What is up, fellow thermonuclear ampers. I am Dan Pavalley coming at you with my fans. Have you mistic co host Grant Hughes. We're back with another I guess long awaited mail bag. We haven't had one in a minute because we were trying to do our biggest long term question for each NBA team. That was an instructive exercise, So go check out those pods who We have another mail bag before we get started. My usual reminder to continue subscribing to us wherever you consume us. If you're on YouTube right now, hit that sub button like in comments, help the algorithm love us back. Subscribe on all the podcast platforms that you possibly can, but most definitely the one that you listen to us on, or if you're checking us out for the first time, consider throwing us that permanent sub. If you've done all those things, cross subscribe on YouTube and podcast players. And if you've done those things, please recommend us. Word of mouth shout outs on Twitter or appreciated we got one the other day from Long Time List or Noah Otage, and I retweet and respond to every single you know person. I think, I mean sometimes I've probably missing that shouts us out. You can help by bumping our promos on Twitter as well, or just following us on all the socials which are in the podcast and YouTube description links. Also join the Discord because Grant has made a Discord. He is in the chizats. He's there. He's we don't know how active he's gonna be. He's lurking. He's watching though, So when you say things, he might see them. That's if that's not a reason to join the Discord, I don't know what is. And before we cat and ball into this mail bag, we ask the question everyone wants to know the answer to Grant, how many days did it take you to figure out how to sign up for Discord? Yeah, the snail mail I had to send to the Discord headquarters with like a crayon handwritten note of how do I do the Discords? Took a long time for them to get that, so they appropriate people and back to me. But I handled it. And so I'm I'm hashtag on there and I'm excited and I'm a little scared, but everybody on there seems really cool. So, like I like the idea of if you're involved in it, it's because you're interested in talking about the same things we are and like being cool to each other. And it's kind of like what I imagine Twitter or other social media like wanted to be like the early stages. So I'm pretty down for that. I'm excited. I'm looking forward to seeing meeting some of the regulars and uh, you know, wrapping it into the pod and like as an example, like we got a bunch of great questions today and so I think it's it's it's only going to be a positive. So I am I'm excited. I saw when they user name come was like, I think that might be grand, but I wouldn't put it past like maybe a listener to make a grand account just to like see so good to know that it was actually you. But yes, I echo everything you said about Discord. It's such a small portion of our listenership, but it's the most like and and this isn't to insult any of them. Maybe you just don't have Discord. I've had people past few weeks asked me about like with my masst on and I'm like, and that like a Power Rangers thing like like so like I understand why you wouldn't be on Discord, but everyone on there. They while they represent a small subsection of our listenership, like they're they're really invested in basketball and it seems the podcast. So it's fun interact with them, and Hey, that's why we don't do Twitter solicitations at the moment for mail bags, which will actually change this week. I will have a second mail bag up just for Twitter. But we had so many great questions. Are you ready to dive into them? Now that the most important question is out of the way, we have to ask the you know, the preamble question before we actually dive into the mail bag. Karlthy Towns is going to miss four to six weeks with a calf strain that came per the Wolves announced that. So, Plus, it's not his achilles. Everyone thought it was his achilles right off the bat when he got injured. Minus, he's gonna miss four to six weeks. What are your thoughts on this? Grand And there has been I've seen it floating around. There are some people I think that this might be beneficial to the Wolves somehow, which I would Yeah, I'm not. I'm not gonna wish injury on anyone aside. I just staunchly disagree in general, Yeah, I disagree too. I think it is positive that it's not an achilles but a calf strain. We're talking about a serious one, Jeff Stotts. I'm sure we'll tell us how long the average time miss is gonna be or has already done that. But I think I read that Grade three would have been three months, so it seems like it's less than a grade three. Yeah. I think I think it's a little concerning though, too, because a calf can linger. I mean, Dan Lillard had one and has it again, It can come back, it can trigger other stuff. So not great, but certainly not as bad as it could have been. I can't get on board with the idea that this is helpful, mainly because the best version of the this Wolves team like sort of has to have both Towns and Gobert on the floor together, or Towns on the floor in general, and so you're just not getting I mean, I think everyone would agree that some of the chemistry and like synergy between all the players in the main lineup on this team needed work and needed reps, and now you're not getting those. I guess the theory would be that you're taking a bad defensive player out of the lineup. But like I mean, Towns matter so much to the way they want to play offense and the spacing that they're not going to have, and the numbers. I mean, you you had this first the Wolves. Just it's a small sample relative to a full season, but four hundred and thirty two possessions with Gobert on the floor and Town's off, the Wolves get out scored by almost nine points per one hundred. Their defense is kind of right middle of the road, and their offense is just god awful. So I mean, that's that's what we're working with now until this lineup figure are these new roster combinations work a workout or work themselves out? So yeah, not great, mainly again to me, because these guys just need to play together. The adjustment to Gobert is massive for everybody, Towns especially, And now it's just this is time lost, you know, to get into the best version of this team. And they lost time in training camp and preseason because Towns was sick, and I think that impacted how confused they see them on defense to start the season, where they're trying to run different packages based off who's on the floor. And I'm wondering if were they doing that because that was supposed to be easier, or if that's how they actually wanted to play. And I was more of an advocate initially. I was like, well, just do what you think is best suited for your personnel. But now I'm just like trying to scale ahead of the playoffs. You want to play how you want to play in the postseason, and even if you're going through the growing pains, at least you have your players available and are trying to figure out what you're going to be defensively. That just gets you don't have the information with towns there, and like, there's also just the risk here that this town's injury torpedoes. They're already shaky standing in the Western Conference. I know he hasn't been great. The Wolves have picked up a little bit of late. I think they're five and three over their last eight games or whatever it is. They're ten and then one game under five hundred, and you mentioned the numbers with Golbert on the court. If you think the Wolves are going to be better, it's because you want to follow the Jazz model or you think it's just oh, we're gonna surround him with four shooters. That's not something that Minnesota is currently built to do. They're twenty fifth in three point shooting accuracy, and Towns his three point clip has pulled back. He's at thirty two point five percent for the season. He's taking him out, by the way, like half as many threes as I expected him. So I just assumed he was gonna take like ten or twelve a game. He's under six. He's important to that four out model because the way that De'anzel Russell has been shooting, even Anti Edwards being touch and