De’aaron Fox is a better basketball player than Austin Reaves. We can get that part from the beginning. There is no real statistical argument otherwise. Even the most optimistic projections of the increasingly brilliant future of Reaves have to recognize that Fox has physical gifts that he simply does not have. Nothing that can reasonably change the fact that Fox could be the fastest guard in the NBA And he is not. If you were building a team from scratch and had the option to take fox or reeves directly without ties, you would take fox and not look back.
This is, of course, not like NBA Construction work on the list. And that is a large part of what this last nba insider first reports Jake Fischer: Part of the reason why Los Angeles Lakers are not a preferred destination for Fox in the commercial market is that their agency, Klutch Sports, knows that the Lakers have “zero intention” of including Reeves in an agreement. This would be surprising for most teams. For the Lakers, who prioritize the power of the stars above all others, it could qualify as a genuine stunner. But in the broadest context of your list of the list, it really makes enough sense.
Let’s start with the obvious. Reaves makes hair below $ 13 million this season, and its salary for next year does not even jump to $ 14 million. Fox is earning just $ 35 million. In order for an exchange of Reaves-Fox to be legal, the Lakers would have to find another $ 22 million or so in the coincident salary, and it would have to be a coincident salary that the Sacramento Kings would really want.
Jarred Vanderbilt, for example, is probably too prone to injuries to be changed in the near future. No team will want to commit three additional salary years to a player who has just lost almost a year with a foot injury. Dorian Finney-Smith would probably appeal to the Kings, but his salary cannot be added before the exchange deadline due to the CBA rule that requires a period of 60 days before a player can be added in a second agreement. The best salary path for the Lakers would probably be Rui Hachimura and Gabe Vincent, failed but useful rotation pieces. Most likely, the Kings press for the young ascending guard Max Christie, who has become an indispensable perimeter defender for the Lakers. Any scenario here involves the Lakers sacrificing depth in addition to Reaves. Depth is not something they have to save.
Nor are Draft selections. At this time, the Lakers have two first tradable rounds that come in 2029 and 2031. When was the last time a Fox caliber player was exchanged without a first -round selection involved? Even in the best case, one of those selections probably disappears in any type of fox to the Lakers. Most likely they are both.
Where would that leave the Lakers? With a three -headed monster by LeBron James, Anthony Davis and Fox … but not much more. While situations are not completely analogous, the obvious comparison would be with the 2021-22 team that Russell Westbrook added.
Fox is a much better 3 -point shooter than Westbrook, but in eight race seasons, it is only classified above an average percentage of the league twice. The tire pressure that generates would be very valuable. Chief coach JJ Redick has Publicly spoken about the problems that a driver of this type does not have. Perhaps Fox’s ability to attract defenders to painting could help Lakers firing better from the deep, but is beginning with a deficit there, not only because of the problems that James has experienced with questionable shooters in the past, but also because Reaves has become quite good.
He leads the Lakers doing 2.5 3 3 per game, and during the last three seasons, he has never been below 39% in open triples. Those are the types of shots that James is so good to create. Fox takes more than 3s more difficult, created by themselves, and there is a lot of value to extract from those shots. But outside an anomalous season 2023-24, it has been below 37% in open looks every year. Once again, we are not talking about a westbrook shooting drop here, but the Lakers are already in 28 -point attempts per game and 19º in percentage. Any sauce for them will be critical, especially if other dangerous shooters such as hashimura have to be included in the agreement.
Would the creation update be worth the shooting of the shooting? Potentially, but the evidence points against him. Often, the greatest benefit that comes from adding a second high -level creator is the security that your offensive can obtain when your best ball handling, in this case, James, leaves the floor. But the Lakers already work well in that sense. Reave alignments without James have scored 120 points per 100 possessions this season, according to Cleaning the glass.
Alignments with both have not been so powerful offensively, but most of their struggles have been defended. Fox is better than Reaves at that end of the floor, but it is not a cap. The pairing of James-Peoves has generally been quite effective in the past, noting at a rate that would place them in the 71th percentile among all NBA alignments in terms of efficiency last season and 89 per previous season. Theoretically, one would expect James to increase his scoring aggression in the maximum leverage games that await the Lakers in the final stretch and in the postseason. That probably helps to start these alignments. When you take into account Davis, who is scoring in shots without assistance more frequent To think that the Lakers have a shot -creation monerant.
Now, the Lakers willpower Have a creation problem when James retires in the near future. A hypothetical fox trade would probably be more a vehicle to ensure that Davis still has a formula partner after James of what would be an impulse for the 2025 championship, but again, think of the sacrificed assets. If one or both of the first round selections are included, they would have very little with whom to trade to build around a fox-Davis nucleus. With Davis causing Supermax Money and Fox with a standard maximum, they would have limited limited flexibility. With luck, Christie would be close to a relatively affordable agreement. Dalton Knecht still has his rookie treatment, and I hope he became a constant sniper and a score option. Otherwise? We live in a world in which the premium 3 and d are going for the maximum money and even the good exceed $ 20 million annually. The Lakers would have to develop bidirectional role players. That is not given.
As we have covered, Fox is a better player than Reaves, but such a deal simply makes sense in the broadest context of where the Lakers are as an organization. If Fox were, let’s say, a player of the 10 best instead of a player of the 20 best or a Top 30 player, you would throw caution in the wind and only try to grab the talent. No matter how attached the Lakers to Reaves are, they would not get it out of the table for Anthony Edwards or Luka Doncic. We know that because when they acquired Davis, they basically exchanged to all those who were not nailed. If Reaves were four years older, it would probably be a pelican at this time. Fox is a star. Edwards, Doncic and Davis are superstar.
The difference does not mean so much for a team and the Spurs, which a young Victor Wembanyama and an almost endless supply of assets to use to build the support cast. You can feel reasonably sure of your ability to get right role players and put Fox in the best possible position to succeed. The Lakers, given the list with which they are starting and leftover assets, probably not.
That is part of why having Reaves is so important to them. If Reaves and James are enough in the ball management front as it is, they can direct all the resources that could otherwise have poured into the Fox update to the players. If they believe they can compete for a title with Reaves and James, they can use those selections and salaries to change for players who make sense around them. Davis has pressed very publicly by a center. Another 3 wing is probably needed and D. a low -end ball handler to improve Vincent’s place could help. For now, these are attainable objectives.
What if the Lakers do not think they have a path to the title of 2025? Anyway, it makes more sense to cling to your fried potatoes. Maybe someone at that level of Doncic-Edwards is looking for a new home in two years. The Lakers would probably feel a little dumb if they took their shot in Fox now instead of waiting for that player. Maybe Davis decreases enough in that period that the Lakers feel they need to rebuild seriously and simply want to use their draft selections to, well, in the draft. Who knows. Maybe in a year it only makes sense to exchange Davis and Reeves anyway.
Unless it is a team that has stored active as aggressively as the Spurs or Thunder, you can only make a Reaves-For Fox style trade once. Once you do it, you are locked in that team, so you better feel quite sure that the group is able to take you to the promised land. In this case, such trade would probably not. Fox makes a lot of sense for a handful of other teams. Lakers are simply not one of them.
