The Economics of Keeping Austin Reaves

Let’s start with cold, hard numbers:

• $13 million contract (that’s rookie-scale value)
• 20 PPG regular season scorer
• Playoff-proven with 16 PPG under pressure

This isn’t just good – it’s daylight robbery by Rob Pelinka. Yet some “experts” suggest trading Reaves plus picks for centers like Walker Kessler or Nic Claxton? That’s like swapping a Stradivarius for a kazoo.

The Salary Cap Reality Check

The “but his next contract!” crowd makes me chuckle. When Reaves earns $35-40M:

• Team caps will hit $170M+
• Max contracts approach $80M
• Mid-level exceptions hit $25M

Suddenly paying your third option All-Star money looks… normal. We’re not in 2010 anymore.

What Would Make a Trade Actually Work?

Three criteria for even considering a Reaves deal:

1. Must return a proven #2/#3 option (think Zach LaVine tier)
2. No project players – only established stars
3. Lakers get younger/better defensively without sacrificing scoring punch

The proposed center trades fail all three tests spectacularly.

Historical Precedent Matters

The Lakers don’t do lateral moves:

• Traded role players for AD (championship) Also didn’t overpay for Myles Turner types (smart) Their blueprint is clear: either go big or develop talent. No half-measures. Now pass me my calculator before I start graphing these terrible trade proposals…