go. So they are shooting when Towns is off the floor and Golbert is on the court twenty five percent on non corner threes. I don't know that you not all of a sudden. I know Towns has been like him and Rudy Gobert want to occupy some of the same spaces on offense, more so than I thought that they were going to run into issues with this year. Like I don't know, you might make go Bear more comfortable, but I don't know that you're inherently improving your offense. I think what you need is what you've always needed, is that di'angel Russell. But I mean, you needed talents to play, but Deangel Russell needs to shoot the ball better, like for a long period of time. That was something you needed before Carl Anthony Towns was injured and so this is just it. You avoided the worst case scenario. But I still think this has the potential to be catastrophic for the Simmerwolves this season. Yeah, it's got far reaching ramifications, like you said, because if you're trying to get ready for the playoffs now, you're just gonna lose a month plus two months whatever it is. Because you'll be careful with this. I assume they're going to err on the side of holding Towns out longer than rushing him back. You're just losing like experimentation opportunities or just you know, chemistry stuff. I think like one of the easy angles to play here is that well, Anthony Edwards, now you're you're gonna get a lot more touches. You're gonna be a much bigger part of the offense. In theory, there's one less big guy in the lane. Although like again, Towns as a spacing big is I mean almost historically unparalleled in terms of like the attention that he commands out there. He's not camping in there like Gobert is. But like you said, there have been instances way too often or shockingly often where they're both kind of in the way. So maybe that spaces things out for Edwards. Maybe he ever just thirty a game or something, you know, over this stretch, it would be certainly that's the best thing you could get out of this if you're the Wolves, which is Edwards just kind of waking up full time for the season. But yeah, it's hard otherwise to spend this in any kind of positive way. And it's just I mean, what are you doing at that You have Tori and Prince, but we all of a sudden, like, oh, we have to explore the pairing that you were never really supposed to explore. And it's probably already played more this season than I thought it would. But Kyle Anderson Rudy Gobert as your front court, and like, if Towns isn't on, like, it's almost easier to work pad pairing of Towns is on the court and slow moos your day. Fact three. I did look this up. This shocked me. But with Anderson and Gobert on the court and no Towns, Wolves have a one fourteen offensive rating. I have to imagine that the level of competition was just so low it didn't matter, or d Russell has just been that bad, like a lot of those Mints are coming without Edwards or D'Angelo Russell. Is that how that's working? I think that. I just feel like this is going to be like an absolute massacre for the Wolves in the answer, maybe I'm wrong here, but just like even I mentioned their last game last key is where there's just five and five over their last ten, still not shooting the ball exceptionally well from three, like nas Reid and Jordan McLoughlin have been two of their most valuable three point shooters over the past ten games. This is just all sorts of uneasy and now all of a sudden, like you're Utah sitting here like, oh, we don't need our pick to be a lottery pick, like because the Minnesota's might be a lottery picked but mean while the Jazz had fallen all the way to ninth in the West, so that neither here nor there for that. But like this is I don't know, I don't know, man, I'm I'm frankly. I was already we had preached patients with the Wolves. Yeah, I'm a full blown panic right now. You're not fixing anything like Torrian Princes on this roster. Great, like there are things you can open there, but they're not fixing anything externally. So they don't have like the firepower to make a trade. And you don't want to overreact because you have so much equity in your front court right now that you're not gonna go make a trade even if you could. Yeah, I mean, like you look at the normal solutions, like maybe we play McDaniels at the four now and we just play three smaller guards they wanted to avoid like forever. Yeah, right, but like maybe that's but it's not like he's like, you know, gonna be honored by a lot of defenders. The other thing, I think again, trying to paint this more positively, like Rudy Gobert has been part of the best offense in the league once and top five offenses like several times. Right, the personnel around him in Utah was very different. But if you're Edwards and Russell, for example, can't you like look at each other and say, why can't we do a Conley Mitchell impersonation? And if Edwards is what he's supposed to be. Conley and Mitchell could shoot. That's the thing like that, It's just not so you can fall into saying like, well, I mean Golbert as the lone big is not a hindrance to a great offense. We've you know, it's possible, It's happened several times. But I think that sells the jazz is surrounding talent short saying that it's just that easy. It's like, now, those guys were all really good and pretty dangerous. Ross O'Neill was like the only guy that couldn't get his own shot in that group. So yeah, it's it's gonna be tough. I think the defense is gonna have to be phenomenal for Minnesota to kind of emerge from this pretty prolonged stretch. It looks like, you know, with six weeks. Yeah, we're talking twenty twenty three at that point. If they win half their games over this stretch, I think that's good. Anything more than that is your film for achieving. Really, Yeah, you're you're surprised very quickly. Can you guess how many possessions I'll set the over under at I don't want to set the overrunder because you know what it is. I'm just gonna tell you nineteen possessions with McDaniels at the four and Golbert on the court, that's not something that they've even tried to if they haven't like wanted to play McDaniels there for quite some time. But I'm with you that that Torrian Prince that might be their first SEP. You just lean all the way though, into like sort of the skimpy, like crampy floor spacing defensive model where it's like, well, at this point, it doesn't even freaking matter. They just aren't even a lot of options all that, all the options are not the best. That's I mean, I do. I will say nas Read's ability to space the floor is something that you can explore with Gobert and so that will help. And they do have Nathan Knight on this roster, but like if we're talking about nas Read and Nathan Knight like helping them sort of navigate this tretch like it might already beat a zette like over, I just I just don't know what the I don't have. I guess my point is I don't mean to all be all dooming loom but I can't see this. I know people get frustrated with towns and big games. I know his performance tends to fluctuate. I don't know that he could be really bad on defense. I know that his office has just been more frustrating this year because it seems like he always wants to occupy spaces that he was necessarily occupying or you know, as religiously last year, but like you're still, at worst just lost your third best player, depending on how you feel about the Gobert Edwards town structure, I don't. I struggle to see any zemblance of blessing in disguise or silver lining for them, And then listen like how long does it take? Which towns look like when he gets back, like he will be This sounds like an injury where he will be fine long term, which is great, but getting up to game speed, what it's like, how is he moving after the calf strain? Does his timetable go according You're still you're so invested in him long term you have to slow play this and what we still don't know, like the actual four to six weeks seems like it's like mild severity based off with the other stars, are out there, like, we don't have like a grade on this. So I just I don't see any silver lining since I'm not gonna lie, I see zero upside to the wolves. And even if you by some zemblance like