What is up, fellow thermonuclear a effort, I am damn Valley coming at
you with get another mail bag as I finish up day four without caffeine.
The energy I have right now might be artificial or maybe just delirious and coherent.
We're about to find out. Had so many great questions. There's a
chance I might need to split this into a third part, which is fine
because I already announced there will not be a mail back next week because we
get into off season grades. I'm gonna try and get through as many as
possible, but never to keep the off season episodes more manageable length where they're
not like eighty hours each, I might need to split this into a weekend
mail back episode. So thank you all for your questions. It was fantastic.
If this is your first time checking us out, you've stumbled upon us
for some reason, hit that subscribe button on YouTube right now means the world
to me. If you are listening to us for your podcast player, throw
us the permanent subscription, help us download or excuse me, please download every
episode. Tell your friends, family members, acquaintances, coworkers about us,
people on the internet who you know, like Hoops, You can also retweet
our promos on Twitter. Of course that helps out a bunch. Or if
you know people consume a lot of YouTube videos for basketball, tell them to
check us out, me out as we as I try to do a very
thorough, unserious though job of covering the entire MBA at large. Join our
Discord. It's a lot of fun in there. This is a discord dominant
mailbag. Those are the question I'm gonna get too first, so you will
get priority, or at least ensure that there's one mailbag per week with your
question by being in discord in ways that you cannot ensure that on Twitter,
via email, as I've gotten some via direct message or via YouTube, even
though I put out solicitations on YouTube though, So join our Discord. Link
to that is in the YouTube description and the podcast description. Our socials are
either on your screen or in the podcast sla YouTube description. Who That was
a longer intro than I wanted, But let's dive right into this mailbag.
There was a shit ton of really good questions. They're all really good questions,
but this one was especially chock full of them and included a lot of
thinkers. So HP Bergie discord again, as I've been wondering about something for
the next mailbag, how many teams are one player leap away from being legitimate
real contenders. For example, Job made an unexpected MVP level leap last year
and the Grizzlies have the second best record in the league. That is still
fucking wild that it wasn't just the second best record in the West, there
was the second best record in the league. Some teams I thought about for
this where the Timberwolves and the Pelicans if anton Zion make joll Eva leaps.
But are there others the Cavs with MOBILEI, the Raptors with Barnes. What
teams have enough talent that if one guy developed enough, it could take them
into the upper echelon of contenders. That's a fantastic question, And I like
framing it this way rather than what team is one player away, because really
every team could dectually be one trade away if someone like Kevin durandis letting around
out there. But this is a more interesting exercise because it's more attainable if
you have someone on your team who you think can develop into something or make
a bigger leap to where this core that you have as currently constructed could be
a contender. And so look, HP Energy excuse me, HP Bergie,
you already like listed most of the main ones. I'll push back, So
let's go through them here. I don't think the Calvs with Mobile just yet.
There needs to be another offensive dynamic to them on the perimeter that even
if you run more stuff through Mobile, I don't think that you get there.
They could come pretty close though, but that I think you need a
combination of Oh, Mobile makes a leap, plus you acquire someone who's not
already on the roster, and that includes if they resigned Sexton, extant LeVert
whatever. I'm with you on the timber Wolves, they are just I have
there's another question. I think it's going to directly follow this one that they're
going to relate to. People are either there are some people that might be
too high on the Timberwolves. I think generally nationally were too low on the
Timberwolves, especially when you're looking at the regular season. But if you get
the leap from Anthony Edwards and you don't really have to concern yourself with well,
who's going to be the engine of our offense and do we have someone
who can hit off the dribble triples, score from the mid range with the
floater, which we know that he's been working on in the offseason. Finish
tough at the rim, get to the line, who is just that threat
at every level. And then is also a playmaker Dealo is pretty good last
year. He's probably a little bit more of an efficient offensive player than people
credit him for. He's not in every level. Score like that. And
then plus just Anthey Edwards his defensive disruption or if you want to call him
a defensive playmaker as well, that goes a long way. And you're almost
guaranteed to have an elite defense this year if Gobert is going to remain healthy.
So if you get that third superstar like that player who was just recognized,
where I think you call even if you people don't like Gobert in the
playoffs, even people have problems with Karl Anthey Town's defense, those are like
two legitimate, unquestionable I would say top twenty guys, certainly top twenty five.
I would throw anthy Edwards in that conversation I haven't gone through since I
don't do I used to rank the top one hundred players for bleacher Report.
I do not do that anymore. Kind of kind of miss it and I
also kind of don't miss it at the same time. I digress there though.
That being said, like if Anthy Edwards gets to that consensus top fifteen
player, to where right now, I don't know if the Wolves have a
consensus top fifteen player. They might actually have two, but they're gonna be
debates is to wear kN Anthy Towns and Rudy Gobert belong. They're both like
in the All NBA discussion for their respective positions or position they should play the
same one. It's like, yeah, they're close to that, But does
Aunt Edwards become like he's their best shot at getting that top ten guy where
John Morant might have been friends that this year. So if Aunt makes Matt
consensus top fifteen player leap, I would absolutely throw the Timberwolves in there.
