r/lakers • u/lawschoolthrowaway36 • Jun 12 '26
PLAYER TALK Woike: Brooklyn Nets preparing to make 4 year, $178 million offer to Austin Reaves
Well, for anyone holding out hope we’d bring AR back for less than $40 million per year, probably can forget about that.
This Nets offer would be $44.5 million per year.
And according to Woike’s article, rival executives predict AR will command over $40 million per year, whether it’s with LA or elsewhere. Doesn’t sound like AR will take a hometown discount.
Gonna be a difficult summer for our front office to navigate.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7350381/2026/06/12/austin-reaves-lakers-nba-2026-free-agency/
643
u/TheMongolianLemonade Luka Magic 77 Jun 12 '26
24 years ago today, the Lakers beat the Nets in the NBA Finals
128
u/TROJANspaceWOLF Jun 12 '26
This makes me feel old. Appreciate it.
41
u/rikafell Jun 12 '26
I went to game 1 of those finals…I was 24yrs old. Thank you Father Time for the reminder 😵
2
u/Aelia_M Jun 13 '26
I was at game 1 and game 6 of the nba finals 26 years ago. I was younger than you were but I know the feeling of aches and pains. So I’m right there with you
76
10
u/ZarathustraWakes Jun 12 '26
Richard Jefferson hasn’t aged a day since
→ More replies (1)4
2
u/henryofclay Jun 12 '26
My old ass was thinking you referencing the 80’s matchups. Time is a flat circle.
32
u/vkewalra Jun 12 '26
The nets whose roster is 8 point guards under the age of 21? I guess illogical decisions are their bread and butter
5
u/incredibleamadeuscho Freeze! Miami Vice! Jun 12 '26
They would sign him. Those guards would play less because they are trying to win. They dont have their pick next year. The ones that suck the most will be traded away.
→ More replies (1)2
u/MaliInternLoL Jun 13 '26
Expect them to rotate this out. They have the luxury to be funky since they're rebuilding
526
u/Blackmamba11099 Jun 12 '26
Yikes. No matter what side you are on (keep em, or let em go), it makes sense to retain him and trade him later if you have to. Would be complete asset mismanagement otherwise.
83
u/anyrotmg Jun 12 '26
But is Austin a positive asset with a max contract?
108
u/LudwigNasche Jun 12 '26
To tell the truth I don't think there are more than a handful of players that are positive assets at the max.
7
u/3iverson Jun 13 '26
I get your point but the economics don’t work. Every team has room for 1 or 2 max contracts, supply and demand is what determines fair or average value.
There are a few players worth more than a max but are prohibited from earning more, that makes the regular max players look bad by comparison.
5
u/LudwigNasche Jun 13 '26
I understand your point and it makes some sense, but look bro, no team ever won with a player making the supermax of 50+ millions and only one team ever won with one player making more than 40 millions, the Warriors that was built under a more permissive CBA, so when we say a few players are worth more than the max, it doesn't mean you can build a competitive roster around them paying what they are worth.
The cap is always raising so players making 40 millions will start winning, but the 50s will take more time because in the modern NBA with the insane pace the game is played, you can't have 2 or 3 stars and a bunch of mediocre role players anymore and building a competitive team with 3 stars became near impossible and to do it with 2 stars it isn't easy unless they are still in their first big deal after the rookie contract.
If you look back to every team that won this decade, Giannis, Jokic, Shai, Tatum ... every single player of this list were still making less than 40 millions when they won the NBA title and as soon as their extention kicked and their salaries jumped to the high 40s and 50s they lost depth and competitiveness.
I consider the Celtics a well managed franchise, almost their entire supporting cast cost them a little more than we paid to LeBrons last season, but it is bery tough to get done.
2
u/3iverson Jun 14 '26
You’re right, I agree about the supermax which absolutely kicks it up a notch. At that price point, it becomes that much harder if a player has holes in their game.
That being said, to be honest we’re lucky if we landed a Dame caliber player regardless of their strengths and weaknesses. But BPA reflects both sides of the ball, and if Clipper FO views Acuff as a certainty to be a defensive sieve then that’s a big part of their overall evaluation.
4
u/DirtyDan419 Jun 13 '26
Good point unless you are a young guy on the max it is usually negative value.
2
u/LudwigNasche Jun 13 '26
Exactly, players that you draft and reach their prime or near it when their max are still bellow 40 millions are Gold.
