Austin Reaves' Role

[Anderson Hunt]

Is Reaves an ideal third option scorer? Or is he a perfect fourth or fifth option?

If he isn't a third option, who is his ideal/prototypical backcourt partner?

If he is a third option, who is his ideal/prototypical backcourt partner?

Also, in a backcourt featuring Reaves, should he be the dominant ball-handler, or should he be more of a tertiary ball-handler?

The Laker front office and many Laker fans believe Reaves is untouchable unless a "star" is involved.

For those that want him in the fold come hell or high water, what is his ideal role?

[stan francisco]

On offense, he should play the role Ginobili played for the Spurs.

On defense, he thinks the right things but needs to improve stamina and lower body strength to not get pushed around.

[scoobs07]

Reaves should be the starting point guard, in my opinion. He excels at making others better and creating offense for himself, so he is best utilized with the ball in his hands. However, Austin is not quick enough to guard opposing point guards, so it creates a dilemma where he needs a very specific type of guard next to him. The guard next to him would ideally have the following attributes:

1. Ability to guard opposing point guards

2. Ability to hit 35% of 3-pt FG attempts on high volume (at least two 3-pt FGs made per 36 minutes).

3. Ability to play off the ball

[stan francisco]

Reaves should be the starting point guard, in my opinion. He excels at making others better and creating offense for himself, so he is best utilized with the ball in his hands. However, Austin is not quick enough to guard opposing point guards, so it creates a dilemma where he needs a very specific type of guard next to him. The guard next to him would ideally have the following attributes:

1. Ability to guard opposing point guards

2. Ability to hit 35% of 3-pt FG attempts on high volume (at least two 3-pt FGs made per 36 minutes).

3. Ability to play off the ball

I think JHS will prove to be that guy this year. 6’6” built like a bulldog, plays defense and is a decent playmaker and scorer. Neither of them would mind taking turns playing off the ball.

PG: JHS
SG: AR
SF: Christie
PF: LBJ
C: AD

… is the starting lineup I’d predict for game 1 assuming the current roster doesn’t change much.

[scoobs07]

Reaves should be the starting point guard, in my opinion. He excels at making others better and creating offense for himself, so he is best utilized with the ball in his hands. However, Austin is not quick enough to guard opposing point guards, so it creates a dilemma where he needs a very specific type of guard next to him. The guard next to him would ideally have the following attributes:

1. Ability to guard opposing point guards

2. Ability to hit 35% of 3-pt FG attempts on high volume (at least two 3-pt FGs made per 36 minutes).

3. Ability to play off the ball

I think JHS will prove to be that guy this year. 6’6” built like a bulldog, plays defense and is a decent playmaker and scorer. Neither of them would mind taking turns playing off the ball.

PG: JHS
SG: AR
SF: Christie
PF: LBJ
C: AD

… is the starting lineup I’d predict for game 1 assuming the current roster doesn’t change much.

That would be great, but he is still banged up with back issues. I do feel that he will come back with a much improved 3-ball though. Whoever plays next to Reaves doesn't even have to be big, or anything like that. The Lakers have an excellent track record of playing an oversized PG alongside and undersized SG. Magic and Nixon won 2 rings, Magic and Scott won 3 rings, Kobe and Fisher won 5 rings, and most recently LeBron and Bradley/KCP won a chip. Other NBA teams have had success too, such as Pippen and Paxon/Armstrong/Kerr/Harper. Jokic/Murray combo is also sort of like that.

[stan francisco]

Reaves should be the starting point guard, in my opinion. He excels at making others better and creating offense for himself, so he is best utilized with the ball in his hands. However, Austin is not quick enough to guard opposing point guards, so it creates a dilemma where he needs a very specific type of guard next to him. The guard next to him would ideally have the following attributes:

1. Ability to guard opposing point guards

2. Ability to hit 35% of 3-pt FG attempts on high volume (at least two 3-pt FGs made per 36 minutes).

3. Ability to play off the ball

I think JHS will prove to be that guy this year. 6’6” built like a bulldog, plays defense and is a decent playmaker and scorer. Neither of them would mind taking turns playing off the ball.

PG: JHS
SG: AR
SF: Christie
PF: LBJ
C: AD

… is the starting lineup I’d predict for game 1 assuming the current roster doesn’t change much.