The Pelicans for sure. Or if you told me that Zion plays, because
we kind of have a better idea of what Zion is at his peak thanks
to twenty twenty one. If you told me Zion played in like sixty seven
games at that level last year, I don't even know if it's a matter
of him making a leap, he doesn't like, Okay, maybe he hits
some more stand still threes, and maybe he's just playing better defense, not
leaving, you know, not as inattentive or ball watchy when he's away from
the ball itself. So, but if you told me he played in sixty
seven games, looking at the context of that roster, having brandon Ingram,
having CJ. McCollum, now Larry Nance Junior, seeing what you got from
Herb Jones and Trey Murphy last year on top of Jose Alvarado, they could
absolutely make that jump. I feel like it's a little bit harder for them,
just because the Pelicans are going to be reliant on more inexperience close to
the top of their roster, where it's where it's like, Okay, there
are three sophomores, and Alvarado, Trey Murphy and Herb Jones, we're super
important. What kind of follow up campaign campaigns do they have? And then
how does Dyson Daniels sort of look, how much do they pend on him?
And so that I think I'd probably put the Timberwolves just above them when
we're looking at actual peaks. If you told me that the Pelicans is gonna
better than the Timberwolves next year, and that's more likely you find. But
I think if we did the ninety nine percentile outcome for the Timberwolves, it's
probably slightly better than that of the Pelicans, and maybe like even the fiftieth
percentile outcome, like it just there's I don't know how to describe, but
the Pelicans feel just a little bit less immediate than peaked Timberwolves, if that
makes any sense for anyone. So some other teams that I had, and
you also mentioned the Raptors, they're right there. They're like a team that
I feel like they have a very high floor and they're still might be a
little bit lower. If Scottie Barnes is kind of just like another regular player,
only improves incrementally compared to his rookie season. But if he makes like
the jump and you're running more stuff through him on offense and the jumper,
the set jumper, he's not hitting off the dribble jumpers, but he has
like some moves when he's in the poster from the mid range, if he's
making that like any sort of leap there even like not even a primary playmaker,
but more of a secondary playmaker, not just someone who you're using as
like the third ball handler, but maybe your second ball handler. You absolutely
throw the Raptors into there. I still might. If we're looking at the
highest outcomes of this season, I think it would go Timberwolves, Pelicans,
Raptors. For me, they're all really close. I thought about Pelicans,
Timorwolves, right, but yeah, if assuming no changes to the roster,
of course, and there might be a big one in Toronto since they remain
heavily linked to Kevin Durant. I also think so some teams I try to
come up with that were not on this list. If you already feel like
Philly is grandfathered into this, that fine, that's fine. But if Tyree's
Maxie takes another step forward, given how good he already was, were one
maybe talking about him as a potential All Star candidate, and then two like
you're a little bit less worried about the Sixers and how dependent they are on
James Harden and James aren't being James Harden, and then Joel bead remaining healthy.
So I think you could throw them in there. Phoenix if mchal Bridges
or Cam Johnson kind of makes like a really big offensive leap this year to
where they have another consistent off the dribble creator from the outside in. I
know Deandreton's always go, we're not always, but is their third best player.
They need that. I will call it a guard, but they really
just need more outside in creation. Hopefully that makes sense to people. So
if you wanted to throw them in there, I think they're still already in
the contenders click. But Philly Phoenix where a team to mention, and then
the other one I have Denver. If you get like the leap from Michael
Porter Junior this year and he stays healthy, you're not just like a new
contender, You're one of the title favorites. I've said on this podcast that
I'm when I go through this before the season, I don't know who's gonna
be my title pick, but I kind of have it pinned down to like
the five teams, and the Nuggets are very off. They're like my number
one right as of right now. If I had to pick right this moment,
I would pick them to win the title. Still questions about their bench.
I went on d NVR and talked with Brennan Voight and Adamadez the other
day, so you could go check that out. About why I'm so high
on and maybe they don't belong in this discussion because you could make the argument,
do they really need Michael Porter Junior to be a contender? But if
Michael Porter Junior makes the leap that it looked like he was headed towards were
already kind of making in twenty twenty one, and you scale that to the
entirety of this season, we're talking about a title favorite here, and so
those are the other teams I'd mentioned that that was a really great question.
I don't think any one else springs to mind. If you could go with
Atlanta and you think that DeAndre Hunter finally makes the leap, and he's more
consistent on offense, Uh what in addition to even improving a little bit on
defense and just improving his availability overall, I think I would listen to that.
I think some people might argue, well, what if Patrick Williams makes
the jump for Chicago, that could be another candidate. I kind of run
out of options after that. Depending on how you feel about Memphis, do
you think that they're a contender. Do they need sort of another leap from
a Desmond manor Zeier Williams That would be another team to mention here, I'm
not necessarily sold on them as that bona fide contender right now, which I
recognize is such a stupid ass thing to say about a team that just had
the second best record in the league. That was a great question though.