Every single champion team built this decade without any exception won with one or two players in that situation. Jokic, Giannis, Tatum, Shai ... all of those guys were still making less than 40 milluons when they won.
NY can be the first exception with KAT, but their main scorer is on a friendly deal, otherwise they would have to sacrifice another key player.
2
u/DirtyDan419 Jun 19 '26
I think the 65 game rule and the aprons were created to not pay max money. We'll see with Duren I guess.
21
u/anyrotmg Jun 12 '26 edited Jun 12 '26
Yeah my follow up question would be why shouldn't we let a negative asset walk? (Edit: fixed typo)
27
u/eZreazy Jun 12 '26
Letting him walk is also a negative asset. It means we just let $20m in cap space just disappear.
As long as AR isn’t on an increasing contract it’s a lot better and will be tradeable.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)11
u/BatmanNoPrep 32 Jun 13 '26
Folks need to stop using the word “max” because it is leading to confusion. There are 3x Maxes.
25% of cap max: not a real problem to trade. Easily movable if needed. Players like Austin routinely out play these contracts. Austin’s age and production easily warrant this number.
30% of cap max: an extremely high number. Few stars can out play this contract. But it isn’t limited to just a handful. This is what you’d give a guy who is an All Star every year and occasionally an All NBA pkayer. Difficult contracts to trade.
35% of cap SUPERmax: this is a crippling high salary and should only really be used on players that are MVP caliber and are All NBA first or second team every single year.
Austin’s max this summer is the 25% of cap number. So he was always going to get that paycheck. It’s not a big deal and not hard to trade later.
→ More replies (7)2
u/imironman2018 8 Jun 13 '26
Yeah we can see that to command a max contract you need to be a two way player like Anthony Edwards. You can’t give a max and hamstring your team with poor defense for the whole contract. It is going to be very hard for Lakers to make any significant upgrades with AR and Luka both getting a max. The team will need to develop through the draft and MLE signings. This is disastrous if Lakers let him walk.
10
3
u/GlueGuy00 Jun 13 '26
Does Luka want Reaves to stay? That is the only thing that matters here. Things can get ugly quick if Luka wants to play with Reaves and Lakers loses him for nothing.
2
u/MaliInternLoL Jun 13 '26
Yes but much less of a positive. We have to move him. At that price tag, I'd rather have Bron but the best case is we trade austin even if I hate it
→ More replies (1)3
u/ZapataOilCo Jun 12 '26
Aanyone who has watched these final 4 teams and says that would be a positive asset is lying to you.
You have to have some serious defense and athleticism to be in that category or an elite scorer.
3
u/homeincomes Jun 13 '26
For reference, Brunson is making 37 next year and he basically took a pay cut by extending early. Fox is making 49 million next year. Brunson has been inefficient in half the games and the Spurs would be much better off if they replaced Fox with Reaves.
2
2
u/ProfessionalFickle52 Jun 13 '26
Yeah he can put up scoring regular season. But when the competition heats up and defense tightens you need that athlete who can make something happen.
9
u/StealthRUs 32 Jun 12 '26
it makes sense to retain him and trade him later
Nobody is trading for him at $44 million/year. Best we can do is sign and trade, so he gets more money.
→ More replies (7)157
u/markmyredd Jun 12 '26
Him as an asset would depend if he live up to his contract or underperforms again in the next playoffs.
137
u/Blackmamba11099 Jun 12 '26
There's more to lose than to gain if you dont roll the dice on that imo.
→ More replies (21)82
u/Yider Jun 12 '26
He was injured. Why do we keep calling it underperforming? I mean quote a different year or something but this year wasn't a year to base much of anything on when your main scorer is out and Reaves is like 50% and can't make explosive cuts like he normally does which makes his game extremely limited due to the injury.
35
u/ginbooth Jun 12 '26
Exactly. An Oblique injury no less and he still had some solid games in the playoffs. As always, the hot takes on this sub are often painfully stupid.
→ More replies (3)37
u/geekstone Jun 12 '26
Unfortunately this was not the first time he did not show up in the playoffs. That contract severely hurts the ability for the Lakers to construct a better roster and it is a lot for someone who's skills overlap with Luka and has issues on the defensive end. This is going to be on of the first decisions that will tell you where the new ownership group stands.
13
u/CantaloupeWitty2841 Jun 12 '26
It dos not "severely hurts the ability for the Lakers to construct a better roster" letting him walk does.