That would be great, but he is still banged up with back issues. I do feel that he will come back with a much improved 3-ball though. Whoever plays next to Reaves doesn't even have to be big, or anything like that. The Lakers have an excellent track record of playing an oversized PG alongside and undersized SG. Magic and Nixon won 2 rings, Magic and Scott won 3 rings, Kobe and Fisher won 5 rings, and most recently LeBron and Bradley/KCP won a chip. Other NBA teams have had success too, such as Pippen and Paxon/Armstrong/Kerr/Harper. Jokic/Murray combo is also sort of like that.

I’m with you.

If JHS isn’t ready, Gabe Vincent isn’t a terrible alternative. A speedy lineup:
PG: Gabe Vincent
SG: AR
SF: Christie
PF: LBJ
C: AD

… or a tall lineup

PG: AR
SG: Christie
SF: Rui
PF: LBJ
C: AD

It depends on LBJ’s defense. Can’t have two defensive liabilities in AR at point, plus LBJ.

[scoobs07]

I think JHS will prove to be that guy this year. 6’6” built like a bulldog, plays defense and is a decent playmaker and scorer. Neither of them would mind taking turns playing off the ball.

PG: JHS
SG: AR
SF: Christie
PF: LBJ
C: AD

… is the starting lineup I’d predict for game 1 assuming the current roster doesn’t change much.

That would be great, but he is still banged up with back issues. I do feel that he will come back with a much improved 3-ball though. Whoever plays next to Reaves doesn't even have to be big, or anything like that. The Lakers have an excellent track record of playing an oversized PG alongside and undersized SG. Magic and Nixon won 2 rings, Magic and Scott won 3 rings, Kobe and Fisher won 5 rings, and most recently LeBron and Bradley/KCP won a chip. Other NBA teams have had success too, such as Pippen and Paxon/Armstrong/Kerr/Harper. Jokic/Murray combo is also sort of like that.

I’m with you.

If JHS isn’t ready, Gabe Vincent isn’t a terrible alternative. A speedy lineup:
PG: Gabe Vincent
SG: AR
SF: Christie
PF: LBJ
C: AD

… or a tall lineup

PG: AR
SG: Christie
SF: Rui
PF: LBJ
C: AD

It depends on LBJ’s defense. Can’t have two defensive liabilities in AR at point, plus LBJ.

I like the potential of a Reaves/Christie back court. I also could see the Lakers with Trent in that starting role.

[stan francisco]

Yeah, I’m thinking that we’ll trade D Lo and Wood (or Hayes) plus fillers for a two-way SG, an impact player.

Giving those SG minutes to Christie and Knecht might be the thing to do. If Christie is ready to start we could trade for a better backup C instead.

[TJM217]

Love me some Reaves but he is not a point guard. He doesn't have the handle is about average as a passer for the position. As a 2 he is an above average passer tho. I think he is your third scorer after bron and AD. Like the poster above me said He needs to get stronger. He gets hunted by bigger guards and wings on defense and when ball handling can get pushed around

[Michael Beasley]

ideally you would want austin to be the 5th option glue guy

[LakersSoul]

Is Reaves an ideal third option scorer? Or is he a perfect fourth or fifth option?

If he isn't a third option, who is his ideal/prototypical backcourt partner?

If he is a third option, who is his ideal/prototypical backcourt partner?

Also, in a backcourt featuring Reaves, should he be the dominant ball-handler, or should he be more of a tertiary ball-handler?

The Laker front office and many Laker fans believe Reaves is untouchable unless a "star" is involved.

For those that want him in the fold come hell or high water, what is his ideal role?

AR provides us a great cast to support Bron/AD.

Problem with AR is his soft defense but it’s not as bad as Dlo. Same goes for Knecht but K4 is athletic so I think it’s a matter of putting in that effort to care and defend.

Our top rotation to close out games got to be:
AR
MAX
KNECHT
BRON
AD

This rotation gives us 3 top notch shooters to surround Bron/AD while slight weakness on D from AR/K4 but not super bad defense.

This season is gonna be super good to see all the improved coaching, formation, and shooting.

Fingers crossed, knock on wood!

[Anderson Hunt]

ideally you would want austin to be the 5th option glue guy

Can a "glue guy" be below average on defense?

Is Reaves below average on that end? (maybe I'm wrong)

I'd like to think Reaves is a glue guy, but is he nothing more than a souped up Joe Ingles (circa Utah), not a fifth option but a seventh or eighth?

