Zach Lowe (and John Hollinger): Spurs Were Close to Offering a Contract to Austin Reaves

[timvp]

I know our good friend Mr. Body wants to keep discussing this matter so here it is.

1:07 mark of Lowe's latest podcast...

Lowe: "I think the Reaves contract has a chance to be one of the best contracts in the league from a team perspective. The Lakers got very, very lucky that nobody got them to pay through the nose. I know San Antonio was going back and forth on it and just for whatever reason didn't do it. And that's a steal."


Hollinger: "I'm surprised. I thought the Spurs would price enforce on them. Knowing that the Lakers would match it -- but just, we're going to make you pay $25 million in those out years because that's when we're going to be competing with you and we just want to make your life as hard as possible."

Lowe: "They thought about it!"

[SpursFan86]

Dammit, thought we were finally going to be able to move on from this :lol

The new “It still hurts…” :(

[Leetonidas]

hE wAs AlWaYs gOnNa StAy iN lA

[BacktoBasics]

I think at 100 million or more LA calls the bluff. I’ll go so far as to say I bet anything over 80 million and LA passes. The last thing we need is to be locked into that contract. We can do much better than Reaves.

[lefty20]

Dammit, thought we were finally going to be able to move on from this :lol

The new “It still hurts…” :(

What is dead may never die. Reaves = drowned god confirmed.

[timvp]

To clarify the situation for those who weren't following...

-Austin Reaves was a restricted free agent.

-Reaves was at times the Lakers primary playmaker last season and had an insanely efficient campaign.

-The Lakers couldn't offer him more than $52 million over four years due to salary cap rules.

-The Spurs (or any other team with enough cap room) could have offered Reaves a contract up to $100 million.

-The Lakers were expected to match any offer -- even a full $100 million offer.

-The Lakers could have delayed matching until midnight on July 6th, which would have frozen the cap space of any team who wanted to try to sign Reaves.

-The Spurs decided not to offer Reaves a contract. Every other team ran out of cap space.

-The Lakers were able to re-sign Reaves at the $52 million mark.

-The Spurs never used their cap space in a way that would have stopped them from offering Reaves a contract.

-If Reaves were an unrestricted agent this summer, I think most reasonable people would agree that he would have made ~$100 million on the open market.

[Extra Stout]

:cry The One Who Got Away (TM) :cry

[tonight...you]

I think they should have gone for it.

[Degoat]

Did we move on from Reaves for Herro? Thoughts

[slick'81]

Meh we have champagne

[D-Robinson 50 fan]

The front office did the right thing. I like Austin Reeves and it wouldn’t been fun to stick it to the Lakers, but would it have really been worth paying him that much or tying up your time waiting for the Lakers to respond a week later?

[Jordan Jackson]

I guess they opted to make an offer to Brook Lopez instead. That didn’t work out either.

[Mr. Body]

:lol I always look to ESPN types for the breaking LAL-San Antonio news.

So they might have wanted to fuck with the Lakers, according to Lakers guys. I hope you all are happy.

[Millennial_Messiah]

He's literally a one trick pony. Why would we want a shooter who doesn't play difference and literally offers nothing but making wide open shots? That's ludicrous.

[slick'81]

They thought about saying fck the lakers

[ismael-robert]

He literally can do everything. A shooter only?!

[Extra Stout]

:lol I always look to ESPN types for the breaking LAL-San Antonio news.

So they might have wanted to fuck with the Lakers, according to Lakers guys. I hope you all are happy.
How can I possibly be happy without my Hillbilly Kobe?

[heyheymymy]

At the end of the day price enforcing is petty and beneath the classy Spurs and even if you hate that:

I'm also not giving rival Lakers bulletin board material that Victor will have to slay through.

I could see the LAL FO sending a revenge memo for Spurs games and even those Laker players are going to know and see the Spurs bind them and so when Reeves' albatross costs them the ability/financial flexibility to land other help because SA bid him up, they are going to mark their calendars for those Spurs matchups.