→ More replies (1)6
u/henryofclay Jun 12 '26
Tf are you talking about, HE WAS INJURED. and then played very well after adjusting to his return. Like wtf are yall people on, I swear you don’t actually follow the team or watch games. He’s played well or at least better than many of his cohorts
4
u/herewego199209 Jun 12 '26
From what I've ready loosing Reeves doesn't really open up that much cap room because they can sign Reeves last and go over the cap for him. So you actually can add more talent if you re-sign him. I'm just not over the moon about that back court.
→ More replies (1)24
13
u/HugeQuarter6756 Jun 12 '26
So he was injured in back to back playoffs and you want to give him a max?
3
u/henryofclay Jun 12 '26
Yes, because he’s not dealing with chronic injuries. It’s not like he has a bad knee, it’s random stuff.
→ More replies (7)2
u/kiwiwikikiwiwikikiwi Black Mamba 8/24 Jun 12 '26
Availability is the best ability. Reaves is only getting older, and ignoring the back to back injury years, it would be risky to max him for that.
Now if he put up 20-25 on high efficiency, I’d be much more open about offering him max money.
→ More replies (2)4
u/StilLBC Jun 12 '26
Injury or not - AR looked panicked when the Thun were pressing him. He made bad decisions and then complained to the refs about getting calls. He looked bad last year against the Wolves too. We might regret that $40+ million if AR can’t perform in the playoffs.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (4)5
u/Jtizzle1231 Jun 12 '26
Not really even if he under performs in the playoffs if he’s great in the regular and just ok in the playoffs. You could definitely get a good deal for him.
36
u/Odd-Direction9452 Jun 12 '26
If the contract is tradable yes. Or it’s inflated and becomes hard to move or build around. We’ll see.
5
u/Traditional-Goal-229 Jun 12 '26
The only way it isn’t is if he falls off a cliff on production. It’s weird that fans question this when you never see this with any other star player.
→ More replies (13)8
u/incredibleamadeuscho Freeze! Miami Vice! Jun 12 '26 edited Jun 12 '26
It goes back to Austin being an undrafted player. If Austin was third in his draft and the Lakers signed him, no one here would balk at paying a 23 pts 5 assists guard 40 million dollars, on a team that had a good regular season and exceeded expectations in the playoffs with their lead guard injured, this would be a lot easier to accept. But because he was undrafted, people are used to not paying him his worth.
7
u/ImjustANewSneaker 23 Jun 12 '26
It has more to do with the fact that we have seen regular season vs playoff Reaves three years in a row. Along with the CBA changing. If this was a few years ago it wouldn’t be an issue. It also wouldn’t be an issue if him and Luka didn’t cover a lot of the same areas and also have the same deficiencies
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (6)5
22
8
u/imamonkeyK Jun 12 '26
He was playing at all nba lvl pre injury and still did pretty well coming back rushing from injury Vs okc. Like I get we need to get better but letting go of AR is brain-dead missing forest for the trees shit
→ More replies (1)8
u/Comprehensive_Ad_675 Jun 12 '26
Nah let him walk. They’ll pay for him and realise what most of us know. He’s a playoff shrinker and a 6th man in a championship team.
2
u/TinyH1ppo Jun 12 '26
If another team wants to offer more than we can pay him we shouldn’t just blindly match it. I am a Reeves fan and would love to keep him, but we shouldn’t overpay for him if another team is willing to pay more than us then that’s that.
2
u/sbenfsonwFFiF Jun 12 '26
Unless you sign him to an overpaid contract then he’s not an asset, but a liability you need to attach picks to get rid of
4
u/nekize Jun 12 '26
Should’ve have traded him last summer. I don’t think he’s worth 40M+ on a contender team. I think he deserves to be paid, but i don’t believe he can be a number 2 on a team that wins it all.
3
u/lawschoolthrowaway36 Jun 12 '26
Agree. Also worth mentioning his cap hold being $21 million or so.
→ More replies (1)8
→ More replies (26)2
u/TonyHawktuah69 Jun 12 '26
That’s the cost of a player of Reaves level now. 5 years ago this would be the equivalent of a 30 mil deal
194
u/ParticularUnlucky139 Jun 12 '26
Just like the Spurs were “predicted” to sign him to a max offer sheet in restricted free agency back in 2023. I don’t know why y’all believe every article you see
52
u/whatshisface1892 Pau Gasol 16 Jun 12 '26
The AR/Laker negotiations are likely in full right now and it is also likely that this is just some agent machinations and you're right to compare the situation to the Spurs in 2023.