Gabriel two hundred twelve hundred asked which five teams have the widest error bands for
you going into next season and which five have the smallest by error bands?
I just mean range of outcomes slash win records chans potential slash potential goodness.
This was another fun question that I put a lot of thought into. So
we'll frame it like this. I'm gonna look at the widest range of outcomes,
so like low to high to where they could suck. I'm using his
streams here to be like the best thing that we've ever seen on a basketball
court. And then we'll do like the narrowest range of outcomes to where I'm
not going to focus so much on teams that we know are gonna be bad,
but teams that are good. And maybe they have really high floors,
but what does that say about their ceilings? Do they have the highest ceiling
or maybe they're just their floor is so high that it's it's just close their
ceiling. This one's I feel like less fun. Let's start with the narrowest
range of outcomes, so we'll start here. This is the whole exercise is
fun, but the widest range of outcomes I enjoy a little bit more.
So I have the Clippers here. They feel like they have an absurdly high
floor, even if they're gonna have to deal with more injuries again, and
that their floor is still title contender and their ceiling is title favorite. I
thought about the Phoenix Suns here as well, too, just because I think
they still have a very high regular season floor if you're worried about Chris Paul
kind of have. And that's look when I'm framing it this way, if
you have a very high floor, that narrows a range of outcomes to me,
because you would be closer in theory to your best case outcome. So
I've the Clippers. I have the Suns there just because I feel like we've
soured on them collectively too much since that game seven to Boco versus Dallas.
They deserve to be crucified for it. I don't necessarily endorse them running it
back in full. But if they don't get Kevin Durant and there's not another
trade out there for them to make an addition, this is still going to
be a damn good slash great basketball team that is going to be mentioned for
me at least still among the top five contenders in the league. The Bucks
belong here too. If you have Jannis, like, your floor is just
contender in the East, I think. And so these two it's funny that
they show up here because we were just talking about how they might be one
player or what one player leap away. I think the Nuggets, like we
kind of just soar their saw their floor and it was five six in the
West, but their ceiling is still like one two in the West as well.
And so if they don't need pristine health or availability for Murray or Michael
Porter Junior to be really good, I think you could argue that maybe they're
not a good pick. Just if, as I mentioned, if you get
a leap and good health or Michael Porter Junior not to mention good health from
Jamal Murray, you're probably looking at becoming a title favorite. So I could
understand if you don't think they're valid. And then I also have Toronto here
in large part because I just feel like they're going to be really good.
And you could also would argue that they might be the truest example of this
narrow range of outcomes because as high as I am on Toronto, and I
would talk myself into them beating anyone over the course of a seven game series
as currently constructed, Like, do you really see a pathway for them to
being one of the five best teams in basketball? You can see the vision
with the Nuggets there, and we know the blueprint in Milwaukee, Phoenix and
the Clippers. But with Toronto, it's like, Okay, I don't think
they're gonna fall further than fifth in the East, but what's their path to
becoming two in the East. And so it feels like they have the finite
range of outcome lest they make a move, And I would argue it's for
it would need to be for another just creator type, that person who works
from the outside in and is preferably like not super small. Even though I
like the idea of Don and Mitchell in Toronto, if it's if it's Kevin
Durant, there you go. So those are my narrowest rains of outcomes.
I didn't really know who else to consider here. I think there are a
lot of people that would probably go with Memphis in this, but those are
those are my five teams that they hashed out there. Some people might even
go with Miami or Boston. I think there's some bustability in a bad way
for both teams there. And I also just like, maybe Miami kind of
belongs there because I'm starting to question whether they're going to be like these true
blue contenders. I really would like to see them solve like the four spot
next to p J. Tucker. My widest range of outcomes, this was
way more fun. I actually have seven teams jotted downs. Let me let
me get through my honorable mentions here. I have the Sacramento Kings in the
Dallas Mavericks. The Mavericks I almost considered for both narrowest and widest range of
outcomes. They have Luca and so I'm like, they have to be good,
but they just lost their second best player. They're planning on playing Javal
McGee and Christian Wood at the same time, they still lack tertiary shock creation.
It's Spencer Didnwoody Luka and then that's fucking it, Like if you're gonna
trust Tim Hardaway Junior to be that person for you or Jaden Hardy in year
one, you're going to run in two some issues. So I could see
a pathway to them being bad, like pretty bad, talking about falling out
of the play in territory. But I think it's you have Luca and so
that props up your floor a little bit. I just don't think they I
would call it a narrow range of outcomes for them, because I do think
there's that combustibility, but they ended up being an honorable mention here. And
also I would slop them into one of the teams is very contingent upon the
personnel, which is probably gonna change, so they would be like my first
runner up. And then there's the Kings. I don't know. I don't
know that I trust their depth overall, and I definitely am not going to
trust their defense. But if you get to a point where you're just winning
games one hundred and twenty to something or one hundred and thirty to something,
I could see a pavenly with them being really good, not just playing good.