Just not worth it.

[tonight...you]

Did we move on from Reaves for Herro? Thoughts
Signs point to Yes, no matter how much you want it to happen brother.
Dude is... you have to look at it from the team's point of view:
They don't know what they have and how they're going to react to an undeniable focal point in Wemby.
They need to see Wemby's 1st year and how the players and how Pop reacts.

Herro is an inefficient, expensive, no-D, mid-ballhogging insta-headcase with a girlfriend on the level Jason Kidd's wife.

Where's the rush? This team has tons of picks to convert (which they are already converting). Cap space to work.

Herro is just a squeal of a baby moment and then reality eventually hits.

[thiste]

wrong thread sorry

[Ariel]

If the Spurs had done this they'd be left hanging for the Lakers decision that would 99% be matching. So they lose the time and opportunity to do the deal they just made, just for the pleasure of screwing the Lakers who aren't going anywhere anyway. Smart decision.

[mo7888]

If the Spurs had done this they'd be left hanging for the Lakers decision that would 99% be matching. So they lose the time and opportunity to do the deal they just made, just for the pleasure of screwing the Lakers who aren't going anywhere anyway. Smart decision.

As much as i wanted them to sign Reaves, this is a good point. Today's deal with Dallas/ Boston might not have happened and if we do anything else by the weekend that would have been off the table as well.

[timvp]

-The Spurs never used their cap space in a way that would have stopped them from offering Reaves a contract.

This is no longer true. The Spurs have used cap space to get an unprotected first round pick swap in addition to Osman and Bullock. With those deals on the table, the Spurs not wanting to waste time on Reaves now makes more sense :tu

[T Park]

I think at 100 million or more LA calls the bluff. I’ll go so far as to say I bet anything over 80 million and LA passes. The last thing we need is to be locked into that contract. We can do much better than Reaves.

lmfao yeah sure

[T Park]

This is no longer true. The Spurs have used cap space to get an unprotected first round pick swap in addition to Osman and Bullock. With those deals on the table, the Spurs not wanting to waste time on Reaves now makes more sense :tu

this deal today needed the Spurs to be in it, the other teams could've waited the day.

Spurs passed out and gave the lakers a pass.

typical too nice bullshit

[T Park]

At the end of the day price enforcing is petty and beneath the classy Spurs and even if you hate that:

I'm also not giving rival Lakers bulletin board material that Victor will have to slay through.

I could see the LAL FO sending a revenge memo for Spurs games and even those Laker players are going to know and see the Spurs bind them and so when Reeves' albatross costs them the ability/financial flexibility to land other help because SA bid him up, they are going to mark their calendars for those Spurs matchups.

Just not worth it.


"its beneath the spurs"

fuck that pansy ass horse shit.

No other teams are going to give the Spurs that fucking kind of gift, so why should they do the same?

Fucking christ

[Uriel]

Just a little pet theory for why Brian Wright didn't do it: he probably wanted to build some goodwill with the Lakers front office, thinking they might return the favor for us in the future.

[scott]

It only would have made sense to offer Reaves if you actually wanted him on the team. Screwing with the Lakers is just a side effect, not the main attraction. I think Reaves would have been a good addition, but he's not worth losing any sleep over. Moving on.

[spursparker9]

I hope Jeanie Buss appreciate the goodwill...

[Seventyniner]

This is no longer true. The Spurs have used cap space to get an unprotected first round pick swap in addition to Osman and Bullock. With those deals on the table, the Spurs not wanting to waste time on Reaves now makes more sense :tu

This is the correct take imo. The Spurs have had these deals cooking all week and evidently weren't willing to put one or more of them in jeopardy just to make the Lakers use more salary space in 2025-2026 and 2026-2027.

[AusSpur]

I was in the pro-Reaves camp, but after reading this article by Matthew Tynan about the how the deal would have rise significantly on the backend (at a time many of our young players would need to be paid) I understood why the Spurs didn't go through with it.