you're killing it without towns, that succeeds and only complicating your future because it's well, how do we great towns into what's working? And now of a sudden he said, oh, it's Karnathy towns the problem, which is just a I firmly believe that's not the case. I want to make that clear. Even if I think some people are lower on towns, that's fine, whatever. I still firmly believe he's not the issue. But that's just not a discussion you want to have to have about someone you just gave like a megamax extension too. That's just gonna fuel potentially at certainly outside noise, but maybe internally if there's you know, if Edwards has bristled at towns or you know, this is all just hypothetical. But like you say, it's like you're you're creating a quarterback controversy almost. It's like, well do it do we need this guy? Like what can we get from it get ready to fire up the if the wolves you know, run off the way better stretch, then it's like, well, what can the wolves get for towns? And then like, who knows, maybe they can get those picks back they give up for a look, it's all ends with the Wolves trading Danigel Russell for Davis Burton's and Reggie Bullocks probably like that's just that's what it'll end up happening. Perfect. I'll throw you the first one just for particular reason. This one comes from kill Hoss. The gist of it is, do you believe that teams need at least two stars to be championship contenders? And that comes in the context of kill Hoss as a mass fan and contends that there's kind of a revisionist history to that theory, using the example of, you know, Drew Holiday and Chris Middleton were on a championship team next to Jannie and I don't think you'd argue necessarily that those guys were top ten at the time, although there's probably a debate to be had, But I think it's an interesting question because there are exceptions to this quote unquote rule that you need a you know, two or more top ten guys to do it. So I guess I'll throw to you. Do you think that theory is legit or are there exceptions to it beyond the Bucks one of a couple of years ago. I just I don't know that you need two top ten players, Like maybe you need two top ten players plus depth to be a dynasty. Like when you look at what Warriors did peak Warriors, they had a case for like four top twenty guys or four top fifteen guys, depending on where you land with Clay who we actually have a question on later. But I think it it's almost it's a prerequisite now to you need like the top five to ten player, and then that kind of informs how good your other star needs to be. And then there's cases of like the Lakers where you know they went in twenty twenty and eighty and Lebron those are both top ten guys at that point. But did the Raptors They didn't have two top ten guys when they beat the Granted, the Warriors were hobbled beyond comprehension, like they had Kauai and then they had Pascal Siakam wasn't Siakham yet. Og wasn't Og yet they had Kyle Lowry. So I do think you need a second star. But the examples to me are kind of like Chris Middleton and Drew Holiday. Do you need multiple of those guys? I don't think you need that on top of your top ten player. I think you need another guy who in any given season can be on the fringes of the All NBA discussion. We're talking another top twenty five guy. Now. I think what's interesting about Dallas, which isn't the case anymore. When you had Jalen Brunson, I looked at him as sort of like the season he had last year. To me, that's probably the worst second best player you could have on a team with title aspirations. That's not to discredit Jaalen Brunson, but that feels like venturing too far outside. Can he be a top twenty five player in any given season? That's where And you know, we had this question a while ago, and that's what's one I've thought a lot about. But I don't think and maybe you feel differently having watched the Warriors all these years, but I don't think you need like that super high end other star might just come down to your definition of a star, it's the top twenty five player or a star. Yeah, I think you mentioned you. I think the prerequisite is you've got to have a top top five ish guy and like like anything maybe six, maybe seven, Like the idea that you need two top tens. It's like a shorthand, you know, it's kind of like a heuristic of how seriously should we take this team based on its top two players. It could be two in fifteen, it could be three and twenty and twenty three or something like that. I think the key is you probably got to have that guy who is you know, in an MVP conversation, like on the shortlist generally speaking. And beyond that, you know, you can get away with some other combinations depending on the fit. But I think the other key that you know, speaking of the Warriors, they're JM. Bob Meyers. You know, I'll get it wrong. I won't get it verbatim, but his theory is beyond that top five guy, beyond the STEPH type player that just changes everything. You kind of have to have as many guys as possible. This is your depth point that can't really be schemed off the floor or attacked or have some kind of exploitable weakness, which is not true of the regular season, but for the playoffs and the deeper you get into the playoffs, the more teams are looking for, like where's the week point, where can we attack? Where where can we sort of create advantages? And so I mean that's the theory I think of, like the Clippers construction is just have theoretically your top five guy in Kauhi. Again, we're talking theoretically another top you know, ten twenty guy in Paul George, and then a bunch of guys that will not get attacked, will not be ignored as three point shooters, you know, will not be like called up to be in the pick and roll every time in the last five minutes because we know we can get something. You just need guys that can't be played off the floor. And that's just another way to talk about depth. But depth means something different, I think in a championship pursuit than it does in the regular season. Like a playable guy in the regular season can just be essentially useless in a conference finals if a smart team is like really being ruthless about going at them. It's also interesting how the structure of your depth might inform what you are looking to do for your playoff rotation, where it's how much are you shortening it? Because if you have two stars in the same roster, those are two guys that you just want to the court for forty minutes a game, and so you're inherently filling less minutes if you amit. But if you have only one, like that's almost an extra spot that you sort of need to make sure. You're talking about the depth that can't be played at the floor, that's almost is it harder to find? Is it easier? I do think though, when you just look back at the past champions and like think like more recent NBA history, like the two they're like these so let's say this the excuse me, the Mavericks in two thousand and eleven and that Pistons team in two thousand was that two thousand and four? Yea, Like those are the exception, Like, those are the exceptions. Those aren't the rule when you go throughout all those other champions. I know there are some people who are like, well, what about the Spurs and what like? Was Kauai at that level then? He was? So it does there is a gray area to it, but it does feel like the teams that don't have multiple stars, and I'll say within the top twenty five, yea, like those are more so there there nomalies to me when you just go through definitely recent NBA history. Yeah, I think like a good a good counter cases like I always get the year wrong, like twenty fourteen or fifteen, the Hawks team that won sixty some odd games and had four All Stars, Like, that's not gonna be a playoff winner just because there's nobody within the you know, Horford, Tigue Corever. I feel like Damari Carroll. I feel like I'm forgetting someone really obvious that was maybe the best player on that team, would a Tigue Horford. Yeah, so it's like a bunch of really good players, but there's no one in the vicinity of the top five. So it's just like it's it's not it's a non starter because you just don't have the guy that will just completely be the