Unless he becomes a player who isn't a liability on defense, he's just a 20-25 minute guy depending on matchups.

To me, Reaves on a winning team is an off the bench scorer and ball-handler. To me, he maxes out at Jamal Crawford, but is more like a Brad Davis/Sam Cassell (Houston)/Ingles-type. Really good but not an everyday closing lineup guy.

[Michael Beasley]

ideally you would want austin to be the 5th option glue guy

Can a "glue guy" be below average on defense?

Is Reaves below average on that end? (maybe I'm wrong)

I'd like to think Reaves is a glue guy, but is he nothing more than a souped up Joe Ingles (circa Utah), not a fifth option but a seventh or eighth?

Unless he becomes a player who isn't a liability on defense, he's just a 20-25 minute guy depending on matchups.

To me, Reaves on a winning team is an off the bench scorer and ball-handler. To me, he maxes out at Jamal Crawford, but is more like a Brad Davis/Sam Cassell (Houston)/Ingles-type. Really good but not an everyday closing lineup guy.

potato potahto

reaves is top 5 in scoring and salary on this team which saw the conference finals last year despite darvin ham

and he is far from being the only defensive liability on this team. he's one of the few guys on the team even willing to take a charge

[Anderson Hunt]

ideally you would want austin to be the 5th option glue guy

Can a "glue guy" be below average on defense?

Is Reaves below average on that end? (maybe I'm wrong)

I'd like to think Reaves is a glue guy, but is he nothing more than a souped up Joe Ingles (circa Utah), not a fifth option but a seventh or eighth?

Unless he becomes a player who isn't a liability on defense, he's just a 20-25 minute guy depending on matchups.

To me, Reaves on a winning team is an off the bench scorer and ball-handler. To me, he maxes out at Jamal Crawford, but is more like a Brad Davis/Sam Cassell (Houston)/Ingles-type. Really good but not an everyday closing lineup guy.

potato potahto

reaves is top 5 in scoring and salary on this team which saw the conference finals last year despite darvin ham

and he is far from being the only defensive liability on this team. he's one of the few guys on the team even willing to take a charge

It sounds like you're calling him the tallest midget. Not much of an endorsement.

[Michael Beasley]

Can a "glue guy" be below average on defense?

Is Reaves below average on that end? (maybe I'm wrong)

I'd like to think Reaves is a glue guy, but is he nothing more than a souped up Joe Ingles (circa Utah), not a fifth option but a seventh or eighth?

Unless he becomes a player who isn't a liability on defense, he's just a 20-25 minute guy depending on matchups.

To me, Reaves on a winning team is an off the bench scorer and ball-handler. To me, he maxes out at Jamal Crawford, but is more like a Brad Davis/Sam Cassell (Houston)/Ingles-type. Really good but not an everyday closing lineup guy.

potato potahto

reaves is top 5 in scoring and salary on this team which saw the conference finals last year despite darvin ham

and he is far from being the only defensive liability on this team. he's one of the few guys on the team even willing to take a charge

It sounds like you're calling him the tallest midget. Not much of an endorsement.

???

he's an above average role player and fairly paid. not sure what more needs to be said

[Anderson Hunt]

potato potahto

reaves is top 5 in scoring and salary on this team which saw the conference finals last year despite darvin ham

and he is far from being the only defensive liability on this team. he's one of the few guys on the team even willing to take a charge

It sounds like you're calling him the tallest midget. Not much of an endorsement.

???

he's an above average role player and fairly paid. not sure what more needs to be said

Glue guys/above-average role players are not defensive liabilities.

I'm trying to think of just one and I can't. I can think of plenty of role players who are liabilities on defense, but not above average ones, not guys I'd call glue guys.

Unless he improves defensively, he's Joe Ingles, a seventh man in the rotation. His offense is good but not good enough to offset the abuse he allows on the other end of the floor.

[Michael Beasley]

It sounds like you're calling him the tallest midget. Not much of an endorsement.

???

he's an above average role player and fairly paid. not sure what more needs to be said

Glue guys/above-average role players are not defensive liabilities.

I'm trying to think of just one and I can't. I can think of plenty of role players who are liabilities on defense, but not above average ones, not guys I'd call glue guys.