Here is a snippet from the article:

While the Lakers can only offer Reaves a four-year deal with incremental raises that rounds out around that aforementioned $50 million total, outside teams can come in and max the guy if they so choose.

But given the fact those bidders would be limited to that initial ~$11-million number in the first and second years, the third and fourth years of the contract would have to make up the rest of the remaining salary. That would mean a massive spike and potentially huge hit on the back end.

Let’s say San Antonio arrives with a 4-year, $80 million offer — forgetting for a minute the basketball side of things and whether or not a potential bench guy is worth that kind of money. Here’s what that offer sheet would look like:

(Note: While there is room for small raises between the first and second years, as well as the third and fourth, I’m just going to keep it simple with flat numbers so it’s clear.)

2023-24: $11,000,000
2024-25: $11,000,000
2025-26: $29,000,000
2026-27: $29,000,000

https://matthewtynan.substack.com/p/san-antonio-spurs-austin-reaves-free-agency

[timvp]

I was in the pro-Reaves camp, but after reading this article by Matthew Tynan about the how the deal would have rise significantly on the backend (at a time many of our young players would need to be paid) I understood why the Spurs didn't go through with it.

Here is a snippet from the article:

While the Lakers can only offer Reaves a four-year deal with incremental raises that rounds out around that aforementioned $50 million total, outside teams can come in and max the guy if they so choose.

But given the fact those bidders would be limited to that initial ~$11-million number in the first and second years, the third and fourth years of the contract would have to make up the rest of the remaining salary. That would mean a massive spike and potentially huge hit on the back end.

Let’s say San Antonio arrives with a 4-year, $80 million offer — forgetting for a minute the basketball side of things and whether or not a potential bench guy is worth that kind of money. Here’s what that offer sheet would look like:

(Note: While there is room for small raises between the first and second years, as well as the third and fourth, I’m just going to keep it simple with flat numbers so it’s clear.)

2023-24: $11,000,000
2024-25: $11,000,000
2025-26: $29,000,000
2026-27: $29,000,000

https://matthewtynan.substack.com/p/san-antonio-spurs-austin-reaves-free-agency



Tynan is wrong. The Spurs could have smoothed out the salary hit for Reaves. Only the Lakers would have to pay his salary at that schedule.

[kobyz]

Not to make the Lakers pay Reaves more is one of the worst moves of the FO all time...

[Chinook]

I was in the pro-Reaves camp, but after reading this article by Matthew Tynan about the how the deal would have rise significantly on the backend (at a time many of our young players would need to be paid) I understood why the Spurs didn't go through with it.

Here is a snippet from the article:

While the Lakers can only offer Reaves a four-year deal with incremental raises that rounds out around that aforementioned $50 million total, outside teams can come in and max the guy if they so choose.

But given the fact those bidders would be limited to that initial ~$11-million number in the first and second years, the third and fourth years of the contract would have to make up the rest of the remaining salary. That would mean a massive spike and potentially huge hit on the back end.

Let’s say San Antonio arrives with a 4-year, $80 million offer — forgetting for a minute the basketball side of things and whether or not a potential bench guy is worth that kind of money. Here’s what that offer sheet would look like:

(Note: While there is room for small raises between the first and second years, as well as the third and fourth, I’m just going to keep it simple with flat numbers so it’s clear.)

2023-24: $11,000,000
2024-25: $11,000,000
2025-26: $29,000,000
2026-27: $29,000,000

https://matthewtynan.substack.com/p/san-antonio-spurs-austin-reaves-free-agency



The Spurs' cap hit would be flat all four years. The cash payments wouldn't be quite like that. It would be the MLE, a slight raise of the MLE, then whatever the last two years need to be to make up the rest of the money, with a five-percent raise between years three and four. The Spurs would HAVE to have offered the full MLE-worth in 2023 and offer a five-percent raise in 2025. Otherwise, they can't offer him a deal above the MLE either.

[AusSpur]

Tynan is wrong. The Spurs could have smoothed out the salary hit for Reaves. Only the Lakers would have to pay his salary at that schedule.