focus of the other team's defense and just like save you and win you two or three playoff games. You have to have that guy for sure. Can I ask you two spur of the moment mail bad questions that I now have after this discussion, absolutely who is the worst player in the NBA right now that could be the best lay on a championship level team. Oh so, who's like the last guy you'd pick as a number one on a title contender and not? Oh well, we can envision if he had Luca next to him, like he could. It would have to be like, that's your one, that's your one a guy. So like, are we talking about like the Devin Booker range, Like, you know, we haven't seen it yet, but you I mean, I think Tatum is definitely in, like for sure, there be the best player. It might be it might be someone like Marant, you know, or we might be like I don't think Donovan Mitchell, for example, could be your number one guy. So it's got to be someone better than him. I mean, it might be someone way better than we're thinking, because it's just like like is it embed is it? Is it Yokich? You know, like I don't know because we haven't seen it. You might it might be the case that someone that good still isn't good enough because you're you're not operating in a vacuum. You're still having to theoretically beat Curry, Luca, you know, Yanna, like all the guys that are we don't really have any question that they could be in the number one. So I'm punting, I'm dodging your question because that's I don't know where that cutoff is, but it's going to be a really good player that isn't good enough. You know, it will be below that cutoff line. If the answer is like in Beat or Yokis, that's pretty harrowing because those are just like consensus top seven guys when they're healthy. At this point, there's more that goes into it, like in Beat's health. But we have we've had the Yokis discussion about how you might need to be more particular about how you flesh out specifically your playoff defense when he's on the court because of how teams like the Warriors could try to attack him there. My first inclination was we made such a good point about Hibat and Yokis was like, probably like the Devin Booker, SGA, John Moran, yeah there, which is wild because those are all NBA players basically, right. I mean, the list of guys that you would say, I'm one hundred percent confident could be the best player on a title team probably shouldn't go pass like five right, it's Yanna right now? Would be honest, Steph, I am Confidentatum can be there. I don't know where you're landing on him being right there is Kevin Duran an answer still? Like I think so? I think he probably has to be, But you still it's Lebron still an answer? Probably not right? So I don't think so. I mean, maybe he's the answer to who's the who's the best player that couldn't be the number one on a championship team right now? Like or he You're he's in that discussion, I think too. That's really interesting. I don't know. It's a short list. It has to be a short list because you got to beat all the other guys on it. Then, and this is kind of my follow up question, but it's twofold. Is Luca on that list? And more to that point? And I think this is just more topical because of how much they've been struggling. Are the are the Mavericks fundamentally failing? Luca don chich at this point, I think Luca probably is good enough to be the number one guy I right now, But I don't think and so, which leads into your second part two of that question are they failing in Probably because I think the blueprint I thought about this earlier today. I think the blueprint for Don Chich the super duper high usage, you know, heliocentric, like there's no one else really on this team that makes the offense go like he does. I think you have to look at like the very best James Harden Rockets teams, which like get shipped on a lot and are sort of already forgotten, but had some monster regular seasons and were like whatever it was seventeen or twenty seven straight miss threes against the Warriors from advancing and maybe winning a title, and then had that happened, Like, how differently would we view a to like Harden or the notion of building a roster like the Rockets did. I guess I'm I'm like short changing because Chris Paul was on those really good teams. But the idea of Harden and switch a bowl position, list defenders who can make catch and shoot threes and maybe a role guy. I think that could work for Dallas, but they just don't have. So many of Dallas's players going back a little bit, have weaknesses that are exploitable, Like you take like Christian Christian Woods are certainly I think, you know, a top five player on that roster. Some people would say too, but I think but defensively, you sort of can't play him against really good teams. And you know, din Wittie's fine. You know Dorian Finny Smith definitely, that's if you had like three Dorian Finney Smith types. I think that makes more sense than what the what the MAVs have done so far. You should still be looking for that other top ten guy just because that broadens your your spectrum of options to fill out the rest of your top seven or eight for a playoff rotation. But I think I think the fact that like Porzingis leaves and it was seemed clear that Porson was not good enough to be the number two for Luca on a team that was going to do anything, And he's kind of been playing better away from Luca. So I'm not willing to say it's just the MAVs. I think it's partly the MAVs letting Luca play a certain way that that wears him down, that makes it predictable for a really good playoff defenses that like everybody's kind of at fault. But I do just the basics of it. Our Dallas should have should have been doing and should do a better job of surrounding Luca with enough talent, because you know how long a prime is gonna last. You don't know. Crazy things happen. He's good enough, If he's good enough right now, like we're saying, or like we think, then quit fucking around like this roster has to be better the twenty two twenty three MAVs quit fucking around. I think that's the best synopsis of it. I would agree with everything you said, and there's I think there's a real question of ken Luca play a different way. I just don't have an answer because they haven't even given him the chance to try really and look to be honest, Perusingkis isn't the guy you try it with. And I think what's maybe different is you see it with Luca and Christian would like there's more of a comfort level there, and it's clear that he likes playing with Christian Wood. I also side note, don't understand why Christian Wood's defense is too bad or to guarantee him playing time, But like Jason Kidd, is just perfectly okay with Tim Hardaway junior and Reggie Bullock shooting this team out of games and they're they're allowed to stay on the floor. So I don't understand that, But the James Harden like comparison seems most apt, where Okay, maybe Luca can't play a drastically differently, I still would argue a little differently because he's so like, he's big and he's thick, Like, why not use Luca as the screener. We've already seen what he can do in the post at a higher volume than the Rockets ever explored with Harden in the post. I think there are different ways to use him, but you don't have the personnel to try it, and you haven't even less than ever now Jon Brunson's gone. And that's not to bemoan a previous point, like you let your second best player, your second most important ball hand relieve for nothing, and it's or let's say let because it was his decision and we don't know how burnt the bridges were at that point, but like you boxed that situation. If you knew he was leaving, then you should have moved him. So like not having any return there hurts, But I think what's more frustrating about this team is that you look at it and you understand why they haven't done anything to sort of rush into a bigger acquisition. They just don't have the asset equity to do so. And it's almost smarter to say, we need to wait for this twenty twenty three pick to convey to the Knicks so that we can reset our obligations and really go all in with the picks we can offer. I still don't know what that gets them, because yes, we've