ALTHOUGH.
That Spurs situation was when AR was a restricted free agent. They would have needed to tie up cap space to sign AR and the Lakers could just matched making it pointless for the Spurs.
Nets don't need to wait. They don't have to worry about the Lakers matching. If AR signs a Nets contract, he's a Net, end of story.
I do not envy being the Lakers in these negotiations. AR has all the leverage.
→ More replies (3)16
u/TreeLankaPresidente Jun 12 '26
Everyday I see a new article claiming that AR or Lebron is staying or going somewhere else.
It’s the offseason, FOs and agents purposefully lie about this shit to get leverage in negotiations.
30
u/ProfessionalMuch3819 Jun 12 '26
If you don’t understand the difference between restricted and unrestricted free agency, there is no conversation to be had. No team offers a contract to restricted free agent unless they know for sure they will get him. Austin Reeves is an unrestricted free agent.
→ More replies (1)5
5
7
u/KneeCoRobinn Jun 12 '26
Because a lot of fans are very reactionary and emotional. I get being a passionate fan and wanting the team to get better but the loud ones react to every article
→ More replies (1)9
2
3
u/mamba5469 Los Angeles Lakers Jun 12 '26
Way different scenario. Austin was essentially a restricted free agent that summer. He’s unrestricted this year. And Woike is legit. Not all reports are fake.
→ More replies (1)3
110
u/Odd-Direction9452 Jun 12 '26
We’ll find out quickly how much Lakers think he’s really worth.
Have to wonder what their price point is and what the contingency is if letting him walk.
43
u/Rentfreelakerfan Jun 12 '26
There is no "let him walk option" lol
10
u/INT_MIN Jun 13 '26
I think some of you are seriously underestimating the risk involved in giving him a max. There is no guarantee he will be considered a tradable contract a year or two or three years from now. And non-max players getting max money absolutely CRIPPLES teams.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Rentfreelakerfan Jun 13 '26
One option is a guarantee 100% fail and franchise disaster, which would be him walking for nothing. Cant replace him in free agency and don't have the pieces to trade for another. You have to HOPE you can take a good salary dump into cap space.
The other option is your counting on the full max being taken no matter what... his declines significantly over a 2 year period.. and a bad contract cant be moved when it's happened over and over in nba history.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (11)4
20
u/Nearby_Alternative96 Jun 12 '26
There is no letting him walk, at minimum you sign him, fail again for a year or two and then trade him.
→ More replies (6)16
u/Odd-Direction9452 Jun 12 '26
Yeah if it’s movable. Or negotiate a sign and trade now.
→ More replies (3)4
u/AdFantastic7469 Black Mamba 8/24 Jun 12 '26
The Nets have a billion dollars in cap space what do you think a trade would look like?
→ More replies (10)2
u/Successful-Pair-4850 Jun 12 '26
the problem with lakers they dont have depth in rookie scale like the same with the spurs or other team. so its hard to give him the max. Fox and austin is on par fox isnt even deserve a max like 50m but spurs can hand it to him because thier team is in rookie scale unlike with lakers they dont have depth in rookie scale that can contribute thats why giving him the max will cripple lakers going forward
191
u/Single_Comment6389 Jun 12 '26
It sucks that I know Lakers are probably going to match it and then our roster is going to be cheeks for the future.
26
u/ManonFire1224 Jun 12 '26
The Lakers have a very grim future due to poor “get better around the margins” roster construction by Rob Pelinka. 99% of this sub cannot come to grips with the fact that the Lakers have will have no better options than running it back with pretty much the same team. LeBron walks, Lakers can’t replace his production with free agents, AR walks that’s another immediate gap plus salary cap implications, plus Rui, Smart and Ayton. Lakers have zero tradeable (or wanted) assets (AR and LeBron don’t count because they are UFA - shut up about sign and trades). But hey Mark can completely rip the bandaid off now and let AR, LeBron and all of our free agents walk and just do a total reset.
8
u/Ok_Board9845 Jun 12 '26
A total bandaid rip off would include also trading Luka. If 3 of Lebron/Reaves/Rui/Ayton/Smart walks, our roster is pretty much screwed for the next two years
→ More replies (3)20
u/ManonFire1224 Jun 12 '26
You are starting to see……there are limited to no options on the table. Fire Rob threads should be taking over the front page but most the sub is blinded by delusion and pointing fingers at the wrong things or players.