Interesting.

Then I'm back in the 'why didn't we do it Brian' camp!

[DPG21920]

Interesting.

Then I'm back in the 'why didn't we do it Brian' camp!

Because the Spurs had this deal with Mavs/Bos. IF they tied up all this cap space in Reeves, there’s a risk they miss out on the deal

[cutewizard]

Champagne and Branham can exceed him in time

fuck the lakers

[MannyIsGod]

it's good to see that they were planning to offer him a deal but also had a good reason not to.

[Fireball]

Spurs should just have made an offer of 80 million ... then at least the Lakers do not get a total bargain

[EricB]

The front office did the right thing. I like Austin Reeves and it wouldn’t been fun to stick it to the Lakers, but would it have really been worth paying him that much or tying up your time waiting for the Lakers to respond a week later?


yes

[scott]

Why does TPark have two usernames?

[rankingtear]

Saw a tweet that Kevin O Bonner said we did offer Lopez the contract MIL was forced to match.

[JPB]

This is the correct take imo. The Spurs have had these deals cooking all week and evidently weren't willing to put one or more of them in jeopardy just to make the Lakers use more salary space in 2025-2026 and 2026-2027.

Stop trying to be rational and to make sense. I mean, we could have mess up with the Fakers!!! Who cares about our own biz?

I'll also take these pundits' insight with a grain of salt. There's what they think they know, what spurs tell them and there's the truth.

[kobyz]

Because the Spurs had this deal with Mavs/Bos. IF they tied up all this cap space in Reeves, there’s a risk they miss out on the deal

They would still have enough cap space to do this trade even after Reaves

[kace]

He's literally a one trick pony. Why would we want a shooter who doesn't play difference and literally offers nothing but making wide open shots? That's ludicrous.

a one trick pony ? well, we have KJ at 18.5M/year who is way more a one trick pony than Reaves, and everybody was happy with that contract, and rightfully so.

i don't see why Reaves, who is better at shooting, passing, defending and as good at scoring at 20-25M/year wouldn't have been a good contract in today's NBA.

The only doubt with him is that we don't have a lot of hindsight since he had only one really good season. but when you see his trajectory this last two years, it seems more than he is a legit player who is a late bloomer than a player whose good season was a fluke.

No, the only good reason IMO was the one that Timvp mentionned: the fact that they had to wait til today to be sure about what LA would do. But well, it's not like we would be missing a huge trade anyway. The FR swap is great, but i would have liked the spurs to take their chance with an offer here.

i think also that the timeline for the spurs isn't suitable for making major trades and sending big money to have good players right now. maybe two years from now, the spurs send an offer for a four year contract to Reaves, but right now, they seem happy to let Victor develop and see what they got with their young players.

[ambchang]

Should’ve offered $85m/4

[DPG21920]

They would still have enough cap space to do this trade even after Reaves

Nope. Spurs had 25M in space after Cedi trade I believe. Reeves offer would have been 25m per year.

[kobyz]

Nope. Spurs had 25M in space after Cedi trade I believe. Reeves offer would have been 25m per year.

Obviously if we tied up Reaves we not doing the Cedi trade, Reaves offer could also be 20m

[Extra Stout]

In two years the Spurs will be trading the 2030 pick swap as part of a massive package for All-NBA Superstar Austin Reaves.

[spurraider21]

Nope. Spurs had 25M in space after Cedi trade I believe. Reeves offer would have been 25m per year.
That cap space was calculated based on the contract numbers of Tre, etc. could have just kept them on their cap holds in the interim

[DPG21920]

That cap space was calculated based on the contract numbers of Tre, etc. could have just kept them on their cap holds in the interim

From my understanding making Reeves offer would have prevented Sa from doing this deal potentially timvp fact check?

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

From my understanding making Reeves offer would have prevented Sa from doing this deal potentially timvp (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=8) fact check?

