What is krack alak in Hardywoo knocks listeners, I am Dan Valley coming out.
You would help my fantabulous co host Adam Cromwell, who was a little
bit swamp at the moment. So we have a programming shift. I'm going
through record a solo mail bag. We have Keith Smith from Spowtrack coming on
later this week to talk about all the eliminated playoff teams and our biggest questions
for them. So like a good time to do a mail bag then,
But first let me remind you all to please continue rating and reviewing us wherever
you get your podcasts. If you haven't subscribed to us, please consider doing
so immediately. Also wherever you get your podcasts. If you have done all
that, consider recommending us to friends, family members, acquaintances, co workers,
anyone on the internet who you think really enjoys NBA basketball like a little
bit more thorough yet personable, modestly insufferable NBA coverage in their life. We
really do appreciate everyone who does that. Remember to follow us on the socials.
We are at Hardwood Knox on Twitter and TikTok at Hardwood Underscore Knox on
Instagram. Follow us on YouTube Hardwoo Knox that will come right up, and
then also join our discord. The links to all these including discorder in the
podcast description, so head over there. Want to throw a quick ship quick
thank you out to our listeners as well. I hope you all know how
much we appreciate you collectively here, but I always get very i guess,
excited or appreciative when we do deep dives into one or two teams and you
guys just keep showing up, keep downloading. Our numbers don't suffer when we
do a deep dive into the end of the Grizzlies Timberwolve series like we did
last week. And I've been on team specific podcast where they say, and
probably a little we are not great for my ego of course, that when
they have the national people on that their downloads just sort of plunge, and
so it's really cool, and you all know that. I think the team
specific podcasts are super important. I just appreciate that we're able to go in
on one or two teams per podcasts if need be, and you all just
continue showing up, downloading, listening. It really does mean a lot.
It gives us flexibility and we try and cover so much the league jam packed
into a bunch of episodes. That's why we do these sort of just I
don't want to say generic, but like every Eastern Conference team, every Western
Conference team, and cover it that way, and I enjoy covering the league
that way. But again, I just wanted to throw a shout out,
and you know clearly it's the guests. I'm glad you guys are choking for
the guests. We had Keith Parish on for that Grizzlies Timberwolves series. But
I just wanted to throw that note of thanks out there before we dived cannonball.
The belly flopped into this mail bag. Had a lot of great questions,
which again I sent. I sent out the solicitation at the last minute
because this was a pivot on our part. My life is one potential perpetual
pivot. Excuse me, though, so that's totally fine. I'm going to
start with a question about the Celtics Bucks here since this could technically become pretty
dated, you know, once it's answered. But the NBA chicken, who's
currently the NHL chicken on Twitter, that's at least the name on Twitter's handles
At NBA chicken. What adjustments do you see the Celtics making to counteract the
Bucks defensive team They don't like taking that many threes. Any rotation adjustments.
Yeah, Boston just chucking fifty three's in Game one was the site to behold.
I think some people are of the mind that they're going to hit their
threes at a at a higher clip. There might be some players who will.
I mean, you know, Jason Tatum ended up four of nine even
though we started slow. Jalen Brown three of nine at thirty three point three
percent. Maybe that comes up. But Boston shot about thirty five point six
percent on their open and wide open threes in that game, and Imodoka didn't
want them to shoot contested threes. They really didn't. Forty five of their
fifty threes were open or wide open, and that's sort of in line with
their regular season mark that thirty. I think they were around thirty six plus
percent on those open, open threes combined. And I don't know that you
have the type of shooters to just bank on this being much better on a
game to game basis. We know there's high variants in a Marcus Smart performance
where yeah, he might go on to six in Game one, and then
he could go you know, five of eight in game two. But he
could also then just drop off immediately from there. So I don't think you
can just count on the Celtics continuing to prop up this three point volume and
then hitting more of their threes. Again, there will be games where it
happens. I just don't know how much you can bank on looking at the
potential adjustments I am. I don't want to say I'm at a loss for
words, because I do have some suggestions or musings on the subject. But
my god, Milwaukee's defense was just a hell fire and it wasn't and you
know, people pointed this out, but when you were watching, like this
wasn't just like let's just have Brook Lopez drop all the way back like he
was coming up higher. Milwaukee's defense was ultra aggressive. They were great at
forcing Katum and Jaylen Brown to their off sides to sort of make them into
these decisions where they were rushed as well. None of the passing lanes were
just ever open. And it's so weird to think that, you know,
change your perception of the series where I had I think I had Celtics in
six, maybe it was Celtics in seven, but I have the Celtics winning
the series because Chris Middleton's out. I don't know that his absence improves Milwaukee's
defense. A lot of people pointed out that they believe he's overrated on that
end. I think he's like net neutral to a slight positive, and I
think he just gives you another body to throw at Jalon Browner or Jason Tatum.
You have Jannis really going taking on the Jaylon brown assignment though in Game
one, and that pays dividends. But there's just so much credit to Milwaukee's
defense, including Javon Carter just all over the place. The nets are probably
watching him like, oh, we were paying that dude to not play basketball
for us, not only for the rest of this season, but also next
season as well. I don't necessarily think that Boston can do much to sort
of bust through Milwaukee's defense. They want to get to the rim more often.
We saw them get to the room at will against Brooklyn. Milwaukee's defense,
regardless of like what types of coveragers they're going to throw out, is
kind of built to stop that. I think some of the things that they
could try, I do wonder if he's not going to hit his threes,
is this a Peyton Pritchard series. I just you know, they gives you
someone to go after on offense as well, but he's someone you would need
to count on to hit those open triples. I think we've already found out,
based off that stint in the first half of Game one, that this
isn't going to be a Daniel Tys series even kind of. You also have
to probably figure out, if Jaylen Brown doesn't have it going, how do
you better navigate those minutes without Jason Tatum, Because there were stretches cam riverers
the third quarter of the end of the second half or in the excuse me,
towards the end of the first half where Jaylen Brown was in the game.
Without Jason Tatum, Milwaukee was able to just extend their lead pretty pretty
substantially. And you know, the Celtics also their credit. I think they
might have that might have mirrored that moment. Let me look at my note,
Yeah, that might have mirrored in the moment that like, that lineup
was going up against a Bucks team that didn't even have Giannis on the court,
So I must be talking about a third quarter stint. I don't know
why I don't have that marked down, so you need to play those minutes
a little bit better. I'd be curious to see if now we're going to
get to what would be my potential solutions? Do you try to just downsize
and create chaos if you're more chaos, if you're that concerned about what the
Bucks are doing, get to a point where maybe through Kalopez, not someone
who's typically played off the floor, but they forced the Bucks into some interesting
decisions, or maybe they're less willing to play Bobby Portis and Yannis together.