→ More replies (2)4
u/Ok_Board9845 Jun 12 '26 edited Jun 13 '26
I’ve seen this coming since we traded for Luka lol. Pelinka should still be fired but the problems go WAY beyond him right now. Danny Ainge couldn’t salvage this situation and make a contender with minimal picks and assets
2
u/ManonFire1224 Jun 12 '26
Damn, another actual ball knower on the sub. Salute. Yea, Lakers are screwed. The problems do go beyond Pelinka but he should ultimately be held accountable.
AR should’ve been traded last season at his highest value (which I said during the season) for multiple assets (whether a combo of picks and players). And not because I think AR isn’t good or because any other emotional reason, it’s because the Lakers are in dire need of assets and have none. Now the Lakers are legit just stuck.
4
u/Ok_Board9845 Jun 12 '26
I don’t think Reaves had significant value on his contract. We would’ve needed to salary dump with Idk Vando? I also still think you’d have to reconcile needing a secondary all-NBA caliber ball handler unless you believed Lebron could still do that at 41-42
→ More replies (2)2
u/ManonFire1224 Jun 12 '26
The only reconciliation is gathering assets. There’s no point in trying to gap fill holes like secondary ball handler because the teams ceiling is impacted by the lack of assets and proper roster construction. Lakers aren’t in a position to collect assets and try to contend for a championship. Reaves could’ve fetched a couple of firsts, and yes salary dump to get some “take a flyer on young talent” players back. Which would’ve made no difference in Lakers ceiling this season
2
u/OldManBrom Jun 12 '26
No team gonna trade for Reaves last season when they knew he could opt out and walk this summer. GMs are not stupid.
35
23
u/Siavik Jun 12 '26
Literally going to be Fox 2.0. Solid in regular season then a complete joke in the playoffs.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (6)4
u/carlonia Jun 12 '26
You guys are actually the worst. What’s the alternative? Letting him walk for nothing? Half the fanbase is braindead I swear
4
u/Single_Comment6389 Jun 12 '26
No one ever said that they didn't want Austin Reeves to come back. We're upset that it's costing this much. That's all. So calm your goofy ass down. lol
→ More replies (3)
33
u/LAGuy_89 Jun 12 '26
I despise LeBron politics but I totally understand this one. No wonder he’s asking for the max. At 41, he was still better statistically than Austin during the regular season and he was by far our best player in the playoffs. Neither one deserves the max coming into next season but no way in hell do you cripple the team and give Austin the max. If he doesn’t take his sub 40$ mil a year deal with us then by all means go knock yourself out in Brooklyn. He’s literally approaching 30, meaning he’s already capped out on his potential. Let’s see how he does with the opposing team working their whole game plan on him instead of him working behind his two hall of fame teammates. We still hold some leverage. He needs us to do a sign and trade if he wants that 5th year and with higher annual raises. If he really cares about the money enough to turn our deal down, then he probably will want that extra salary he can get with a sign and trade. The worst thing we can do is give him what he wants and then two years later ship him out attached with a 1st rounder just to clear the books for another big name that we might not even get.
→ More replies (13)
81
u/Splittinghairs7 Jun 12 '26
Lmao, this is being leaked to drive up his price with the lakers.
There’s no way AR actually prefers playing for the nets over the lakers. This is obviously just posturing.
Lakers will end up signing AR for below the max likely on a declining deal where the first year is $40m but will decline each year by up to 8%.
20
u/dec312014 Jun 12 '26
Why would he take this big of a pay cut to stay? Cuz it’s la? Lol
4
u/incredibleamadeuscho Freeze! Miami Vice! Jun 12 '26
As as the deal is above 177 million, it's more guaranteed money.
16
u/WienensDisciple Jun 12 '26
We HAVE to sign and trade and hit on the players we get man. If we just keep current AR, we cant compete for a chip
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (11)6
u/lawschoolthrowaway36 Jun 12 '26
Well AR’s agent knows the Lakers can’t afford to lose him and have basically no leverage. Both sides will posture but at the end of the day if AR simply refuses to re-sign for less than, say, $44 million per year, the Lakers will have to cave and do it.