But are they one of the top six teams. I would say that
their ceiling might be six in the Western Conference, but I think that their
floor is also much lower than that. Still, you look at them on
paper and with Keegan Murray, Diaron Fox, Domasa Bonis, Harrison, Barnes,
Davion Mitchell, Malik Monk being there, having Rashaun Holmes is a backup
bag right now, there is talent and like looking at and they're also look
Mike Brown received a lot of credit for some of the work he did defensively
with Golden State. That might just help them systematically in Sacramento. So I'm
not ruling it out. I just don't know if they have the ceiling to
where I'd want to put them in the widest range of outcomes. So the
team, let's get to my actual list. I have the nets on here,
and they could be like easily bounced. I'm not even just basing this
off of Oh, they could have Kevin Durant or not have Kevin Durant.
It's just like, think about it, Kevin Durant trade, what are they
getting back? Are they getting back Jaalen Brown? All of a sudden,
you have like this non all NBA star on your roster, and what does
Ben Simmons look like? Have you traded Kyrie Irving at that point, and
it was it for Russell Westbrook to where you know, he's not even gonna
play in Brooklyn or does he play in Brooklyn at that point. So there
are just so many different outcomes, and this is all the safe and nets
stay the same. You have to deal with the health issues of Kevin Rent
that we've seen in the past three years. There's always stuff going on with
Kyrie Irving, whether it's you know, him just going m ia or refusing
to get the COVID nineteen vaccine that won't be as big of an issue unless
they're playing in Toronto this year, or he's just had some weird injury quirks
throughout his career. So the nets could be all over the place. For
me. I think the rest of these were easy, and we already talked
about three of these teams. I think the Calves are there. They were
darlings for most of last year. Injuries really hit them. Are they that
team that's like third fourth best in the East. But they also kind of
have this floor of well their offense. They haven't done anything to materially improve
it this summer, and they haven't even officially resigned Colin Sexton yet and so
like you're sort of running it back and there actually could be a deficit and
offensive talent depending on what happens with Colin Sexton at this point. So that
would be a team to monitor. And we're looking at look Jared Allen,
Darius Garland, Evan Mobley, they can all get better. How do you
work Boji into this? Does Isaac Korro get any better? The heck does
Colin Sexton get better if he's coming back? So I could see them being
really good or like this is a team that's like firmly in the lottery.
Ditto for the Pelicans. There's the Zion health factor is big. And then
you still look at this roster. They improved a lot defensively, especially in
transition under Willie Green as the season went on. And just like I have
that the way that they pushed the Suns in the first round of the playoffs,
that is tattooed to my memory right now. But like, are they
are we rushing to coordinate them as this team that's the one player leap away,
given the extent to which they will be relying on some youngsters again,
three sophomores and Trey Murphy, Jose Alvarado, and Herb Jones. Plus they're
probably gonna want to develop Dyson Daniels. Are they gonna try and shoehorn some
Kyra Lewis minutes into here? What if DeVante Graham doesn't play well? How
many games the Zion playing? How does he fit? And next say you
own his val and chunis, what are you doing up front if he doesn't
fit well with that is Jackson Hayes, You're gonna try and make that fit?
It happened. There's just a lot of questions here to where I could
envision things going sideways for New Orleans. But I also think that like their
best case outcome is oh their fourth or something wild in the west on The
Minnesota Timberwolves are on here as well. I think this one's pretty straightforward.
I could see them absolutely finishing with the best record in the Western Conference.
I could also see this dual big situation go belly up. I don't think
it will, but it is something drastically different. Even though Jared Vanderbilt and
Karl Anthony Town's played together a bunch last season, this is drastically different from
what they were doing, and so are they a team that if this pairing
doesn't work out, or if this setup doesn't work out, they're pretty top
heavy right now too at the moment, maybe the bench isn't shallow enough.
Do they have enough secondary creation after de Loo and Anthy Edwards? How much
are you going to rely on Jordan McLaughlin and Jalen Noel? Are they going
to give you enough of that element? So I could see the Wolves being
the best team in the Western Conference for the regular season, I'm not I've
been kidding. I could also see him being like, I don't think they're
Their floor is probably in the play in but there aren't many teams that I
don't know, Like, there aren't many teams where it's like tenth to first,
Like that's a really wide range of outcomes, And maybe there's a scenario
where this whole dual big setup just really doesn't work out for them. So
then you would fall out of the plan because that's so central to how you're
directing your roster moving forward. I wouldn't predict that. I think they'll be
closer to their best case outcome than not, but that's still there is that
combustibility would be the word to define this, and then finally I have the
Portland Trailblazers. I mentioned them on this last pot. I think they're ceiling
is like fifth in the West, but they're not especially deep, especially when
you're looking at the front court. And if you don't if Anthony Simons takes
a step back, let alone doesn't improve given all he did last season,
or if you all of a sudden feels like you're too small, or is
there a nur kitchen injury, or you're just wanting for depth like maybe Shandon
sharp Is if he's healthy, is even playing right away? Is is there
a developmental curb that's not helping you? What are you doing with the backup
center spot? How reliant are you on either going small where Jeremy Grants soaking
up a lot, soaking up a lot of the backup five minutes? Or
are you just married to let's say Drew you Banks. At this point,
there are a lot of questions there. Are you good defensively even though you
have this talent like Josh Hart GP two, Jeremy Grant, Justice's winslow even
how much is he playing? Are you getting any improvement from from Keyan Johnson
given you're also reliant on youth to an extent, like, yeah, Amfredy
Simons is young, but he's experienced. There's also just young inexperienced guys here
nots little has just not been healthy throughout his career. Keyan Johnson mentioning there
Shaden Sharp of course, so are your best lineups? Like how what are
you conceding on that is its size? Can you be small if you want
to play Josh Hart and GP two at the same time while having Damian Lillard
and Amfrey Simons on the court? Is Jeremy Grant You're five in that situation?