You might prefer to have Bobby Porteris on the court though if you're Boston,
he played, He's had just better moments defensively than people would expect. But
if you're Boston, that is someone that you can go after. Also,
what does downsizing look like for this team? They can go to one big
route. They've done that a bunch, So you won't have two of Horford
Williams, or or time Forford and Grant Williams is they both at the same
name. You won't have two of those three guys on the court at once,
and they're more willing to do that. I'm thinking more along the lines
of getting drastic, where it's just you're playing without a big and if is
that something that you're willing to try, I think that hurts you on the
glass, but if you're a team. And look, Boston didn't do this
a ton during the regular season, and I don't know if this was just
them feeling rushed against Milwaukee and not wanting to have to go up against them
in the half court. They really looked to push the ball after defensive rebounds
in Game one, at least relative to what they're they would normally do.
And you know Milwaukee, they're going to have guys that can make plays and
get back anyway. And if you don't want to rush, it might sort
of behoove you to hope that you can make up the rebounding gap, that
maybe a Jalen Brown and Jason Tatum really help you out there, and then
just get into your sets with more ball handlers, having Smart and White on
the court with you in addition to like do you round that lineup out with
I don't even know at this point, is it like, is it a
Grant Williams that there's a facts of a big The grant Williams and as we're
not spectacular versus Milwaukee either, So that's going to be that's someone who holds
up fairly well on defense across different matchups, but not you know, al
Horfor is still gonna be better in those those situations than him. And so
I definitely think you need to skew even more heavily towards the one big combinations.
That might be something they could they could really look at. I would
also wonder if this is a Derek White series to where I don't want to
say he felt underutilized. If he's not going to shoot like an astronomical clip
from three like yes, he's fine. Is a sort of this secondary passer
connective tissue of the offense, then he's going to give you some some juice
on the defensive end. But just to have sort of another ball handler option,
can you run pick and rolls where Jalen Brown or Jason Tatum are used
as the screener and you're trying to open them up for the open threes or
to get Marcus Smart going and diving towards the basket more. That's something that
the Celtics are going to probably have to try to do it's just up their
number of just off ball cuts or having guys dive towards the rim. That
way, Milwaukee's still going to be able to do better jobs if they stifled
a lot of those plays in Game one. But if it's smaller guys who
are making bee lines towards the basket, does that give you a little extra
North South jet fuel to go up against Milwaukee with. I honestly, I
don't know, and this you know, the Celtics will adjust. I still
expect this to be a better series. And you can look at like they
could they also go the other route. I mean you're looking at Milwaukee and
it's like they didn't shoot like this astronaumical clip from three of themselves. They
had Wesley Matthews go one to six from beyond the arc. Behannest had a
really good game and it was probably one of his least efficient games of the
season. Nine to twenty five from the floor, six of eleven at the
foul line. Just someone who's such a monster on defense, and he had
twelve assists as well. He's just absolutely spectacular. So you can't even like
you won the three point battle. All Sensibiliaveness by eighteen points from behind the
arc, you were plus six made three pointers. Do you look at trying
to junk up this series even a little bit more where it's are we really
going to lean into this bigger stuff, in which case I still think you
cut even the Pritchard minutes and maybe just get there and give yourself more of
Derek White as well. Looking at the defensive end, I think probably the
thing that they might be able to focus on is how do we attack the
minutes in which Jannie is on the bench, And I don't know how many
minutes that's going to end up being. He plays almost thirty eight in a
game that Milwaukee had pretty handedly towards the end. Can you count on him
being on the bench for you know, eight to ten minutes a game?
Maybe do you try to get away from are you know, you can't really
extend adjacent Tatum any further? You definitely should be extending it out Horford any
further. Logging thirty six plus minutes in this loss. We've seen him play
a ton of minutes in the postseason just overall. But you just sort of
consider that, whereas if Yannis maybe the Bucks just mirror his minutes, But
do you try and get away with having Tatum and Brown on the court at
the same time, just for even a brief spurt where Yannis isn't on the
floor to try and make up that gap you're certainly going to need. I
think if we're looking at one player that you say, hey, he's probably
going to need to play better on offense, and it's Marcus Smart, well
it's it's Jason Tatum. I think that's the bigger one, because he needs
to be more willing to shoot and to take the kinds of shots that he
was during the regular season going up against the Honest though, I think you
can understand that this is probably someone who's going to be, you know,
towards the bottom of just the percentile of his performances. No, he shouldn't
have seven turnovers every single game, and Boston as a team like, yeah,
you can do a better job limiting them. Overall. It was you
know, I think Jayalen Brown had just the really the only egregious outing on
this. You're probably gonna need more from Marcus Smart as a decision maker,
both away from the ball and on the ball. Whether it's are you trying
to get Tatum and Brown just involved in more away from the ball actions.
You're gonna need to count on him as that ball handler, unless you want
to bestow that to Derek White. And then I would just argue that because
we've seen it more like, can you get Marcus Smart going as the screener
a bunch trying to get him moving on hill where he can really be put
in positions to finish. And then there's of course the variant of they need
him to shoot better than one of six from three and they need pretty they
need him and Brown ideally would shoot higher clips from three, and then you're
going to get the same level of performance from Horford and Tatum when you're looking
at oh, they combined to go eight of eighteen from beyond the arc,
that's totally fine. It's like, you know, basically forty percent over forty
that's over forty percent. So those are the things that I'm watching for.
I just the Celtics will find a way to break through because the Celtics are
a really good team. Their defense is absolutely spectacular. I think they're just
probably gonna have to get weird with their lineup combinations, or again, maybe
you know Jared Weiss of the athletic I think was writing about this, I
think maybe we see like more stuff happening away from the ball other than like
these driving kicks or these side to side possessions from Boston. So this series
has suddenly even more intriguing than I thought it was going to be. Shame
on me for underestimating Milwaukee without Chris Middleton. I mean, they've just been
on an absolute scorcher since he went down, and so you know, they
might not get as great performances from a Grayson Allen or a Javon Carter a
night to night basis, but sometimes it just comes down to, like you
have Janice attend to Kopo, and then like you have really steadying, try
hard role players with I don't want to call role puzzle role player, but
even Wesley Matthews like someone who can count on to work his ass off on
defense, and even Bobby portis giving you huge minutes and you sort of know
where you're going to get from Brooke and Drew Holiday and a night tonight basis,
and that just gives you this sort of even keel medium at which to
start from. So the series is endlessly fascinating for me now and We're just
gonna have to keep an eye on what ends up happening with Boston making adjustments
specifically on offense, and I would think a lot of it does come with
maybe the way that they're running their their lineups. Let's get into more general
questions now that are well, some of them have to do with the playoffs.