seen Danny Ainge accepted two trade packages built around basically draft pick returns. Like, yeah, Larry marketing has been great, he wasn't the centerpiece of the don Van Mitchell deal for Utah, but the fact that their infrastructure, like yeah, there are players that might interest other teams, Maxi Kleiba, Dorian Finney Smith, even Reggie Bullock, but like one, you probably want to keep dfs. Like on any version of the maps that's supposed to be really good, are who are you outbidding for certain players if there's an actual competition for them, and so short of someone like Bradley Beile having a no trade clause in demanding his way to Dallas. But what I would also note is that you mentioned Chris Paul for the Rockets, it is still then doable, like that was a very like it wasn't James Harden and Chris Paul playing off each other a toime, Like you go back and look at their you know, spot up numbers during that time, like they weren't like drastically skyrocketing compared to where they were at least someone then who can give Luca don Chech a break where like maybe you're still not running a ton of stuff for him off the ball, but you are able to trade off that responsibility. That Rockets team, that Rocket score was good enough to win a title. They just didn't, and it was so short lived that who knows what could have happened if they stuck together and the Harden CP three thing didn't fracture. Now, is Luca tough to play with where he's grading on team teammates, I don't know. I still think he's one of the most brilliant passers in the game, and I think we've seen it just takes a certain type of player where if they envisioned more for themselves, like let's look at PJ. Tucker and Philly He's doing all this stuff on the ball in Miami last year, and then but he decides to go back to Darryl Moray and James Harden and Philly and like, so there are players that might just be more comfortable playing where they're not going to have a ton of you know, long on ball touches or you know, be moving a bunch off the ball, Like you can still make it work. The mats just haven't. And I want to make clear to some extent, I understand why they haven't rushed in to this mega upgrade because in part I don't think they have the ability to do it. But I'm not sure that after this season you have the ability to do it. And so I just have this really slap dash process where it led you to waving Facundo Compazzo to sign Kemba Walker who was just floating around on the open market, like who knows what his knees look like. He looked pretty cooked a lot of the time in New York. That's just a really precarious situation to put yourself in. And I do think that they are fundamentally failing Luca, And it's sort of the weirdo ground swell of Luca should involved his teammates more. It is just yes, he's so bob dominant. I want to believe it's because he has to be into to dude his third in potential. It's his per game. It's not like he's not setting up we're teeing up his teammates. Yeah, I just if we're never going to get off this question. But do you think and because I don't know what I think, I think it's worth having a discussion, like if you're a second star or a second star type that we all think Dallas probably should prioritize getting when they have the resources to do it. Do you think there are guys lining up that want to play with Luca? Like is he someone because it's not the same as like because if we're going to talk about him in that top tier, I think everybody on the planet would want to play with Jannis because of like, well, in addition to being a great score, like he's going to cover up your mistakes on defense, he's like, you know, very unselfish, like just wants to do what the team needs to win. Steph is the same way people want to play there because you know, he creates so many opportunities for other guys and is just not about himself. Like I'm not trying to say that Luca is or is like really distinct from those guys, but it does feel to me like if I'm a second star and I think probably I'm good enough to be the number one option on like fifteen other teams, if you know how good those teams are going to be. I don't know, but like I'm good enough to do that. Do I want to go somewhere where a guy's got like a forty percent usage and maybe that comes down a little bit, but I'm constantly good. I'm gonna have to change everything about how I play. That's like a rare. That's a rare, like top end, Oh, put you over the top player that's also willing to go and be like I might get eleven shots of game, they might all be wide open, but my role is I'm just never gonna be able to like, I just feel like that's a little bit of a hurdle with Luca playing this way, even if I would concede that, Yeah, it's partly because the MAVs just don't really have better options. He has to be on the ball all the time. But that's a hurdle. I think, yeah, that's a good point, and I mean, but we seem like the Nets wanting James Harden when they already had Kyrie and KJS. It didn't end well, but I think that was for I feel like it literally had nothing to do with basketball for the post part which July didn't end well. That being said, it's like how much do pre existing relationships factored in? And because Luca, like his home base is not like the United States, and like he didn't come up with these guys, like does he have those interstar relationships with not claiming he's not likable or that international stars or like some like somehow sucked. So that's a factor which I think, you know, would almost leave me to say, like that's why you have to make it via trade, because then you try to see if it works, see if a player is just at that point, maybe Luca changes the way he plays, maybe it just works out so well and there's winning that players just stick around. It's easier to keep them once you have them in house. I don't think it's a situation where, yes, if you were the Nets with Kevin Durant and Kyrie, you could very much bank on James Harden forcing his way to Brooklyn. I don't know that you could do that with Luca, which is why you're just gonna have to go out and you might not. You know, players aren't leaving in free agency right now, but let's just say the next CBA, which is you know, too far down the line actually, Like by the time we're thinking about that, we're thinking about Luca's next contract. Like, let's say you have free agency meetings or you open up caps face to sign a star. I don't know if playing with Luca would be their first choice. Like you just need to get that star and show them that it can work, and you need to figure out a way to make it work and maybe change up the dynamic compared to what we saw with Chris Paul and James Harden, like inject more creativity into that. But it is a fascinating question because I don't think Luca is completely blameless when you're looking at the stylistic leanings of the MAVs. He's absolutely blameless when it comes to roster construction, Like it's not like that is entirely on the front office, and that's why we shouldn't I don't feel like we shouldn't have this curiosity, I guess is my point, so late into his career, and it's just like Jalen Brunson is the best second best player he's ever played with, right, Like I'm not, I guess like Christof's had moments, and like the idea of him was always great, but he was always injured and he was always kind of sub all star level. He was in New York. I think that really helped inflate his reputation a bit, so like we just haven't seen it. And look, you know what when he had Jalen Brunson, I know, injuries happened the circumstances of the season. That's every year, Like you can point to something like they made it to the Western Conference finals, right, That's that's where you can stop the analysis. I mean, they made it farther with him, and he mattered like he you know, not so much in the conference finals per se, but getting them there, Brunson was integral, like in a way that Porzingis really never was even close to, you know, And that's that's almost more frustrating because it's if Jalen Brunson as your second best player and as your best player in the Jazz series because Luca Dodgers wasn't available. If if that you pair that with Luca and that gets