Is it nurkicch? How does he hold up defensively this year if Portland
wants to be a little bit more aggressive on that end. So they could
be pretty bad even if they're healthy. They could also be really really good
And so that's why they were an easy inclusion on this list for me.
Another great question, thank you Gabriel for that one. The Bronx is Hallowed
Ground has an interesting one. I was listening to a pod recently where the
host, who is a player trainer, was critical of players competing in open
runs, parentheticals ProAm games. The host point was that the competition is weak,
so it's not a real workout. Specifically, he was critical of the
defense. He didn't feel players got better going against lower competition. My thoughts
are that these games give players a chance to put to use the new skills
that they are trying to develop. Where does your opinion fall on these types
of games? Do you feel they are useful or is it just players showing
off? I'd probably excuse somewhere in the middle. I want to know what
this player trainer thinks is happening in like practices during the season. Yeah,
there might be some guys that are gonna put up more of a fight because
they're fighting for a roster spot, or this is the only playing time they're
think is in scrimmages in practice, But like practice is not inadequate simulation from
what's happening in an NBA game. And I think you could really just shit
all over any sort of pickup basketball or non actual NBA game, if we're
going to get into that. Does it matter if you're just, you know,
in a gym, hitting all these open three pointers or hitting shots that
you wouldn't normally take in a game. I appreciate any game simulation more than
I would something like that. I do think it's interesting that you believe the
Bronx is hallowed ground. I feel weird calling you by that, but that
is your discord name. I never really thought that element. Oh, that
it gives players a chance to try out like new skills. If we're talking
specifically, probably about ball handling or self created shot making, I'd probably agree
with you there. I wonder how much forethought goes into that. One thing
to kind of think about, though, is does it matter a little bit
that Dejandey Murray, John Collins and Trey Young have already gotten reps together on
the court, Like we think, Okay, that can't matter that much.
They're getting a little bit familiar with one another, and if nothing else,
they're getting to know one another specifically with de Jante Murray and Treyon Collins have
been on the same team before. Also of them playing together. When there's
all the rumblings that owe is John Collins unhappy with Treyon, they're just kind
of hysterical. We do know John Collins wants a bigger role, that's a
fact. So I don't have an issue with these games. Do I think
that they're like super helpful to player development or player improvement. I would probably
argue no, but I don't know why you wouldn't want players in these games?
And do you want them going full So would it be better if they
were going full born risking injury? No, Like I still have that I
was watching. I think I was actually at a bar or a club when
it was happening in my youth when Paul George was injured at the Olympics,
and I remember watching that, it was just like it was gruesome. I
felt terrible for him, and I understand that the stakes were higher there it
was with Team USA, but it was also like, you know, the
stakes for that game was a Team USA scrimmage if I'm not mistaken, So
do you want them to injure themselves? No? So why should they be
going at full tilt in these games when you're looking at oh, playing defense?
If you really want to see them go up against guys are going to
try and play scrappy defense. You could find those guys in pro end games
like to on the other team. So I don't know that's interesting that anyone
would be critical of them. I definitely don't think even if I don't think
they're incredibly helpful. They're they're not harmful, like they're not players aren't regressing
because they're playing in pro am games. So that's a fascinating take that said
player trainer had on a pod. H P. Bergie had another question.
Here's one I've been thinking about. Who's the worst player in the league that
could be the best player on a championship team. I was thinking maybe Tatum,
Jimmy or Paul George. And this is a twofold question, so let's
start there. So yet you name all the good ones. I think Tatum
is too high end for that. Paul George feels like the answer here.
Look, Jimmy, Butler and Tatum are still like they were in the top
ten player conversation last year. And if you can't win a title, if
one of the ten the fifteen best players in the league as your best player,
what are we even doing here? Yes, there's star loading or just
building a better supporter or cast supporting cast. I'm I'm curious if, like
I think Paul George feels like the answer, I still think is it someone
like excuse me, is it someone like Karl Anthony Towns? And I don't
know if that's me being too low on Carlton Towns or is it too high
on Karl Anthony Towns. I mean it is more of a compliment to him,
but like he's someone if if he's my best player, I actually feel
comfortable with what the product could be. You definitely have to build your supporting
cast around him pretty like specifically. So maybe that isn't the best example.