But Braydon, who do you want to win? Not who should?
I'm assuming they're talking the playoffs. So I typically, as someone who just
wants great stuff to write about or tweet about, or to follow and talk
about, I do root for chaos. But if we're getting into the hashtag
agenda here, I did pick the Suns to win the title at the beginning
of the season. I doubled down after picking them at the beginning of last
season, so you know, if I want my pick to actually pan out,
I definitely want the Suns to win. It would also be you know,
Chris Paul getting a ring to kind of put some of the lazy postseason
discourse around him to bed would be great. Also, Devin Booker specifically seeing
him win. It does feel like some are still shocked how good he is
or they get uncomfortable when we talk about, Oh, this is someone who's
really improved defensively, So that would be that. Again, that would be
that. That's totally narcissistic on my part because I did pick the Suns to
win the title, but that's the team. Like, the energy is great.
I think the other thing here too would be too look at potential matchups
and I still want to see Suns Warriors in the conference finals. I think
when you sort of look at what's happening in the East with the Joel and
Beat injury, I don't know that I would want to see the Sixers come
out of the East. Right now, it feels like Suns versus Celtics,
a rematch between the Suns versus the Bucks, if we can assume that Chris
Middleton would be back, those would be the most interesting to me. It's
not that I'm not intrigued by Miami, but you know, with Jimmy Butler
banged up entering the semifinals, does play in Game one, having the stuff
with Kyle Lowret, I do wonder if there's more variants in how poorly they
could technically play against a better team, and a lot of that energy against
Philadelphia in Game one, it felt like Miami went out with James Harden the
night before is what it looked like, and they still found a way to
pull away and when I don't think you could go wrong necessarily, though,
in the team that's coming out of the East, I would probably just prefer
not. If I had a rank, I'd probably rather see I'm gonna say
Bucks Celtics, even though I think the Celtics beat the Bucks. Bucks Celtics
followed by the Heat and then the Sixers. I think if I'm looking at
at East team that I would like to see win, I don't know.
That's like I don't really have a preference of who comes out of these.
I mean, Yanna is one of the most likable players in the NBA history.
We've already seen the Bucks win, though, I just I guess I
don't have any like there's too much to like throughout all this there would be.
It would be absolutely chaotic if James Harden ends up in the NBA Finals
after forcing his way off the Brooklyn Nets, having Joel Embiid get injured and
missed some time against the Heat, that would be mine melting. Seeing Kyle
Awry get another ring in Miami, that's something I could totally enjoy. I
don't know if I would appreciate the heat culture tweets that follow, but I
don't think you can go wrong in the East right now. The Warriors are
the Suns are the teams that I want to see back in the finals of
the West. They would put up the most fight. But yes, selfishly,
the Suns are my title pick at the beginning of the season. I
love Devin Booker mcail bridges. That's someone that I would absolutely run in front
of a moving truck for. And I mean camp Johnson just his story,
the way Deandre's improves like that team to me. I know opposing fans are
not advocates of you know, Chris Paul. Some people don't like watching him,
but that's a team that I could very much. Just the energy that
I really enjoy having followed this season, That's a team that I would really
like to see when So we have a few questions on the Jazz Surprise Surprise.
We're gonna get into more detail with this when we do. Are you
know all, like, what's our biggest questions for each team? Leonate from
playoffs seating of the off season, But I think these questions are fair to
everyone wants to know and they're asking them. Team Bloom from Discord asked,
what's the best option for the Jazz this offseason? What's the most likely outcome
for the Jazz this offseason? I say best options to trade Donovan and keep
Rudy and Snyder. Most likely is that Rudy has traded, Snyder fired and
they rebuild around Donovan. Jake g asked, why, well, so,
yeah, well we'll go to Jake g next. Since it's ten Jenzer really
do this. I would agree with the overall take of this figures to end
with Rudy Gobert getting traded. Snyder is not going to get fired if he
leaves, is because he wants to leave, So let's make that clear.
And ideally, yes, you would keep him, but he's been offered a
contract extension for multiple reports and hasn't signed it, and so that's largely out
of out of their hands. I don't know that trading Donovan Mitchell is necessarily
like the more preferable course. He is younger, his contract. Look for
whatever you want to say about Donovan Mitchell, his contract is going to be
just better when you look at someone who can create from the point of attack
is younger, and both he and Ruy Goberta playofption for twenty five, twenty
six, and that final year Rudy Gobert's forty six point seven million dollars non
Mitchells on the hook for thirty seven point one million dollars. Again, that's
the stage of their careers at which they are at. But you have someone
who's younger and in theory does more for you in the playoffs offensively. That's
not to say that I don't think you could go the route of, oh,
let's move Donovan and try and retool around Rudy Gobert. But if you
move Donovan Mitchell like you need to restructure your entire offense because he is your
number one option, and I feel like that's harder to do than cobbling together
what would be a strong defense. If you're trading Gobert and maybe you're getting
back a good big man prospect or just a solid big man in general,
and is there any way that you're getting other perimeter defenders as part of the
process. Your defense is not going to be better, but it could just
be deeper in the sense that you don't just have this one generational talent plus
Royce O'Neill, who is not great in that Maverick ceiling, plus nobody after
that. I get that there are red flags. People aren't happy with the
lack of improvement for Donovan Mitchell at the defensive end. It's all fair,
I would argue from this standpoint, most likely, I think what happens is
Snyder leaves, Rudy Gobert's traded, Donovan Mitchell stays, at least in the
next season. What I think should happen is, if you're going to trade
Rudy Gobert, why are you keeping Donovan Mitchell at that point? If you're
in trade one of these guys, you're not getting better any in any case,
And Donovan Mitchell I would say, specifically, like that's the package that
you're not flipping Donovan Mitchell for another stall, like you could, yeah,
if you wanted to get like a Jeremy Grant or even if like Atlanta,
I probably wouldn't love the fit. But they're like, yeah, we'll give
up John Collins, like you're not getting You're not getting better for that,
And I'm sort of the mind, yes, I know that there's the realities
of the market, and we know how much Ryan Smith has bought this team
for and wants to keep fans and seeds. But like the Jazz fans,
like they're super loyal, Like those are people that are gonna put butts in
their seats, and I'm sure they would understand a pivot at both their stars
are unhappy. I just don't know what you do. Like you're rebuilding regardless
of who you trade, is my point. You can call it a retool
of renovation. I think you're more likely to move Gobert and be better while
keeping Mitchell than you are to have Gobert and still be better while trading Mitchell.