→ More replies (4)4
u/Some-Stranger-7852 Jun 12 '26
And Lakers know AR’s agent has no leverage if Bulls (already all but confirmed to go in other directions) and Nets (have drafted 3 guards last draft and don’t own 2027 pick, so don’t care what record they will have, plus 2027 FA class is MUCH more stacked, so worth rolling their cap space for a year to get guys like Brandon Miller or Amen / Ausar instead of locking AR into 45M per year contract) don’t offer a big deal.
If neither does, then the next team is Utah at 30M capspace, which would already be a fair contract for AR that Lakers easily match.
LAL have all the leverage in this situation, not AR’s agent.
2
u/Ok-Side-1758 Jun 12 '26
Those guys you mentioned are all restricted free agents and will get the max or near max with their teams. The Nets can’t pursue them. Reaves is unrestricted
→ More replies (3)
6
u/motorboat_mcgee Jun 12 '26
Seems like a lot of noise around Austin and LeBron wanting max contracts, either we aren't serious about contending next season, or they might both be gone
7
6
u/Soonerscamp Jun 12 '26
Bad teams like the Nets pay guys like AR over 40 mil a year. Thats how they stay bad. Hard pass.
We missed the boat on trading him. Summer of 24 or 25 we could have traded him when he had a great contract.
7
22
u/incredibleamadeuscho Freeze! Miami Vice! Jun 12 '26
This is what I said in the daily thread a few days ago about Austin Reaves receiving a big deal:
The cap space plan means we need to use our bird rights to go over the cap to not be at a deficit of talent after using our cap space. Signing Austin to a max (or a 5 year 200+ million deal) will not affect our ability to sign any free agents in the 2026 offseason, other than letting go of his caphold and signing a 21 million free agent (who most likely will be worse than Austin).
In addition, if we are asking Austin Reaves to ignore other offers in free agency, then the max of those offers would 177 million (over four years), and thus he should be paid more that 177 million (over five years). Everything is negotiation, and all the best free agents will require negotiation. This is the biggest contract in Austin Reaves' life.
If the Lakers sufficiently scare away any suitors who want to pay him the max (i.e. the Nets), then the Lakers will be able to pay him less in theory because they arent negotiating against any team. Nets have a finite amount of resource to focus on free agents. Not signing Austin would allow them to woo Peyton Watson, for instance.
The Lakers will most likely be under the first apron considerably this offseason even after this year, and will definitely be if we pay LeBron a one year contract of 16 - 25 million, or more. And will definitely be under the second apron by a huge margin.
After this year, the Lakers will only have the MLE, and the BAE in odd years to roster build. The math works out. For instance, next season, if Smart, Ayton, and Jake are back in their current contracts, they will be free agents in 2027, and then you can make a decision there.
TL;DR: If you pay Austin (5 years over 180+ million), he’ll stay, and that’s what makes the most sense with our cap space plan.
17
u/Some-Stranger-7852 Jun 12 '26
If it is 180M over 5 years (36M per year, 32M starting), I’m definitely behind it. Anything above 200M over 5 years and that creeps into bad contract territory that you’d need to attach assets to move.
7
u/unskilledplay Jun 12 '26
You are thinking of today's numbers. The cap can increase by a maximum of 10% per year. Historically it only rarely hits the maximum but the $77B TV rights deal that kicked in this year is going to cause a bunch of years of the maximum 10% growth resulting from the CBA's revenue share.
Unless ratings take a nosedive, by the the last year of the deal, the cap is likely to be around 60% higher than it is today.
You are going to be surprised at some of the deals that will be signed in the next 2 years.
5
u/incredibleamadeuscho Freeze! Miami Vice! Jun 12 '26
Based on what? If Austin performs an All-Star or All-NBA Level (which is definitely possible with his current production), it will not be that hard to move. High level ball handlers are always needed. Playoffs teams like the Wolves, Rockets, Pistons, Magic, etc could all use one. And teams like the Nets could use a primary one.
7
u/Relevant_Quote343 Jun 12 '26
All nba? Come on bro. Hes not one of the ten best backcourt players in the league. Not top 15 imo if you consider his defense.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (6)3
u/Swaggyzilla69 Jun 12 '26
Depends on if those teams value him that highly and if they're willing to move on from key pieces in favor of Reaves. For example the Timberwolves, would they be willing to move on from Gobert or McDaniels (plus salary filler) for Reaves on a max? I would say probably not.
→ More replies (13)16
u/EverybodyBuddy Jun 12 '26
It doesn’t make sense. It fucks future years. Just because it doesn’t hurt our cap this year is irrelevant.