Paul George is is just a fantastic answer. I think Tatum's probably Twyan for
that. I don't think Jaylen Brown is like you can't really put him in
in that discussion. Trey Young probably too high end there as well. So
I do I think Paul George is the answer here? I think I think
my answered this next question might rankle some people, but bam Adebayo should probably
be in this discussion and he's not. I still need to see like more
from him offensively. The versatility is there, and I'm not telling him to
start chucking threes, but there feels like there's a toggle on off switch with
his offensive aggression. But yeah, I think Paul George is just that's someone
who's very easy to build around and very very easy to plug and play alongside.
Other stars, I will die that the answer is actually Frank Neil Kina,
but in actuality like if like I kind of want to say Shae Gil
just Alexander, It's just the talent isn't around him right now in Okay see,
but that might be someone I would consider as well. This one's probably
more just apropo if you've done that one before. Who are the best worst
players in the league that could be the second best player in our championship team?
For the best, I was thinking hard and kyrieer Booker. For the
worst, I was thinking Lavine Middleton or Jamal Murray. I hate that you
took all the good ones. When I was reading through this and prepping for
this podcast, I was like, fucking Paul George is on here at Middleton
would be my answers, like I think Middleton is the floor on what you'd
want as your second best player. I don't necessarily understand who can be the
best second best player on a team. Is the implication that they're so that
players are so good sometimes that they're be harder to fit alongside equals or who
would be their superiors to which I could dig that, but I would say
right now, like the second best number the best number two in the league,
or the best the best second best player in the league. I think
is hardened in Philly if we're assuming a beat is the best player and that's
still general. If it's not hard and I would probably say it is Devin
Booker. Would I have him in front of Paul George at this point?
Yeah? I would, but hard and I still give him the benefit of
the debt. I think this is gonna be a monster year for him.
Quite frankly, So if that's the question who's the best second best player in
the league, it's harder Booker for me, And I'm look, I can't
even put Booker there because I think Booker is the best player on the Suns,
and so the answer for me is James Harden. I would be curious,
like, is Devin Booker the answer to the first question? Can he
be the best player you win a championship? I actually believe the answer is
yes. But am I selling too low on Devin Booker by putting him in
there? Which is why I didn't put him in the in there? I
think Paul George is a a great proxy for that. I'm just curious,
is to like where Bam at a bio fits in this discussion. Can you
win a title? Is he like too high end is the second best player?
Yeah, like he's in that kind of Levigne or Jamal Murray territory for
me, And so I think the better question be can you win a title
with bam is your best player? And I think Miami like their best path
to a title is probably the answer that question being yes, So he probably
belongs to that first discussion. And could he be the answer then I'm just
not sure if you could win a title with him as the your best player.
So yeah, I I would go with Middleton as the worst number two,
And then Paul George is the worst number one. And anyone who thinks
that it's not Paul George one, what is your actual picked in two?
Could we at least like we need to pour one out for Paul George here
because he he was fantastic last season when when he was healthy and the whole
pandemic pe thing took on a life of its own, and I think we
veered too far from reality with him. Anthony Davis could probably earn the honor
of the second best, second best player in the league. I actually I
don't want to say this, but I'm not sure if you can win a
title with him as the best player on your team. Was he better than
Lebron in the twenty twenty like playoff run? No? Overall, So that's
would be a more fascinating question. Does he belong Like can you win a
title with Anthony Davis as your best player night and night out best player?
I think the answer is no. I'd be more inclined to think that it's
Paul George than it is Anthony Davis. Is that is that wild? Like?
Am I? Am? I a fucking idiot? I? I think
I just value consistent every level shot creation a bit more. And if even
if you're running the offense through Anthony Davis, a lot of it needs to
be done through someone setting the table for him. Michael Lebron. And yeah,
he had that bubble run, and he's had moments where just like his
jumper is falling and he can really create for himself, but it never just
feels consistently enough or a at a high enough clip for it to be in
that discussion. And so is he like the best player you can't win a
title with? Is your number one option? Like that's like, let's just
totally flip the tables on this. Who would be the answer to that question?
If anyone's listening to this in discord on Twitter, let me know who
is the best player that you can't win a title with as your number one
option. I think it's problem like Ivy days might be the answer there.
I hope at least I'm I'm using myself with framing it that way. Christopher
asked with teams having some difficulty moving a player four years left on their contract,
you first see an eventual move to making long term contracts three years.
I would consider three years on long term contract right now, just the way
that extensions have worked predominantly and guys wanted to hit free agency sooner or again,
we've seen a lot of like two year extensions or even like the three
year specials. And I don't think that it's hard to move people with four
years left in their contracts. It's just Kevin Durant is in his thirties,
like mid thirties at this point, and is one of the five seven best
players in basketball, So he's going to have a say where he goes no
matter what, even if he definitely doesn't have the leverage, and so I
actually don't think it's the contract length so much as player specific. Here,
if this was like, I'm trying to think of an example of a player
that maybe doesn't have the cachet to force a trade in the first place,
like you know, if it was like, Let's use Jalen Brunts as an
example. Let's say the Nicks wanted to trade him in the middle of the
year, and once he's trade eligible, that's a contract that you could move.