If it was supposed to be the Reaves max (close to $102 mil) then yes, couldn't do the Bullock deal as well, as it would have required over 35 mil of cap space, which they didn't have after the cap holds for Wemby, Tre, etc.

Shows they're actually very active though, 2 trades done already, probably more coming up soon especially with the roster having so many players + Sidy, they're ripe for a 2-for-1 or 3-for-1 trade. There was also a rumor that they offered a big contract to Brook Lopez, which forced Milwaukee to pay up, so they might have been thinking between Lopez and Reeves and no cap space trades, but obviously things move quickly and opportunities arise. Think we can sleep well knowing they're working hard and not just being passive. Conservative, sure, but passive - no.

[rascal]

At the end of the day price enforcing is petty and beneath the classy Spurs and even if you hate that:

I'm also not giving rival Lakers bulletin board material that Victor will have to slay through.

I could see the LAL FO sending a revenge memo for Spurs games and even those Laker players are going to know and see the Spurs bind them and so when Reeves' albatross costs them the ability/financial flexibility to land other help because SA bid him up, they are going to mark their calendars for those Spurs matchups.

Just not worth it.

The Lakers will be the first ones after Wemby when his rookie contract is up.

[rascal]

Just a little pet theory for why Brian Wright didn't do it: he probably wanted to build some goodwill with the Lakers front office, thinking they might return the favor for us in the future.

Doubt it. The Lakers will try their hardest to pry Wemby away at first chance.

[rascal]

Why does TPark have two usernames?

T Park = EricB

[rjv]

How can I possibly be happy without my Hillbilly Kobe?

:lol

[heyheymymy]

Wonder if Brian called up Laker FO and bartered a tamper truce

[Amuseddaysleeper]

this deal today needed the Spurs to be in it, the other teams could've waited the day.

Spurs passed out and gave the lakers a pass.

typical too nice bullshit


Dude, you're back holy shit.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Just a little pet theory for why Brian Wright didn't do it: he probably wanted to build some goodwill with the Lakers front office, thinking they might return the favor for us in the future.

Like the Lakers care.

They're probably tampering with him already.

Which is why the Spurs should have given them a poison pill to swallow with the Reaves contract.

[MannyIsGod]

Man, there are people here who really have an issue with Austin Reaves being valued and I honestly don't get it. The dude is good and y'all act like anyone who acknowledges that he's a good player has just kicked your first born in the stomach.

[Seventyniner]

Man, there are people here who really have an issue with Austin Reaves being valued and I honestly don't get it. The dude is good and y'all act like anyone who acknowledges that he's a good player has just kicked your first born in the stomach.

You know what the story is here.

"We had a chance to stick it to the Lakers and we didn't :cry :cry :cry "

[scott]

T Park = EricB

Yeah, this is obvious. I'm asking WHY he has two different names.

[Obstructed_View]

Yeah, this is obvious. I'm asking WHY he has two different names.
He got tired of being on everyone's ignore list.

[NASpurs]

He got tired of being on everyone's ignore list.

Probably didn't help people kept calling him T Pork :lol

[DPG21920]

If it was supposed to be the Reaves max (close to $102 mil) then yes, couldn't do the Bullock deal as well, as it would have required over 35 mil of cap space, which they didn't have after the cap holds for Wemby, Tre, etc.

Shows they're actually very active though, 2 trades done already, probably more coming up soon especially with the roster having so many players + Sidy, they're ripe for a 2-for-1 or 3-for-1 trade. There was also a rumor that they offered a big contract to Brook Lopez, which forced Milwaukee to pay up, so they might have been thinking between Lopez and Reeves and no cap space trades, but obviously things move quickly and opportunities arise. Think we can sleep well knowing they're working hard and not just being passive. Conservative, sure, but passive - no.

Agreed. I was nervous after Cedi deal, but this Bullock deal shows exactly what you said. That’s why I love it so much. Not just the value of the deal in a bubble, but the mentality and what it signals.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Would have been cool to make the Lakers spend more than they wanted to resigning Reaves. Teams were too nice to the Lakers with this one.