Unless he improves defensively, he's Joe Ingles, a seventh man in the rotation. His offense is good but not good enough to offset the abuse he allows on the other end of the floor.

joe ingles in his prime started and played 30 mpg lol

ham already experimented with bringing him off the bench last year. the team played much better with him starting

[Anderson Hunt]

???

he's an above average role player and fairly paid. not sure what more needs to be said

Glue guys/above-average role players are not defensive liabilities.

I'm trying to think of just one and I can't. I can think of plenty of role players who are liabilities on defense, but not above average ones, not guys I'd call glue guys.

Unless he improves defensively, he's Joe Ingles, a seventh man in the rotation. His offense is good but not good enough to offset the abuse he allows on the other end of the floor.

joe ingles in his prime started and played 30 mpg lol

ham already experimented with bringing him off the bench last year. the team played much better with him starting

Utah had the best record in the league with Ingles off the bench (20/21). The team was better with Ingles as the sixth or seventh guy.

And that's my point. Reaves has the ability to be a 20 point scorer in this league, but his team will probably be bad.

Unless he gets better on defense to the point where opposing guys aren't salivating when they see Reaves in his stance, his best role is an efficient bench scorer and ball-handler.

If Reaves is your sixth top scorer, but gets seventh or eighth most minutes, you have a really, really good team. Ironically, that level of production would Garner 15m per year, so his contract isn't t that far off from his actual value, still underpaid but not by much.

Unless he gets better on defense, the Lakers should be looking to place Reaves in his optimal role. That means not viewing him as a pillar or core piece but instead understanding that in order to be elite with him on the team they have to have 3-4 wings on the roster who can and do outplay him, at least 2-3 wings in the rotation who are better than him defensively.

[stan francisco]

Love me some Reaves but he is not a point guard. He doesn't have the handle is about average as a passer for the position. As a 2 he is an above average passer tho. I think he is your third scorer after bron and AD. Like the poster above me said He needs to get stronger. He gets hunted by bigger guards and wings on defense and when ball handling can get pushed around

Agreed, and I’m thinking since LBJ will handle the playmaking a lot of the time we wouldn’t have to depend on AR being the sole playmaker in traditional PG style, but rather he’d bring it up and initiate via LBJ and AD.

Even if he starts at PG, I still see him in a Ginobili type of SG role, albeit smaller. A triple scoring threat with a three, a midrange shot, a good drive and touch around the rim. Plus he’s a very quick and precise passer in traffic / on the break. Thin base and core is his main weakness on defense, indeed (and offense). He thinks defense right, but is just too easily pushed around and picked on by bigger wings like you say.

And I agree that Austin is our third best offensive player. He competes fearlessly, is an energizer, creates easy buckets for all by attacking. With Knecht and a coach around, his assists will surely increase.

[Michael Beasley]

Glue guys/above-average role players are not defensive liabilities.

I'm trying to think of just one and I can't. I can think of plenty of role players who are liabilities on defense, but not above average ones, not guys I'd call glue guys.

Unless he improves defensively, he's Joe Ingles, a seventh man in the rotation. His offense is good but not good enough to offset the abuse he allows on the other end of the floor.

joe ingles in his prime started and played 30 mpg lol

ham already experimented with bringing him off the bench last year. the team played much better with him starting

Utah had the best record in the league with Ingles off the bench (20/21). The team was better with Ingles as the sixth or seventh guy.

And that's my point. Reaves has the ability to be a 20 point scorer in this league, but his team will probably be bad.

Unless he gets better on defense to the point where opposing guys aren't salivating when they see Reaves in his stance, his best role is an efficient bench scorer and ball-handler.

If Reaves is your sixth top scorer, but gets seventh or eighth most minutes, you have a really, really good team. Ironically, that level of production would Garner 15m per year, so his contract isn't t that far off from his actual value, still underpaid but not by much.

Unless he gets better on defense, the Lakers should be looking to place Reaves in his optimal role. That means not viewing him as a pillar or core piece but instead understanding that in order to be elite with him on the team they have to have 3-4 wings on the roster who can and do outplay him, at least 2-3 wings in the rotation who are better than him defensively.

brother, joe ingles was 6th in scoring and mpg on that team that year, 5th in fga. he started 30 games. i would argue he was the 5th option on that team.

looking at this laker roster right now, reaves is our 3rd/4th option. it's really not a stretch to say his ideal role would be the 5th starter on a good team. i get what you are saying, maybe he'd be better as a 6th man or lower, sure. i would love to see more christie and knecht this year. but it's pretty obvious the team was better with reaves on the floor than off last year.