That's the four one O four is not and it's and it's declining.
Maybe some teams want to appreciate that, but the declining scale I think helps
a lot of teams plan for the future. So I don't think it's the
contract length so much as the player. If Shake Gillishawxander went on the market
tomorrow, is he like too good? Does he have the cachet to request
to trade and limit his options? I'd argue, no, he's just so
young and Okay, see also won like Brooklyn probably doesn't give a fuck.
But knowing how Sam pressI operates, I'm not saying Shay's gonna request to trade.
I'm on records saying the thunder should keep him. So if there are
any okay, see fans listening to this, let's just clarify that I think
the bigger issue here, or it's not the issue, but what I think
Christopher kind of alludes to that's going to be interesting. Are we just going
to see more shorter term deals before that we get that cap spike, whether
it's in twenty five, twenty six, whatever it's supposed to be. At
this point, our player is gonna prep to want to hit free agency that
first summer, let's say twenty twenty six, or do they want to kind
of be in twenty twenty seven since there's cap smoothing, so you want to
get two medium jumps in there. That's something I absolutely think that we could
see when we're looking at extensions that are going to be signed, or just
players like stars who are in their prime and who were still being there in
their prime in twenty six twenty seven, that might be how they approach deals.
And even just some of the more min end talent, like if it's
just you're younger, you're still going to be in your prime and in the
summer of twenty six or twenty seven, I could see you signing a shorter
term deal. What's interesting is that Zach Lavine did not do that, and
I thought he was the perfect case study. This year he signed the full
five year bolt with Chicago. He has injury concerns in his rearview, including
to end this season with maybe that factor into it a little bit. But
I do think that we'll see shorter contracts over the next summer or two become
a little bit more common as players try to position themselves to capitalized as much
as possible off what's going to be in impending and probably multi year cap spike,
and we all assume that smoothing is going to happen the big fella,
as Bamtebaio is looking to have his fourth different starting power forward next to him,
seems to be a struggle to find the perfect fit. Who do you
view is the best potential fit next to them right now and then long term.
I will say I don't think that players on the heat roster. I
think they found some really good fits with Jay Crowder only to let him leave,
and then PJ Tucker, who it seems like he wanted to leave Miami
could have offered him the same contract Philly did. I don't know if they
would have wanted to have hard tapped themselves for PJ. Tucker at that point,
so they found the fit. I was looking. I scoured rosters,
and I came up with some names I wanted to think, like higher end
trade targets or at least semi aggressive trade targets that they could go after.
And I think these total line of immediate fit and long term fit. I
have Jay Crowder on this list. John Collins would be fun. Naxie Cleibo
would be an understated example. Kelley Bridge Juniors in the final year of his
deal. I guess from a space perspective, I don't necessarily love it,
but Kelly Bridge and your shot the three ball well enough for that to work.
Here's a name, and I know he's been, or maybe he hasn't
been. I feel like I've read somewhere he was linked to the EAT,
but like Miles Turner where it's BAM and I don't know who you consider the
four in that scenario, but that would be a front court setup. I
would like to see. Marcus Moore's senior, of course, would work.
Harrison Barnes if things go off the rails in Sacramento, Boyo Bardonovitch right now
in Utah, Like, is there a way, Like what do you need
to give up if it's a Duncan Robinson for Brillon Bardonovitch swap, Like how
many sweeteners do you need to include? Kyle Kuzma could be really interesting here,
and then this is I don't know if it's my favorite, but if
things go off the rails in Portland, Jeremy Grant, they didn't give up
a ton to get him, and so it was just they used that they
took him into a trade exception and gave up like the meat and potatoes of
that deal was that Milwaukee pick in twenty twenty five. And so if you
can get another first round pick for him from a team that won't have cap
space and wants to resign him, if you want to move him, that's
another name that's bringing him one. I try to think of like really younger
types that, oh, could they be available and you could try to go
after them, And I just don't know that that player like would actually be
gettable. Would Charlotte be willing to move on from PJ. Washington? I
think he's probably good enough defensively, in addition to stretching the floor where that
could potentially work. Grant Williams in Boston. I don't know why Boston would
say Grant Williams. Grant Williams is such a direct rival, but that could
be appairing that works out. But those were like the trying to think of
younger type names where if you were going to take a flyer on them,
that's the route you could go. And I don't think there was nobody else
that specifically like skewing younger that sprang to mind for me here jolt the goat.
What do you think about the recent push by teams that go big?
Seems counterintuitive to the space and pay small ball era, but we're in But
more teams seem to embrace starting multiple big men that have perimeter skills. I
eat a Timberwolves, Cavs, Grizzlies, even the Celtics. All those teams
had great success last year when healthy and the timber will seem to make a
lot of sense on papers. This is a fat or is this more indicative
of the full realization of the modern big unicorn big man? I think it's
more so the ladder and I think what teams are trying to do here is
that you want to still maintain the ability to have a dynamic and diverse offense,
but can you do it while also kind of upping your defensive ceiling.