The on off data can support different facts there, but Rudy Gobert is
about to turn thirty. He can't anchor your offense. And even if it's
better for next season, I don't know long term that you are in a
more favorable state by keeping him over Donovan Mitchell. So there's the potential to
have that lateral move where old if you trade Rudy Gobert for like Clint Capella
and stuff from Atlanta, how much worse are you? I would still argue
significantly weren't because of how good Rudy Gobert is, but you're better than keeping
Obert and trading Donovan Mitchell to the Knicks for a bunch of picks and like
some of their young players like quickly and all the picks. Even if you're
getting RJ. Barrett in that you're still in the throws or rebuild. Rudy
Gobert's not taking that team into title contention. I think if you're moving one
of them, moving both of them should absolutely be on the table, especially
if Donovan Mitchell is unhappy there. There's the optics for the league and as
we talk about the next collective bargaining agreement, if Donovan Mitchell figures out a
way to get himself off this team with technically four years left on his contract,
three guarantee years, the fourth is a player option. Yeah, that's
not great. But if you're on the fence of where you think that you
would move Dona Mitchell to keep Rudy Gobert, then you shouldn't be technically attached
all that attached to him, And so that's the that's the school thought Island.
I do think you should keep Dona Mitchell if you're choosing between the two.
Rudy Gobert is probably the more valuable player. Donovan Mitchell gives you more
ways to build out your team because he can at least be like even if
you trade him, like you just don't have that long term number two option.
You're saddle with finding the number one, and like there's that trickle down
effect there. It's not long term. It's not Buyan Bogdanovich, Jordan Clarkson,
Mike Conley, those are That's just the reality you have to come to
grips with. I still think that the jaz should probably be open to moving
both of them if they think they're going to move either of them. And
the rumor as we're recording this was that Rudy Gobert was going to give the
Jazz and you know, a me or him ultimatum. Rudy Gobert came out
on Twitter and like kind of rebuked that. He tweeted every day there's another
rumor if I'm the Jazz. That doesnt change my thinking like Rudy Golbert.
Neither Rudy Gilbert Donovan Mitchell is good enough at a championship level to give that
the team that ultimatum, Like I'm not paying if I'm the Jazz I'm not
paying attention to that insofar as it's true, but it just it feels like
it's time. This core is stale, and you can look at it one
of two ways. Did the Jazz fuck up by not doing anything substantial at
the trade deadline other than cutting their tax bill? Or was that sort of
a harbinger of we don't really trust this nucleus to begin with. Why are
we going to double triple down on it after we've already doubled down on it
by investing more long term pick equity in getting a Jeremy Grant or Harrison Barnes,
even if those avenues were open to us. So it could just really
show a lack of faith in what they were going to do, what this
core was capable of, even if it was slightly better in the first place.
Would I rule out the Jazz running it back? I almost at this
point would. And I think because you can argue that Quinn Snyder seems like
such a flight risk, even losing him would be like this huge material loss,
so you had to wrap that up. I think the most likely outcome
is Rudy Gobert gets traded, Clint Snyder leaves, and they keep Donovan Mitchell.
If I'm the Jazz, though I am, would I consider getting rid
of Mitchell and keeping Gobert? I would not, And that's not anything against
Gobert. It's just at that point, like you're you're entering a a fuller
scale rebuild just based off Rudy Gobert's age and then what you need to have
your offense really hum So, yeah, that's where I'm at with that.
Jake g asked, why do the Jazz not take a trade of Gordon Hayward,
PJ. Washington and James brook Knight and fifteenth overall for Rudy Gobert assuming
the requesting trade rumors are true. I would argue, even if the requesting
trade rumors aren't true, like the Hornets are going to be a team that's
linked to to Gobert. And so I have another question that from Anthony MURLATCHI
asked, what are your favorite fits for Gobert? That's maybe easier who is
top five or bottom fives? Because every team gets better with Cobert. I
love the phrasing of that, your team is not getting worse because as Rudy
Gobert, if it, it's probably franchise mill practice based off what said team
gave up or what they put around him. So before I get into my
favorite destinations or kind of tackling all the teams that I see, I'll go
from worst to best that I could see going after him. The Hornet's package.
It's tough. You have Rudy Gobert over four years one seventy left on
his deal, and that's something where I think that's where you expect him to
fully opt in that final year of his contract when we get there, based
on how old he will be. That doesn't quite feel like enough. Even
if you're factoring in that Gobert's market value is going to be lower than his
actual encore value because of the contract. Gordon Ayward, I doubt Utah wants
it back after the way that he left there. You have two years,
sixty plus million left on his deal. Maybe there's a third team that's willing
to take him on, But are they sending Utah anything substantial because as of
right now, PJ. Washington's extension elige goals. So that's someone you immediately
have to turn around and reinvest in. James book Night probably has minimal trade
value, even though he was a lottery prospect last season. He had a
moment in Summer League, but like the horse, didn't rely on him that
much this season. So again it's one of those driving the car off the
lot situations where the pick his, you know, his where he was drafted,
has more value before he was actually selected, and so that's come down
quite a bit. I don't know if you're getting red without including kai Jones
and that you're just to give the Jazz another big man prospect there. I'm
also assuming that they're gonna want more than just one first round pick, and
it's different if you have a blue chip prospect you're sending them, but neither
PJ. Washington nor James block Knight is that blue chip prospect. Charlotte specifically
is also a little bit hamstrung because they have that first round pick that's lottery
protected until the end of time. That's now owed to Atlanta and it's not
lottery protected at the end of the time, but the protections on it are
a little bit weird, and so are the Jazz willing to accept an offer
where they're not getting picks until further down the line, and maybe they can
even get thirteen and fifteen from Charlotte season. But are they okay with accepting
that? I think at minimum you need to have both thirteen and fifteen in
here, and you probably need to find another taker for for Gordon Hayward.