you to the Western Conference finals to then just kind of sit like pull back and wait out these pick obligations or I don't even know what they're waiting for. And like I said, because when you put their best offer on the table, unless it's for a player that has like, you know, cautionary tape around them, like a kyrie, Like, I just don't know who they would have the best offer for moving forward? Yeah, you can't go backwards when all it took for you to reach the conference finals was jail In Brunson, Like, You've got to just keep that and add like one or two more pieces and maybe that's all it takes, right, you know, since I hijacked the past two questions, did you want to did you want to read the next one? Oh? Yeah, well this is better for you anyway. So this comes from Cam Brownish's I'll try to condense it here. So getting rid of the coach is one step, But I think the Knicks have to look at making a trade to improve the spacing and structure of their starting lineup. Sites that you know, Julius Randall's jumper is m ia and so he's limited to scoring around the rim. Mitchell Robinson congests things in there, and really Brunson and RJ. Barrett are also you know, their primary skills are getting into the paint and scoring at close range. So the question in addition to do you think the Knicks need to find some spacing and restructure their lineup? Which I'm sure you're going to say yes because you've watched more than five seconds of the Knicks, but do you think of Robinson and Fournier to Indiana for Turner and Healed and some picks makes sense because you could replace Fournier with Quickly or Grimes in the starting lineup, which is kind of I mean, Fournier has been out of the picture for a while. But how do you like that fit? You know, does that make sense? Does that address the spacing? Does that ultimately matter in the grand scheme of Nick's getting better? Yeah, I should have changed up the question there because it was they this was asked like a while we had we had a backlock because we still a very valid question though about lineup construction and a trade. They're starting Randall and Mitchell Robinson together still, so it's it's a valid question. So it's like Quentin Grimes now been in the starting line of with Jael Brunson r J. Barrett, which makes sense, especially with the way that Grimes moves off the ball and up and down the floor. My answer to this is yes. However, I don't know if I'm giving up picks. I want to get off Julius Randold's contract because I think that that's just the biggest I don't want to say it's the big sorry, it's the biggest functional stain on this team because he's blocking the pathway to a player who's a better fit alongside what you have in Albe topping his defense. This has been half asked or worse for much of this season. And I also the thing here giving up any like at least if you're trading Julius Randall, I think you improved by structure just looking at the hierarchy of your roster. If you get Miles Turner, do I trust hims to let him continue spacing the floor like because he likes to have these like traditional rim runners, Like, are we all of a sudden gonna see Miles Turner like just be more of a screen and roll guy. I have no idea, but I do think what's interesting about this question. I don't think it's talked about enough, and it's not. I want every single player to get paid, So I'm happy. I'm happy Julie's Randall got paid. They are their market values, what a team was willing to pay them. I have no idea what leverage or what value. Mitchell Robinson showed this team that he was worth four sixty. I don't care that the cap was going up. You had, yeah, you first of all, you signed I Saya Hartensteign anyway, and so like, what are we doing there? You blocked the pathway further to get more creative with your front court, including Obie. And you had Jericho Simms, and like when you watch Jericho Simms and his mobility, Jericho Simms is the reason why you don't pay not so dynamic big men like Mitchell Robinson that much money. We didn't even see. I know he had his own injury concerns. R W three, Hey, guess who else had their own injury concerns like enery last summer Michell Robinson and r W three was better when he signed his extension than Mitchell Robinson is right now, So I that is a curious move. And now are you we talking about? Is this low key? Like the numbers just smaller and can be used as trade fodder. And I think Julius Randall Nephyfornier had been bigger issues that has sort of flown under the radar, Like that's not great, Like the Knicks don't have any like damning contracts on their books, but they don't have a lot of good ones. That there's Jalen Brunson and then their rookie scales and the Heartness signe deal is fine. So I would be on board with a move because they do need to improve their spacing in lineups and they also need to just improve like the volume at which they take threes. They need guys who are just going out un boddle them in droves. Will tips let them again? I do not know. Turner would be a fascinating fit for this roster, even if you are keeping Julius Randall, because he is more of a natural fit next to Julius Randall. I just if you're getting it's going to take picks. And we had there was a discord discussion about this. If I'm Indie, I don't I don't want like it's Mitchell Robinson is just like like and I don't want, Like how many picks are you including here? And I think that's where the pause comes for me. Anyway, you can view like Buddy Healds contract is probably like net even value at this point with the way he's playing this season, So you're gonna have to give up like a younger a player or two an addition of picks. Would I still consider it? It doesn't seem like the Knicks are married to Quickly. They're getting into the trap of we wanted all these guys as trade assets, but now they're these guys are coming up on extensions and we have no idea what the fuck they are. Yeah, Manuel Quickly's defense has been spectacular. He's showing flashes on offense him. But over your extension, Els, But what do you pay those guys? So if I'm the Knicks, I absolutely would want to improve the four balance via trade. But if you're not acquiring a megastar, it has to be done in scale. And I just I think to get Miles Turner because of how good he's been. By the way, he's like a true shooting percentage over seventy or whatever it is right now. I think you would have to give up too much equity for it to make sense, because you like, your next trade needs to be if you're not just using a first round pick to get off Julius Randall, your next trade needs to be like the home run swing, and Miles Turner and Buddy Healder are not that. So I support the idea of the pacers are out of their minds and just want to accept let's call it Nichols on the dollar for those two. Yeah, I think just from a Knicks perspective, I feel like this really highlights like kind of a broad roster building issue that confronts a lot of teams that are kind of in the middle. Which is to say that, like, there's no question that Randall and Robinson kind of obstruct what say what you're probably your two most important players Brunson and Barrett. I mean not probably, I think those are your two most important players. It obstructs what they do best, which is get into the lane and then maybe kick out, except there's no one to kick out too, because there's one to two guys. Robinson Randall that are just in the way and are not going to be threats to space the floor to make driving easier, to make finishing easier. So yeah, like get Buddy Hilled and Miles Turner in there. Essentially play a five out style if you're playing Turner at center and Robinson and Randall are not in the equation. But then, like, is it worth giving up picks, which you would have to do to incentivize anyone and the Pacers for sure to take Randall and or Robinson? Does it make sense to give up those picks to then essentially be building a roster that is around Barrett and Brunson, Like, are those guys the caliber of players that you want to be sacrificing future assets to help reach their peak potential? And I guess if you think Barrett is someone that could be a second best player on a you know, contender, I