And so if you look at a lot of the teams that we roll through,
yeah, Orlando was one of them, and they were not good on
defense, But four of the top ten defenses from last year started two bigs
Boston and Golden State, who are the two best defenses in the league,
and then Cleveland was sixth and Memphis was fifth. And so what I think
teams are at least trying to do is that they want to give themselves a
defensive edge with players and size who are not going to compromise their ability to
go against the grain or be versatile on offense. And I think what they've
also decided in some cases that it will be easier to figure out a way
to be an elite offense while having two bigs, maybe when it's imperfect on
offense, than it is to be like, hey, let's downsize and overcome
that. And so you look at the Warriors would be a great example.
They finished seventeen in an offense last year, but when Steph was on the
court, they have that transcendent talent to carry them to well above average offensively.
You trust in Boston they were tenth in offense, so they were it
was not the same case of Golden State. But they have someone like Jayson
Tatum. You trust that he's going to elevate your actual ceiling. Is easier
for him to do that than it is to downsize and play Jayson Tatum himself
with the five and still maintain a good defense and not worry about the wear
and tear on his body as well. And so let's Cleveland would be like
one of the best examples here, and even you could throw Minnesota since it's
going into the first year of this experiment for them, even though you had
the town's Vanderbilt dynamic last year. But Cleveland, like they've decided to play
basically three bigs at points and think that they can still drum up enough offense
and that they're not going to be able to replicate that same versatility as easily
on defense. And so if you think that it's size and then mobility,
size, mobility, and length, some combination of the three, if not
all three, is going to give me that pathway to an elite defense,
And then you because I do feel like it's easier for a singular player to
have an impact on offense versus defense, where I do think it's more team
and personnel dependent. And Rudy Gobert would be a perfect example. He punches
your ticket to a top ten defense by on his own every single season.
But if you get to the playoffs, you need like more defensive talent around
him, or it's going to be easier to make life hell on him.
And you could say offensively, you need the same thing. You don't just
want the one player run everything through. But over the longer term, it
does feel like one player on offense can have a much bigger dent on the
product, impact on the product in the higher leverage moments than someone on defense.
And so if you think that this model is a way to really beef
up your defense and maybe even counter some of the teams that are going small,
we talk about how the timber was going to match up if the Clippers
decided to downsize against them, for instance, in a playoff series or just
a game. Maybe you're trying to force teams outside of their comfort zone.
Do the Clippers when they don't have the size to run two bigs can you
sort of beat them into submission there, And so I think those are the
elements that go into it. But I mostly think that teams are always looking
for, like not cheat codes, but counters to what's happening the new trends.
This is just a natural counter. But it also feels like a conscious
or maybe even subconscious decision that hey, we can build like these terrifying defenses
with size and dual bigs and then still just be good enough on offense even
if the fit is imperfect, and places like Boston, it's not imperfect because
al Orford's based on the floor and you have Rob Williams is a passer running
down the lane and also just like a lob catcher and good rim diver there.
So yeah, there are times where where it works out just fine.
But even in a fist where maybe a Steven Adams and Jared Jackson Jr.
Aren't the ideal fit alongside one another just because yeah, Jaren Jackson Junior's space
is the floor and Steven Adams can be your primary screen setter there, but
Steven Adams is more limited offensively than a Robert Williams the third to me and
Steven Adams de fan I nobody does for you on the offensive class. So
it feels like that type of a decision where teams are looking at this and
saying, oh, we it's easier for us to cobble together really good offense
if the personnel isn't perfect, so long as we have that one sort of
guiding force, then if you flip flop it on the defensive end, and
that maybe just the size is better to beat up on some of these teams
that want to run smaller. Do I think this trend is here to stay.
I honestly don't know. I think the Timberwolves might be the ultimate litmus
test for this, and that's because it's such an extreme when you're looking at
the pay that was allocated to it and the caliber of talent that's upfront.
This isn't like Draymond Green and Cavan Looney where there's one star in a non
star or Al Horford sort of at the end of his prime or the end
of his talent of his career. Verse with Robert Williams the third who's at
the beginning of his prime. Even Jared Allen and Evan Mobley, they're both
at the beginning of their primes, and only one of them is expensive right
now, so you haven't had to like make that extra pot commitment. And
I think how Minnesota fairs during the regular season as well as in the playoffs
is going to say a great deal about whether this is something that catches on
more so around the league. I'm gonna actually stop it there. I got
through all the discord questions. I will get to the mailbag and YouTube.
One's in a separate one that will go live on Saturday. So hopefully you
just appreciate the extra content. This was all great. If you have not
already, please remember to rate, review and subscribe to us wherever you're getting
your podcast. If you're on YouTube, hit that subscribe button, hit like
comment, help the algorithm, love us back. Let's you blust it the
hell up as always, and maybe get the shout out to the one,
the only, the indelible, Frank Nila Kina