And there might even need to be like future first beyond that, which will
be contingent upon their obligation to Atlanta actually conveying. So my favorite or what
I think the most sensible destinations are. They're apply like there are more teams
than this, but I have jotted down I think it's ten teams or nine
teams that I could see going after Gobert, and I have them. I
have them listed in like order of I don't like dig the fit to do
I love the fit, and I didn't I threw trade assets basically out the
window. Here the Kings, we'll start off with them. I could just
see them look Rudy Gobert or something, someone shiny. He really could anchor
a defense. Are they like, what would they do to try and get
Ruey Gobert? Would they want to pair him with the bonus? Or you're
trying to use the bonus as primary bait there? Does that even make sense
for you? Tell how much of your picks are you giving up? They're
just a team that I can see trying to get involved. I don't think
they should. I hate the idea of Gobert. There you're either left with
Sabonus or Rashaann Holmes, depending on who they're giving up. But he isn't
fit with either one of them, and maybe you're trying to give up both
of them and whatever deal. I don't even know what the structure for trade
looks like. But because the Kings are so bad on paper and in actuality
defensively, I could see them getting involved. Don't think they should. People
have mentioned the raptors. I guess he fits the rudy Gobert fits the motif
of just defense, defense, defense, and but like it doesn't fit the
theme of oh we want these like six seven to six, eight to six
and nine guys who can fly around everywhere on the court. And then even
if you just want to have that rebounding presence, that generational rim protector,
maybe even someone who gives you just like lob threats, someone's going to really
like devastate out of the pick and roll and set by the hardest screens on
your team, like your floor spacing is kind of all over the place already,
and you feel like you want for half court creation. Rudy Gobert doesn't
give you any of that, And what are you giving up to get him?
Like, You're just I'm not giving a Pascal Siakam Farigobert, especially considering
how well Siakam play this season. I'm just I'm not doing it. Would
I give up o Gianna Noby? I guess because Scottie Barnes is there and
all these defensive options you have great, is Utah willing to accept him?
Plus salary filler is the primary package structure? I don't know. I just
don't love the offensive fit there. I've seen the Bulls suggested by some where.
It's like, hey, you offer Vooge, Patrick Williams, whatever picks
you need to attach, definitely sort of gives them a ton of defensive appeal.
With Carusoe and Lonzo Ball if they're both healthy next season. You also
would still have Iodasumo unless you have to give him up as part of that,
and maybe a Javon day Green. There's a lot of different things you
could do defensively there. I would not love the floor spacing, and I
know that vouch was not shooting the ball great for most of this season,
but he's at least someone who can space the floor, and when you have
Demarta rozen on the court, that is incredibly important. And like, yeah,
a Lonzo ball is a higher volume three point shooter. At this point,
I was Crusoe's really not quite there yet. So you're kind of in
a situation where you might have three below average shooters on the floor at any
given point in the game, and then two of them just aren't going to
take those threes. I just feel like, you know, after giving up
what you did for Vouch, knowing that you have that draft pick owed to
Orlando down the line, that's just not something I'm just sidering. I don't
think it elevates their team just enough. They need more of like a star
powered wing than they do, like a pivot at the big man spot.
And you know, depending on what happens with Zach Lavine's free agency, I'd
really expect him to resign with the Bulls on Max, are you more incentivized
to do the Rudy Gobert trade? You have more incentivized to make this a
trade with urgency. I just don't like the idea of Gobert in Chicago going
staying. I feel like probably hasn't talked about enough. They might win the
title this season, so maybe that's why. But like they have the Andrew
Wiggins contract, they have James Wiseman, there's Commanda movie. They can offer
some future picks. They're twenty twenty four pick is though to Memphis right now
as part of that Andre Godallas, Allerygum, So there will be that to
consider. They could build some interesting packages and maybe you don't want to give
up Wiggins, and if you don't, then yeah, you're sort of like
that whole thing is scuttled. And Wiggins has had some pretty big moments for
them over the past few postseason games. But it would just be something to
consider if that's you know, they have James Wiseman sort of sitting there,
hasn't He's barely played over the past two seasons. Does have some mystery box
appeal if he's healthy. If Uti is looking to hit reset or just believe
that it can make, you know, sort of a more lateral move by
going from Gobert to Wiggins and Wiseman next season, you get another big on
the cheap to play a both in the minutes, and then I'm assuming other
assets would be involved in there. From Golden States perspective, you have there's
Moses movie and Commingo. Like I mentioned, that's something to just look at.
I don't love to Gobert Draymond fit together, and he's I know Draymond
Draymond has played with Looney would be my sort of counter to that, And
neither of those two are floor spacers. But it's a little bit different.
When Movie has been in the Warrior system for for so much. Is Gobert
gonna be able to make the same type of offensive reads. I don't know,
but the Warriors do at least seem to have like some commitment to getting
into at least a more conventional pick and roll attack. Otherwise, I don't
know why they picked James Wiseman in the first place. So I'm making a
lot of inferences there. Just a team. Again, they're not towards the
top of my list. I the Blazers coming in here they are, So
I did end up listing nine teams, and they are number five on this
list. I don't I love Damian Lillard and Rigobert and Anthony Simon's like the
idea of them together. I don't think the Blazer are at the point where
they should do that. That being said, they could have a top lottery
pick in this year's draft. Are you going to give that up for Gobert?
You shouldn't be. I want to make that clear. However, if
you're committed to competing with Damian Lillard, rebuilding around Damian Lillard, whatever you
want to call it, he's thirty two, Like the rebuild can't last that
long, you are obligated to at least search out these bigger swings like this.
Looking at the overall package, aside from this year's pick, what else
are you giving up? Is there a use of murket signing trade there?
Because the markets so barren of cap space, Utah maybe wants a big too.
Just slot in the middle and play some Gobert Again, these players do
very different things. When you start from there. You have Eric Blezo's partially
guaranteed salary. You can fully guarantee it to sort of help grease the wheels
of this trade, depending on the extent that Utah would be rebuilding. I'm
not looking at including Josh Hart if I'm Portland, because you're trying to maximize
your immediate chances, and to give up Josh Hart and a top pick to
get Gobert in addition to whatever salary it takes. Like that sort of puts
you in, like again, Gobert generational defensive talent, but you still do
need like wing depth on this roster. They're not chock full of established contributors
after moving CJ. McCollum, Larry and Junior, Robert Covington and Norman Powell
at the trade deadline in favor of just a bunch of flyers and mystery boxes
and unproven prospects. So you know, you have Justice Winslow you could throw
in there as well. Maybe Nossil Little has some appeal there, Greg Greg
Brown the third excuse me, super athletic. So there are actions that you
can make, but there have to be more of a future like driven package
catering to that for Utah. And look, their pick is projected to come
in at I think number six this year if the lottery odds hold. That's
if you're Utah, like, that's a pretty good springboard into whatever you're doing,
whether you're also trading Donovan Mitchell or just looking for a retool around around
him. The next team that I have on this list, and now we're
starting to get into places that I actually would enjoy seeing Golbert. The Hawks
had become like a fairly popular destination cling Capella and what I'm not giving up
DeAndre Hunter in this if I'm Atlanta, not because I think he's indispensable,
but again, you're trying to optimize the team around Trey Young for winning immediately,
it sort of defeats the purpose to get rid of yet another wing while
having an incoming big here that's so important that when that wing in Hunter is
so important to your defense, even if he didn't make the progress that you
wanted to see from him this season. And if you're Utah, like DeAndre
Hunters extension on the bo, would you want him on your roster shore like,
if it's someone you could get but you don't want to after view him
as the centerpiece of a So are we talking about future picks and Capella?