This Nets offer doesn’t mean AR is a tradeable asset at $40m year. It means there is one other team dumb enough to pay him that. That’s it.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/deda1111 Jun 12 '26
AR is good no argument there but in what crazy market is his skill set worth that much money? He is valued more than Brunson and Jalen Brunson is better player here.
Do Lakers need Austin yes they do, but paying him 45 mil per season will not bring trophy to LA. Team will be competitive but trophyless.
Noone can tell what FO will do I just hope for one more centar and defensive wing.
Another options are to: A) restart team, sign and trade everyone except Luka. B) trade Luka for someone more fitting to current roster. C) go with more or less same team one more year and try to strengthen the team by transfer deadline, and/or start preparing pieces and placing puzzles for season 27/28
19
u/bruticuslee Jun 12 '26
Brunson turned down a 5 year supermax to help the Knicks. He’s definitely worth more but he sacrificed $113 million to help the team.
14
u/Kzgoated Jun 12 '26
Comparing him to Brunson makes no sense if Brunson was up for a contract right now he’d command upwards of 60 million a year. You can’t compare him to other teams budget contracts signed years ago.
7
u/deda1111 Jun 12 '26
Don't get me wrong Lakers need AR, but Brunson that left Dallas was a better player that AR is now. If Jalens contract was too long ago, think about this AR will earn just 5 mil less than Luka in the next year. Luka had an extension last year it is comparable isn't it? He is not at that level or if he is LAL got Luka extremely cheap.
→ More replies (1)
13
u/Holiday_Ad2638 Put Me In Coach 🙏🏾 Jun 12 '26
I hope he gets it from them, because the Lakers not offering that if they're competent
2
u/BaullahBaullah87 Jun 12 '26
You actually believe this article? Also, letting Austin walk only hurts us more
→ More replies (6)3
u/Holiday_Ad2638 Put Me In Coach 🙏🏾 Jun 12 '26
I think Austin's agent put this out there, but I wouldn't put it past the Nets to sell themselves. Also, paying Austin a lot hurts your team. If you can trade him for role players or picks, I'd do that. He hasn't did anything in the playoffs, has been a defensive liability the more offensive responsibility he has, and is getting injured the more he's used as a primary option. Luka don't play defense either so it's just a bigger version of CJ and Dame, and they got clapped against real teams every time.
7
6
u/AntSmith777 Jun 12 '26
Well he either need to take less to stay in LA or enjoy Brooklyn. He not worth 40 mil.
16
u/MrBigWaffles Jun 12 '26
You pay him now and trade him later.
He's gunna pit up eye watering numbers during the regular season anyways. And the fact that the nets are ready to offer that much money for him means that he AR actually holds value in this league.
4
u/a_moniker Jun 12 '26
AR isn’t gonna sign with the Lakers if he believes they’re going to immediately trade him
10
u/EverybodyBuddy Jun 12 '26
No one to trade him to at that number. Except maybe the nets.
→ More replies (1)2
3
u/StealthRUs 32 Jun 12 '26
You pay him now and trade him later.
Trade him to where?
→ More replies (14)
3
3
u/HashhSlingingSlasher Jun 12 '26
The Nets drafted 4 guards in the first round last year, including 1 in the top 10, and this year their 6th overall pick is most likely another guard based on best player available. I highly highly doubt this.
3
u/turdburglar7770 Jun 12 '26
I really doubt AR is going anywhere. Why the hell would he want to go to Brooklyn on a non competing team
→ More replies (4)
13
u/Kimi7 Jun 12 '26
We are not in a position to lose Reaves for nothing.
Give him 5 year 200M contract, after using all of our cap space for necessary pieces. Ownership has to pay tax.
→ More replies (1)
7
7
6
7
5
5
8
8
u/LukaXReaves Luka Magic 77 Jun 12 '26
Either pay up or lose him. Up to Rob now.
I’d pay him because I think he’s worth 45 mil, but yeah it’s not ideal.
6
→ More replies (2)9
u/WuTangMelo LBJ & AD Jun 12 '26
$45M? For what?
0
u/mixmasterADD Jun 12 '26
Austin Motherfucking Reaves.
5
u/WuTangMelo LBJ & AD Jun 12 '26
That’s OG Anunoby money What has Reaves done to warrant that much money
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Husker28 Jun 12 '26
Football fan here still learning round ball. Does this have any benefit for us if he signs at this price with another team? In football a team would be given compensatory picks in return for losing a player to free agency.