don't think I think it. Like even you're shaking your head, like I definitely didn't start at best player, but like second is probably generous. Brunson has been the second best guy on a team that made the conference finals. We just spent twenty minutes talking about that. But like, so you're you're throwing good picks after bad money. It's not throwing you know, it's not throwing good money after bad it's throwing these picks to get off these So it's do you want to win, you know, five or ten more games over the next couple of years by changing this roster construction and it costs you picks and you still probably don't have a ceiling that's as high as you would need it to be to justify that. I don't know, but it's hard to not want to do something when the problems are obvious, when the roster is imbalanced, when the roster doesn't make sense, when the best players are sort of being hindered by other guys that play a lot, Like how do you solve this problem without making a bunch of concessions that lower your ceiling for the next half decade? I don't know, but I understand, Like, so I guess my what I would do is like you might just have to wait this out. You might just have to say, we wait a year or two and then it's easier to get off these contracts that we don't want. But that sucks, Like that's not realistic, guys, you know, general managers and coaches have short contracts. They're not going to say, well, yeah, let's let's look at twenty twenty eight. You know, it's not like a fan that can say or an owner that can say, we got a long time horizon. That's just not how it works. So like you're just gonna have to give up stuff you don't want to if you want this to change, and you're gonna screw yourself over the next like you know, handful of years. It's it's it's rough because I get it. I there's totally logical to want to change how this roster looks. It's just the cost is going to be high. Yeah, and it's just I mean, you can wait. But then like some of the players and picks that you team trade assets are going to no longer exist, Like you're gonna be players will be on the next contracts, those picks will turn into players and no less Deak And so that's the like, that's why the Knicks are in such a tough situation. The real question we should have asked is are the Knicks failing? Jell and runs him like that has been spectacular and like he comes and all of a sudden they're like sixth and quarter three point of tempt right, but just they don't hit shots from beyond the arc and they still don't take enough of them. I think they're eighteen from three point a temph raight overall. So I'm with the change, but if it's not a star, like, is there a way to do it without giving up or bankrupting yourself of assets? And I don't know the answer to that question, but yes, I do think Myles Turner would be a great fit on this team, no question. Miles Turner would also be a great fit for this team that we have a question on. How is that for a segue? This was asked a little bit ago, but it was pre the Pelicans lost to the Grizzlies and then pre their victory on Monday night. But Rome eighty one eighty asked, like their defense and offense have improved during this recent stretch. Is this a function of something that's changed? Just random noise? We competition? And he has a second part to that. But so the Pelicans since they were like five hundred, So going back to like I think the date was on this November ninth, they are seven and three over their last ten games. Third in net rating six points, have an eighth in offense, and third in defense. Have you noticed anything about their improvement? I made some observations myself. I'm just curious as to what you think. And look, they've done it by the way, like CJ. McCollums, miss time, brandon Ingram just miss Monday Nights game. They have not for a team that's like firmly in the mix. They have not had like their full cachet of players available much this year. Yeah, I think that's part of it, is just you know, generally getting somebodies back. Although, like you said, I mean the problem with all of this is I'm assuming that this time frame includes the forty five point win over the Warriors when they didn't play any of their starters, and so if you're talking about defensive rating and net rating and anything like that, it's all just like completely destroyed by that. You know, congratulations, you beat one of the worst benches in the league into the dust, and your net rating is going to be juiced for like the next two months probably from that. So that that kind of punts on the question, I think, because like what that does. It Just I was taking their last six games, which included that Warriors one. And this is probably a little further beyond when this question is asking about. But if you take that out and say the Warriors just go in and beat them in a close game or it's close or whatever, you're talking about three and three over the last six and the Pelicans wins were over the Bulls, Spurs and Thunder, So, like, how good do you feel about that? How probitive is that really of the team's actual quality. I don't know, but it's definitely not the same thing as just looking at what their net rating is because it's going to be messed up for a while. I'm kind of more interested in, like some of the similar roster balance questions, you know, with respect to just CJ. McCollum have a role, like is he superfluous? As word their room eighty one eighty used the exactly part of the question is is CJ. McCollum superfluous of the Pelicans? And related to that is because the Pelicans look really good when Jose Alvarado's in the game, it kind of makes more sense because he's just looking to distribute and the Pelicans have a lot of high usage, you know, worthwhile offensive guys that need the ball, and Alvarado just gets off the ball, and so that's helpful, I think, as so I guess I should answer the first part of the question. I think maybe this is just sort of what we expected the Pelicans to be like from the outset, which is they're going to score a ton. Their defense is going to be a question. Again. That defensive rating is iffy because of that Warriors game where they give up eighty three points. I think you know, you were higher on the Pelicans, I think than I was at the start of the season. But this is sort of what we expected more or less, where yeah, they're gonna be good to really good, and it's going to be offensively driven, and if there's enough stops in there, then yeah, they're like a fifty win team potential. That's roughly what we're looking at. But the roster construction thing is interesting because I think it's it just depends on the answers to questions that we still don't have yet, which is like how much should Zion have the ball in his hands? Because if the answer is a lot, then CJ. McCollum could be replaced by more of a catch and shoot guy or someone that's like, yeah, he could attack, you know, from the second side when the ball gets swung and run a pick and roll. But you don't need a high usage get into the lane and create your own, you know, seventeen footer or in that context so much. And if it's that Zion doesn't need the ball as much, well, then you need at least another really good defender in that lineup alongside Herb Jones, because Zion's defense is you know, crippling sometimes and you're not getting quite enough from Certainly McCollum. Ingram is like passable to you depending on the night you catch him. Valanciunis is probably a subpar defender. So I think that focusing on McCollum is kind of the eer thing because if you say, well, Ingram and Zion there's your one two, let's get role players around them that defend. Maybe, but I don't know that we're sure yet that Zion is someone that should have the ball all the time, that should the offense should run through. That might be the case, So I think before you look at like balancing this roster or moving McCollum, that's not what the questions asking. But if you're saying he's superfluous, then that's sort of implied, I guess because he's being paid a ton, so you can't just not play him. I think you just need to figure more out. I think that we still I don't have a theory of like what is the optimal lineup