And then you have salary filler? Do they want another Bogdanovich? They have
the Gallinari salaries partially guaranteed for next season, so there are ways to include
him in this deal. There's also just like I really like Janen Johnson that's
someone you talked to take a flyer on. They could also take a flyer
on Sharive Cooper as well, and so you could build a lot of interesting
packages. There's also just Clint Capella and John Collins, like that's a framework
if their picks included or whatever, that you could work out with Utah or
Gobert. I don't know that, you know, I get the train of
thought of, oh, if we have Cappella, really, how much worse
are we defensively with the current perimeter talent on your team? They probably argue
a lot worse, and so you need to find ways to address that.
Would Atlanta, you know a Yeko Kungu, that's someone that you could sort
of slot in if you're whether you're rebuilding or trying to be more of a
lateral moving team Atlanta, though it doesn't make sense to make this trade unless
Capella's headed to Utah or there's a third team involved. There are different levels
of packages there, So like Capella picks Jalen Johnson, Sharif Sharif Koupa,
and Yaka kong Wu, and then even if John Collins is on the table,
like maybe that's where the third team and fourth team comes into play a
team that really wants John Collins. There's just a lot of options there,
and I think that Rudy Gobert next to Trey Young is a no brainer.
You can just look at how many times the Trey unconnected to Clint coopelor even
John Collins for that matter, on assists this season. I think he does
a lot for them on defense, they still need more perimeter talent there.
But if you if you still have Hunter, maybe bring back the loan,
right, could you still turn around and make another move just because you do
have a lot of middle groun salaries on this team? Where do you enter
the Jeremy Grant sweepstakes? And we have a question on the specific to the
Hawks coming up. I'll follow it up right after this actually, so that
we're still sort of topical the next team I have. This might sound weird
and people have killed me for suggesting Miles Turner be traded to the senior in
season, but justin Grizzlies, I mean, Rudy Gobert is not someone who
gets matchuped off the floor, and Steven Adams did in the playoffs already.
So if you're including Steven Adams the primary salary matching fodder. Memphis has all
their own picks moving forward. They have Zeier Williams, they have Golden States
pick in twenty twenty four. They also have Utah's pick, They've UTA's pick
this season and that Golden State pick. So yeah, there's like a lot
of different factors they could build if if Utah's okay with going and sort of
pandering to the future more. I don't think you get You're not getting Desmond
Made, you're not getting Jared Jackson Jr. And you're certainly not getting John
Morant. Everyone else I imagine would be on the table. You want Brandon
Clark, Do you have Brandon Clark, Xavier Tilman? Xavier Tilman is there?
If you want Dylan Brooks, Like you're trying to make more of the
lateral play and you're viewing this as Okay, Steven Adams could textually play for
us, but maybe we don't view him as the centerpiece of this deal.
But it's least someone who's competent center. Do we sign another big who's perhaps
a better, less schemable defender and trying to move forward that way, Dylan
Brooks is really going to help out your defensive mojo there on the primter or
maybe do you want a Danthy Melton the strengthens or your backup guard minutes and
give you a just a go getter on defense there as well. There's so
much that Memphis could propose. I don't love what Rudy would do to memphisis
floor spacing at the same time, like they just figured it out with Steven
Adams and Jaren Jackson Junior. His volume from three, even when he's not
hitting them, give you a ton of flexibility. Don't know how much he
improves the half court offense, specifically in a playoff setting when you're looking at
Rudy Gobert. That being said, just imagine the defense here. If you're
going to have Rudy Gobert Jaren Jackson Junior in the same front line, you're
still going to have one of, if not both, of Dylan Brooks and
the Anthe Mountain. You could bring back Tyas Jones. You should still have
the flexibility to bring back Kylanders and Desmond Bain has really stepped up defensively for
a lot of the playoffs. That defense is already pretty terrifying, and there's
like a chaos to it. Colbert gives it like a structure, but like
this sort of impenetrable structure. That's probably my most out there team for this
exercise, perhaps, but I would absolutely enjoy seeing it. Checking in at
number two, I have the Charlotte Hornet's The fit just makes too much sense,
and we already outlined with the different packages, could look like you might
need a third and fourth team and take on the Gordon Hayward salary, or
if Terry Rozier ends up being a part of it, you need so much,
you know, you just want shooting around Gobert that I think Caypon Rosier
is more important than Hayward. I'm just Rosier is going to be dependable when
it comes to availability at this point, we know Hayward is not. I
would absolutely give up both my first rounders this year if I'm Charlotte. I'm
not a fan of them upping their timeline when LaMelo ball is only entering year
three. I get. I get the urgency, though, if you really
are concerned about him becoming disenchanted with the franchise, You've moved on from James
Arrego already, so I don't want to see them, and to the extent
I don't even know what morgaging their future looks like. If you're a trading
LaMelo Ball, then I guess it's kind of like, all right, what
are you really giving up or sacrificing? And you don't want to have so
many of your first round picks into the distant future accounted for, even when
factoring in the obligation to Atlanta, I would give up a distant first plus
these two and then filler salaries with PJ. Washington for Gobert, I include
Craid Jones there as well. So again the math I'm just throwing out,
I'm literally if I'm Charlotte, I would be okay throwing the kitchen sink if
it's only we're talking about one distant first. If you're getting into the realm
of two and it just and everything else, that gets a little iffy,
and not love a little iffy, that gets megga iffy. Because I don't
know if Rudy Gobert makes you a contender. He certainly makes you more interesting
defensively, certainly could be a good fit with LaMelo Ball when you look at
the types of passes he seems ready to throw. But everyone can. I
don't. There's no one here that's indispensable to them aside from LaMelo Ball.
