He has way more experience at the point than what Porter had when they gave him the keys. Grew up playing point through High School and some college. Played lead guard role many times through the playoff run with success. Ck the facts.
We could really use a sturdy, cerebral, scrappy hard worker with deceptive speed and all the intangibles. Sign him up.
I’ve watched a lot of his game this year and he’s a really talented player. He will absolutely get 20m range.
The offer has to be structured so weirdly, it more negatively hits the team trying to sign him away. A 4/$80 deal breaks down as around 11, 12, 28, 29. It’s not insane, but it’s very easy for the Lakers to match. And any increase in the total value can only be added to the final two years. The good thing is that they have to match within two days (it seems like it used to be five). But without the ability to make either of the first two years crippling for the Lakers, it pretty much seems like a waste of time for a team to make an offer.
I think I heard Bobby Marks saying that the cap hit for the Lakers would be as you said but the team offering the contract would have a more standard split. Anyways I'd offer him whatever his max is no hesitation. He's young, talented and a hard worker. If someone on our team beats him for minutes it's an easy trade after the cap spike in a couple years. And you all know how I feel about screwing the Lakers.
If Reeves loses the starting job it's more likely that Green earned it... which is a great situation to be in. Making the Lakers fans miserable is also a plus, they are royally screwed when LBJ retires.
Young, efficient, can create and play off ball. Plus, has shown the ability to perform on a high stage. He can help usher in a new culture, is still young enough to grow with our guys, and won’t cost us $40 MM per year. …wonder if KMJ and Tate would be enough to entice the Lakers to let Reaves go.
That sounds right. My understanding was that any team who makes an offer larger than what the Lakers can offer ($51M, or $12.5m annually) would need to have the average annual salary available in year 1. The kicker is, each dollar that gets added has to be added in years three and four. So to make a max offer of $98m, a team would have to have $25m in cap space available. While I'm all about screwing the Lakers, it's not quite so easy to do it in this deal. It really just depends on if you can sacrifice two days of your own free agency to do it. And you can't even enjoy the screwing for two years. The max contract offer breaks down as around 12, 13, 36, 37. So the Lakers will still only have $12m counting against their cap next year (and the year after). This doesn't push them into significant luxury tax. They can match that without blinking an eye. The increase doesn't even start until after Lebron and AD's contracts are over, so I don't know how much of a screwing it is. He might be the best player on the team at that point, but at least he won't be balling out at a paltry $12m a year. The Rockets may be in the unique position of being able to offer that max salary and still carry on negotiations while they wait for two days. Any other team will have to stop their offseason while they wait to see if the Lakers match, which they surely will. Most other teams won't want to watch players sign elsewhere while the Lakers leave them hanging by a thread.
We have to spend 50m. We could try and sign one 30m contract 1st day of FA and then extend the max offer we can for Reave and wait for 2 days. There will be plenty of ways for us to spend another 20m if we don’t get Reaves.
