the next couple of years and even this is a value contract. It's also possible that this becomes a negative value contract before its over. It's up to Austin now, he's no longer just a feel-good story. This is a vote of confidence from that front office that he is a, if not the, core piece of the franchise next to Luka going forward. He's got to live up to it and deal with the scrutiny that comes with it.

 

Go support the Flippers if you are so upset.
Man, peeps mental stability relies on what another man gets paid.
How sad.

 

Okay, cool. So you wanted to give him $35 to $38....that's fair. That was what I was curious about.

So, they sign him this year and I think the tweet said $40 or $41. So he's making an extra $5 to $8 than what you think was fair to him.

I am not seeing the real issue here as to where things are screwed up, in my opinion. Not that you are wrong, but like....what does $5 to $8 mil do for us signing wise? Is that the different of Duren or Dort or Kessler coming to us vs not? Also, sure...maybe Detroit wasn't going to give him the max and you're right that the Nets were out once they got Randle. I will not argue that.

But still, you have to show the interest and loyalty. You are going to get some people to take a GREAT deal for little and sometimes you bite a bullet like this. It is a lot, but like the information is saying, he will be the last one signed to the team this off-season. Probably with LeBron too. So we can still sign whoever we want, and then them and then be over the Apron and go from there.

The dude signed and some are acting like he wasn't playing like a new All-Star this season....with Luka. Plus, if Luka is telling the Office "Do it right or I am out" and he said all season long that he LOVES playing with Austin and LeBron, AUSTIN ESPECIALLY.....I don't understand how you don't get that locked down first.

Sometimes you're put at a disadvantage and have to work with it. I think they did better than we could have expected, under these circumstances.

Basically...this just boils down to...I don't see this as a problem as you do. Which is fine, but I am sorry that I don't see it like you do.

 

I feel like I am trying to explain this straight, but I guess not. So....my bad.

 

Buddy, the problem isn't the dollar amount as much as it is trying to trade Reaves if it doesn't work out.

You're not going to have many teams clamoring to pay Reaves $100 million in his last two seasons if the Lakers are trying to trade him. That effectively means that if the Lakers want to trade Reaves, they have to give up assets.

Now, if he was getting paid $85 million his last two seasons, that's a lot more manageable. You might be able to get fair value or trade him without giving up any draft compensation or assets.

You have yet to explain how, if there were no bidders for Reaves at the max, how this is a great deal for the Lakers. You're only saying, "Who knows, he might be amazing!" or "I don't think it's an overpay!"

An overpay isn't your opinion. It's what the market dictates. Did the market value Reaves as a max player? I don't think so. So why pay him the max? Unless the Lakers had notifications from others around the league offering Reaves the max, there was absolutely no reason to do it.

It doesn't affect the Lakers if they don't really plan on moving him other than a money issue which they can afford. But let's see where this sentiment lies when they aren't winning and the obvious move is Reaves doesn't fit with Luka and has to be traded. You don't have to see it the way I do. The overwhelming majority of Lakers fans believe it is an overpay from other platforms. You're not in the majority of opinions here other than on this forum?

 

What a low IQ comment. Very telling, honestly.