Some are going to suggest the Miles Bridges sign and trade. I don't see
Utah being about that, and you also need Miles Bridges cooperation there. I
imagine even with the limited cap flexibility for teams this summer, he'd be able
to find a destination that he might prefer or at least an offer sheet,
rather than work out a sign and trade to a team that's maybe rebuilding or
doesn't plan on having him like in this this huge role. So I would
view a Miles Bridges sign and trades out of the question. I don't mind
if he and Riego beart front court as long as we're on it. Like
Miles Bridges needs to shoot better on jumpers, but he's just he's super explosive,
and if you think that he'll up his clip on three the stuff we
could do off the deuble. You could run quote unquote dual big picking roles
with these two if you really, if you really wanted to to at least
test it out. Even though I don't necessarily consider Miles Bridge is a big
there's also valuability positionally on defense becomes a lot more valuable. Riego bears behind
him because there does feel sort of like an aimless miss to his capacity to
switch at this point. But yeah, it's it's look any prospect aside from
a mellow ball that they want the PJ Washington, James Book, Knight,
Ki Jones. They're on the table. The thirteen and fifteen should be on
the table and at one of the distant first round picks. And again you
have to structure it because they have the obligation to Atlanta. At this point,
I'm not really it out for Charlotte, and I think Ruego Behart makes
them exponentially better. I'll be it not quite a contender. I would still
argue if they need like a stronger perimeter body than having a Kelly Ubery June
yours there their best defender on the premiere, or maybe you view it as
you know Cody Martin's that's fine, maybe you consider Jail McDaniels. I would
just argue that that's just going to create even more problems. So can you
turn around and still figure out a way to trade Jeremy Grant while making the
deal for Gobert? You have the salaries to make things interesting thanks to that
partially guarantee deal with Ubrey like expiring at twelve point six, you have Terrors
year at twenty one point five, Heyward at thirty point one, Mason Plumley
partially guaranteed on a nine point one million dollars bollering inspiring contract next season.
PJ. Washington's at five point eight, even even James book Night at four
point four million, Like, there's just a lot of money to shoot here
in a year. So if you can turn around and make another deal,
yeah, you're mortgaging more of your future at that point, but you're upping
the defense, and it seems like you want to make this a wind out
timeline around LaMelo Ball. I would argue against the absolutely nuclear route, but
there's no denying the fit of Gobert in Charlotte and my final team, this
is the obvious one is Dallas. Like the fit there is just it's perfect.
You could play him with Maxi Kleeba at the four alongside Gobert, like
that's Cleba prodes more than enough stretched there. He would probably be the single
best defender that Rudy Gobert had since this best season. I think Royce O'Neill
is going to be above Cleiba, but having Dorian Phinney Smith Kleiba in the
same like rotation, you've already just beefed up your defense, like past the
rim, past the restricted area, way more than Utah ever did this offseason
where I've started to run into issues. I don't know what Dallas is giving
up here. They have the twenty six pick. Okay, so you can
give utan im media pick, but they owe their twenty twenty three selection to
the Knicks's top ten protected it will convey let's just assume. So then you're
looking at the soonest first round pick you could convey in this deal, aside
from trading this year's draft pick after the fact, it's twenty twenty five,
and then you don't have any other blue chip prospects on this roster. Maybe
maybe Utah wants Maxi Kleiba as part of this deal, and that you know
you can't break. That's not a make or break. Shouldn't be a make
or break for Dallas. But like using Dinwitty or Berton's a salary or Powell's
salary, Bullocks salary, actually Ceba salary, maybe they're even intrigued by Dorian
Frenny Smith as he begins that four year, fifty six million dollars extension next
season, Like, those aren't those aren't names that are going to be viable
centerpieces for a deal with Gobert. There is Jalen Brunson. I don't think
Utah's gonna want to acquire him and sign and trade negotiations. Maybe this is
a situation where you're sending Jalen Brunson va sign and trade to another team and
getting more draft picks to arm yourself with. But unless you're just unless Utah
wants number twenty six plus, you know to get out to get more salary
flexibility in the shorter term just because Powell comes off the books after next season,
Davis Berton's only has two years left of his deal before that non guaranteed
one in the final year. Spenser Dinwiddy only has a partial guarantee the year
after next. So there are shorter term salaries you could exchange Gobert for or
even a Reggie Bullock technically in expiring contract next year when you look at the
structure of that, the same with Cleba, but like number twenty six and
then at twenty five, twenty seven, and twenty nine first round, Like
if you're you taught, is that even like wet your whistle, knowing that
how young Luca don Chich is, you can include swaps in there as well.
It feels like this would take a third team scenario, but it's very
clearly the team that makes the most sense for Gobert. The defense is already
fairly strong, especially if you're gonna keep Dorian Finney. Smith is part of
the equation, Like you're in business and you have Reggie Bullock there. Some
of these players might need to be moved. I know that, including Max
and Cleiba. But the Luca Rudy Gobert connection makes all the sense in the
world, and it look ideally not ideally, but like if you're because I
don't think you's how launch Jalen Brunts, Like there's scenario where you're keeping Jael
and Brunts and as part of this too, maybe even Spencer Dimity as well,
so you're not losing your anything from your ball handling hierarchy, like aside
from Luca and I think look, the Dimwity addition has been great from that
perspective, jail and runs and making the just this ascent this year, even
from where he was at during last regular season. That's huge. Not saying
you could afford to lose one of them, but if you need to move
Jail and Brunson to get a pick or players that Utah is going to want
in assign and trade and then you can send them to the Jazz like that's
you know, it's workable. You would still I think, want a higher
another higher end offensive option, and you're now funneling your money into a player
in Rudy Gobert who doesn't provide that. But it just makes all the sense
in the world. If I'm Dallas, I'm probably not concerned about short circuiting
any part of my future. Like, if Utah wants that pick special I
laid out, I might do it, especially if they're will they take back
Tim Hardaway Junior's contract, if they're drinking back Davis Peton's is contract, Like,
yeah, that's something I would absolutely consider. So those are easily my
favorite destination. Well, that's my favorite destination for Regalbert. I love.
Of all the ones I listed, the only teams I'm actually probably love with
the fit would be Memphis, Charlotte and Dallas like, those are the teams
that I really want to see Egobert on. I thought about the Knicks for
a second, but they're so just like ask backwards in love with Donovan Mitchell.
