My concerns are that people aren't appreciating how punitive the new cap is and I think max players need to be top-25 guys (honestly borderline perineal All-NBA but the league is full of idiots and trademill teams happy to pay for mediocre: see Lavine/Beal) to earn their pay if you want to be a contending team or unless you have a Brunson type that willingly takes less than market value. I don't think its reasonable to expect Fox to be a Top25 player in 2 yrs, I don't really expect him to be top Top25 again.
Fox is WAY better than Lavine and Beal, at what age? What exactly does Fox do exceptionally? He's definitely better defensively, today and at the same age, will he still be a better defender at 29 than Lavine? Is he so much better that that makes him WAY better?
Offensively? He is a far less efficient scorer than either and that's Fox's best attribute and its speed based and he's not getting faster and he has no positional versatility in a league where 6'2" starters are disappearing.
Lavine's career TS% is 58.7%, and he's been above 60% 4 of the last 5 yrs. Fox has 1 ing season better than Lavine's avg, Fox has never been above 60%, only above 57% once. Fox is a mediocre assist man, 19th amongst starting PGs this season, 20th the yr before. What is Fox elite at? Getting to the line? Not the last 2 seasons, where Lavine has been better.
I think Fox is a better player, but go look at age 23-27 Fox vs Lavine. WAY better? Not at the same age. WAY better on a team that needs 3% shooting? No, Lavine is arguably a better fit if you want to play Castle and not to mention the guy that definitely would've been draft #1 last yr (Harper).
Throw in Beal if you want, but I was pretty clearly talking about albatross contracts though. But even Beal jacking up crazy shots without help in WAS was a more efficient scorer.
As offense players, Fox is the least efficient player, the worst at getting points/shot. There are other things that make him better, but those 3 get Max money for scoring and for nothing else. Scoring efficiently. Fox is easily the most speed reliant and EASILY the worst shooter of the 3 and the least efficient scorer at that age (and from ages 23-27).
The concern you missed is that, if you view Lavine and Beal as albatross contracts, you shouldn't pay guys for what they've done but what they will do. This is especially true if they are not your franchise guy. IMO Fox screams potential albatross contract. I think its at least as likely Lavine lives up to the last 2 yrs of his K than Fox does to his if he gets the full max extension. Beal was still moveable this season because of his shooting, but he exercised a No Trade Clause to block it and those no longer exist. I'm concerned a slowed down, 29/30y/o Fox will be unmovable in a 2nd Apron league and potentially blocking Castle and/or Harper. And if he slows down enough, he becomes borderline unplayable. That's not a far fetched concern, speed goes. Fox has averaged <63 games played over the past 6 seasons, that's not great. There are reasons to be concerned, he's not a superstar and he never was. He's a former 1xAS/1xAllNBA3, and unlikely to be close ever again. He helped take 1 team, as the 2nd best player, to a first round exit. Sure, great 7 games against GSW. He was the best player on that team? The league and stats disagreed, as evidence by Sabonis getting 27 compared to 2 MVP votes, and nearly a double WS, with better efficiency almost across the board.
I like Fox and I want him for 2 more yrs, but I think Fox's decline has begun. I think its more likely a declining Lavine is capable of living up to his contract (like being the 14th most efficient starter in the NBA like he was THIS SEASON) at 29/30+ compared to Fox.
Its not about Harper, its about overall context. Fox made a ton more sense before the trade as compared to today, he is way more risky now given that context IMO. To me, that risk is pretty close to unjustified if we get KD for cheap (Vassell + 14 + filler). There's real concern and its not unreasonable.