and playing style and sort of usage distribution on this Pelicans team. And until we have a better idea of that, I think you probably just want to keep as much like rook talent in the fold as possible and playing. So I would still give the edge to mccollumn over Alvarado in that regard. But it's a worthwhile question, and I think it just highlights like we're still kind of early in this experiment, and because everybody's heard all the time and we haven't got a sustained look at what the best version of the Pelicans is. This is fun because I think we disagree fundamentally on and I think that this has been really informative for them, and I think a big shift is and part of this actually might be because of the vailability issues. But Zion has the ball on his hands more, which is absolutely the answer, especially during the regularsy just to bust up some of these defenses, his drives are up during this stretch they've run, They've had him run more pick and rolls. I also like to look more, which is why like the Larry Nance Junior Zion Williamson Front's court, like the noise on there, Like there's a lot of statistical noise on it, I'll say, but like there are just moments where it's like, well, if that was Miles Turner, and you know, Miles turns a better chance of holding up over the course of the season, and defensively a lot at the five. I also think, and I won't say overall, I think Zion's kind of gotten a little bit better on defense this year away from the ball. On the ball, as you mentioned, it feels like there can just be a lot of damaging possessions for him. And I also feel like that's why something like Miles Turner could help, because now and junis is more of just like a that's not something like if you need him as like your rim protector doesn't have to make a lot of complicated reads. Fine, Larry Dance Jr. Is like kind of on his best at the perimeter, like making a lot of switches similar to Jackson Hayes, who hasn't really played this year. Zion has just done better with the off ball stuff where he's not doesn't feel like he's getting burned as much by ball watching. He's making just like you could if you watch him, like he's kind of moving all over the place. Players are shooting under fifty eight percent against him at the rim this year, under fifty five percent during this stretch that we're talking about. There's something here, I think, and I do the point that you made the I totally forgot about the Warriors no hands on deck win at the Belt like they had no like it wasn't all hands on deck. It was no hands on deck for Golden State. So I do think there's definitely noise in the schedule. But I think this team is just like it's ready and it's on the cost if it's healthy and the type of ball pressure can provide. If they can trust Zion to be rotating. When you have Jose Alvarado and Herb Jones and even Dyson Daniels and Trey Murphy, that's huge. And with CJ. McCollum, maybe he's superfluous or awkward during the regular season, that's absolutely a player I want in this rotation come playoff time, we're to have that third ball handling on like third legitimate ball handling option. We're not talking about like I mean, maybe we are talking about Milwaukee a little bit, just because Janie's ball handling has gotten better and he can do so much with the ball in his hands. Like having that third player who can just self create for others or self create for himself even but also table set for others if like I think there's a pathway to making it work. And I'm wondering if we're in Roman mentioned this like a rejaated a little bit because of how slow CJ. McCollum was to start the season. I want him on this team and he's not. I wouldn't view him. It's just like mission critical, I guess. But I think that he's absolutely someone who's going to help them in the postseason, maybe even more so than the regular season. I think I think I agree in theory that Zion with the ball makes the most sense. But then so get I get what I can think of as you're talking, was, is Dyson Daniels like low key the like major swing piece for this team Because I think if if you're talking about the playoffs, I think CJ is gonna get targeted. I think Zion will still get targeted. I think Valentcionis is gonna get called up to defend. So you just have so many if Daniels could be a reliable shooter, and I think Daniels has immense defensive potential because he's a big guard and he's a good passer, and he just sort of makes the best version of this Pelicans team that is balanced and less exploitable in the playoffs. I think that a premium like top like ninetieth percentile of his potential, Dyson Daniels is like the right guy to be in there versus maybe a McCollum, who would be a huge luxury as a third ball handler scorer, but who I think will get attacked a little bit. But yeah, I think I'm being maybe too pessimistic. But that's sort of I've been like a notch below you on the Pelicans, I think throughout and maybe that's just because I still want to see more to prove to me that, like the offense, defense, low usage, high usage mix works. But yeah, it's a good question. I think I think like we just need. We need to see the signs like be sustained over a long period and for everybody to stay healthy, which is a big ask on this team. I think my roundabout take was that Jonah valent Tunis is probably the one who's super fluous on this roster. And we've seen like they were doing a lot of this success they're having now with not rebounding as well as they were before. I know Valantunis is shooting the ball well, but the most dynamic version of the Pelicans I think probably if it doesn't I don't want to say it doesn't include him, it includes an upgrade over Onnas valent Tunis would be one point there. And also you mentioned Dyson Daniels forty one point five percent from three over his last ten games. That's the talk about swing piece. If that's like something it's only it's like negligible volume. But if he's just hitting ultra wide open threes every now and again, with the way he can work in space with the ball a couple of his defensive ubiquity, that's that's massive. Yeah, if you have him and Herb running around like causing trouble like that's that's a pretty good start. I still think you need someone to keep people away from the rim, and maybe that's nance. I mean, Miles Turner. Can it just be Miles Turner. I did get a DM saying Pelicans fans are not my idea specifically, but I was lampooned for basically the past two years for saying that they need to get Miles turned not need, but like, and I was willing to listen, like we hadn't seen Zion and Jonas, but I was DM saying that, like, Pelicans fans are coming around on the idea of Miles Turner now. So I'm glad to hear that at least I wasn't completely off base. I feel like that's been the most no brainer destiny. I mean, Charlotte was thrown around a lot, but nobody needs to go to Charlotte now he is. I'd be interested to see, like the splits with Zion on and off of like opponents are the last thing gave im shooting eighty two point six percent of the room against Yotas found shoot, it's like there could be an elementable over tax, like what is he trying to cover up? But like gets this is not the ideal front court pairing. I think that's it. Unless you got anything else, I'll take us out. Thank you everybody for listening and for your questions too. We loved I really like doing these mail bags. I think Dan feels the same. So engage with us. Get on discord. I did it. Anyone can do it, like subscribe, download rate us, tell your friends. Word of mouth still matters. We really appreciate when anyone says anything nice about the pot on Twitter or anywhere else. It doesn't have to be on social media. Just you know, tell someone quietly that's good too. Join the discord. Last thing, I did it. We would love to talk to everybody on there, get some more questions, all that other stuff. In closing, even though I shouted him out and said a nice thing about him, I would like to apologize to Jared Allen and I'll be happy to Dan. Just want to celebrate the one and only greatest human alive that has ever lived. And still can't get on the floor, but someday will and justice will be served. Frank Millikina