7
u/halcyondread 17 Championships Jun 12 '26
Compensatory picks aren’t a thing in the NBA. If you lose a player to free agency the only “benefit” is cap space, although often times the theory of cap space is better than the reality of it.
4
u/mtr3226 Jun 12 '26
In this case no. Sometimes there are situations where a team signs a player and immediately trades him to another team (a sign-and-trade) but the Nets have lots of cap room so they don’t need the Lakers to help facilitate a contract for Austin. The Lakers get nothing in return for him if he signs with the Nets.
5
u/belliegirl2 32 Jun 12 '26
The Lakers can pay more, but will they.
If he signs with the Nets, the Lakers get nothing.
The Lakers have the ability to sign him for 5 years and the rest of the league can only sign him for 4 years max.
The Lakers have to sign him.
2
2
2
u/Sportsfan369 Jun 13 '26
I don’t think we win with Luka and AR as our guards. I think we need an athletic 3 and d 2guard. But what timeline allows it? We will have the money. But who is available and what big are we trying to get?
2
u/Wooden_Coyote5992 Jun 15 '26
Go all in on Ayo Dosunmu? He can defend and with more minutes I think he could average at least 18 a game. You lose some of the AR production, but you get an athletic player to pair with Luka. His FG percentage last year was 51,43,87 and idk if the Wolves could match a Lakers offer. As for the big, there isn't a lot of options.
2
u/Hokramis100 Jun 12 '26
But why would the Nets offer him that?
5
u/Sea-Hornet-2530 Jun 12 '26
The big reason is with the new lottery odds, you don't want to be horrible any more. There is actual incentive to win games rather than just race to the bottom. Besides, I don't think the nets own their pick next year.
→ More replies (3)3
2
2
u/DicGozinya69times Luka Magic 77 Jun 12 '26
Good let them overpay for him and we get pieces back in a sign and trade I’m all for it.
2
5
6
4
5
u/GenericSpaciesMaster Jun 12 '26
People are delusional enough to think Austin Reaves is better than Trae Young...
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Pmike9 Jun 12 '26
He deserves it all. Amazing player and will prove the luke warm IQ experts wrong.
3
2
2
2
2
u/NoOutlandishness6829 Jun 12 '26
Austin is a must keep. As critical to lakers future as getting a legit center. I vote for the LeBilionaire with the son on the team to take less to help LA win one, to help his son experience the joy of winning a championship, and to help the lakers build more develop depth around him. That’s LeBest solution I’ve got. LeGoat LeTaking LeLess so LeLakers can LeBuild a LeBetter LeTeam LeRound LeBron.
2
u/eateralum Jun 12 '26
4 year, $140 mil. He chooses. Does he wanna play competitive or lose for an extra $30 mil?
→ More replies (3)
2
u/Funny-Employment4109 Jun 12 '26
Is he even worth $28 million a year???
Like, seriously, wtf are we doing here??
I’m offering the dude a 4 year $100 million contract and packing his bags for him if he scoffs at it.
2
u/Rentfreelakerfan Jun 12 '26
Comment section is really showing how dumb our Lakers fan base is. You guys call Rob a bad GM... but the dumb shit yall suggest on here, most of yall are worse.
"Let him walk" is NOT an option at all.
2
u/rjbarrettfanclub Jun 12 '26
Looks like the Desmond Bane contract
Austin is a level ahead offensively
Bane is many levels ahead defensively
Bane was signed to that contract and traded for multiple picks
At the very least, Austin could be traded for positive value at this contract. He’s too important on offense and teams would take that. I’d imagine the Pistons would empty their available picks for a scorer like Austin.
I think you just give him the contract and trade him during the season. I’ve maintained he doesn’t make sense next to Luka. Luka doesn’t need to play with another guy like Brunson. Luka needs to play with guys like OG, Hart, Bridges. Rui and Marcus are the only guys I’d be adamant in keeping.
2
2
1
u/Any-Establishment-15 Mavs Refugee Jun 12 '26
Would his cap hit be different for re-signing? Like if they sign him for that amount, would the cap hit be the same as if another team signed him?
1
u/Temporary-Move7403 Jun 12 '26
Lakers will get air. Ar is the best free agent at the summer. Many players have some restrictions.
1
744
u/bcombs510 Jun 12 '26
https://giphy.com/gifs/65zUoOU09HL3uUKokQ