That would be that would be counterintuitive to whatever there to whatever vision they
have, and I don't when you're when you're what they are, Rudy Gobertt
makes you better, like you need to. I think already have someone who
faced of the franchise material in place, and maybe you think that's r J
Barrett. Do you think they're getting out of that trade without including r J
Barrett Shore But RJ. Barrett isn't decidedly that player yet and it's certainly not
Julius Randall. So yeah, you could make cases like Portland. I don't
mind the fit, but I just don't. I don't see him Rudy Gobert
doing enough to be like, oh, hey, like we're really a threat
with with Damian Lillard to win the title. Now, Brooklyn, I flow
to this as a joke, but like the Ben Simmons Rudy Gobert framework,
if you're figuring out a way to get royel Neil back as part of that
deal as well, maybe you're including you do have some you know, you
have a future picked from the Philly trade. You can include Phillies pick from
this year's shraft as well. I wouldn't hate it. I just don't see
them that's doing it, so I didn't include them. Let's move on to
another question. This one comes from Jake g also asked, well, actually,
let me get to this. Uh, let me get to this Hawks
question really quickly? Have this one two Hawks questions, one from Jay Dobbs
ninety four what would be the best realistic trade target for the Hawks to make
a consolidation trade this offseason? And then Garland Riley asked josh Akogi to the
Hawks. So Cookee would definitely not be like the consolidation option. But if
you're just really desperate to beef up your perimeter defense, Kogi does give you
some real like mobile girth there, I'll call it. It comes at the
expense of your offense. Maybe you really don't care. He should come super
cheap. He's a restrictive free agent this summer. I can't imagine that Minnesota
is like going to be They might not even tender him or a qualifying offer
for all I know. I can't imagine that they're desperate to keep him.
Looking at the consolidation trade, though we already like sort of outlined the Rudy
Gobert stuff, he's someone they should consider. Jeremy Grant is probably a popular
warder. That's one that Jay Dobbs actually suggested in tandem with his question.
I don't like, yes, Jeremy Grant for sure. I don't know whether
I consider that a consolidation trade because it's someone that you're willing to give up
two of your younger kids for, like Okung Glu and Jalen Johnson and Sharif
Cooper plus another pick I could totally see that is Jeremy Grant, someone I'm
giving up John Collins and then something for. That's sort of more what I
view in the vein of a consolidation trade and the player that I think Atlanta
needs, like a really strong perimeter presence, who could on defense, who
would potentially be a secondary ball handler. Those guys just don't become available a
ton. I thought Derek White was a good target for them before the Boston
trade. I doubt the Celtics are all of a sudden you're gonna want to
look at moving him, so it gets difficult there. I think Jeremy Grant
is the most logical option. I don't think looking at the trade market what
it could become. I don't know that there are these other options where it's
like just worth consolidating for. Maybe there are opportunities that creep up where you
know, if Orlando makes Jonathan Isaac available, that's someone that Atlanta could try
and look at. I just don't know what I would be giving up to
get him. Again, we already mentioned the rudygo Bert situation. That's probably
like the realm of what you should be looking at. Otherwise, maybe you're
probably looking at more along the lines of like singles and doubles. You know,
a Victor Oladipo as a free agent target for this team I think could
make a lot of sense. He has shown a lot of positive signs in
the playoffs, shouldn't cost more than the mid level exception, and if he
does, they're assigning trade scenarios. But you should probably also just steer clear
of him in general. But yeah, the trade market just doesn't seem conducive
to the Atlanta Let's make that clear. Has the amma to just go out
there and make sort of this sizeable splash. I don't just like, if
you told me Shane Kills Alexander was going to become available, that might be
perfect for this team, even though he's probably become a little bit overrated defensively
at this point. But he's not going to become available. And so like,
who are you're really going after? If Bradley Beal becomes available via sign
and trade, like, that's not someone who's going to move the needle for
you. I think Jayal and Brown would be great for the Hawks, or
even a Brandon Ingram type. Neither of those players are going to become available.
And that's where of the issue you run into. Would would Brooklyn like
look at trading Ben Simmons for what like the Hawks couldn't offer. I just
don't know that Atlanta is gonna want to give up more for Ben Simmons or
as much for Ben Simmons when it couldn't prime away from Philly. They were
very clearly looking for an established star, and perhaps Brooklyn looks at it as
like, oh, if you're giving us clean Capella and like other stuff,
like, maybe that's maybe that's enough for them. I don't I do not
know, but like that's you know, I don't even know if that's like
a for Atlanta. It's I like the idea of Ben Simmons there, but
we haven't seen Ben Simmons play basketball to be an over a year by the
time you get there, And so that's something that simontor Malcolm Brogden would be
fairly interesting in Atlanta. I just don't hume as a consolidation trade, like
that's not something I'm giving up a ton of value for. I don't think
he'll nudge your defensive needle in the right direction too much. You can certainly
play off trade young and certain lineups. Is he a much? Is he
an upgrade over deln Right? Offensively? Sure? Defensively? No. So
I'm if there's an there needs to be an opportunity that I'm not thinking of
naming to arise, or maybe one of the ones that I already ruled out
coming to the table. If you have one, Jay Dobbs, other than
Jeremy Grant, I think that's the most logical one you're free to to get
at me there. Let's be on to this question from j G had the
other one of which team, who's a better chance of coming out of this
is not Jac's question. Sorry, I'm all over the place, you know.
J G asked, who's a better chance of making the playoffs next year?
The Pelicans or the Wolves. I think it's the Pelicans. The Wolves
might clearly be on to something. Anthy Edwards is only going to get better.
Karlathy Towns is fantastic, even for how the discourse goes with him.
I just don't know, like what's happening. They have nice players on that
team after them. Jaden McDaniels, Jared Vanderbilt was huge for them this season.
I just don't know the Di'angel Russell going into his contract year. He
had a good season, was all over the place during the playoffs. When
you just look at how deep the West is, it feels like this is
a team that could wind up falling out of it, though, and New
Orleans you could argue, has the wild card of Zion Williams since health.
Zion Williamson is an all NBA caliber player that they did not have this year,
and they're just getting him back to a team that has CG. McCollum,
brandon ingram Herb Jones, Jose Alvarado, Jonas Now and Tunis is there
right now. I also think it's easier for New Orleans to make a move
that's not nuclear that winds up drastically improving their team as opposed to it it'll
be harder for Minnesota if you put New Orleans could use some shooting. I
floated the idea of you know, they could still use also a rim protector
as well. So if you plug a rim protector next to next to Zion
Williams, you're just upgrading the guard position. Where it's like Gary Payton is
second is a name. Let's for example, it's going to be a free
agent, and if he's going to cost your your mid level, he's perfect
for a team that has Ingram McCollum and Zion, three guys that would prefer
to operate on the ball. He had and Peyton and enough of his threes
this year one hundred and twenty attempts to where you could argue at least doesn't
shrink the floor. But he doesn't need to orchestrate the offense. He's going
to give you a ton on defense. Just imagine him and Herb Jones within
the same defense. Like that's the type of signing or move I think it
substantially improves normally a chance of doing damage in the West because they're just getting
back to ole NBA caliber town. I don't think they should be out on
a Miles Turner trade still either, because his fit now, especially when we
looked at how they played, it's absolutely perfect. When looking at their personnel,
I don't see that same path for Minnesota. And even if you say,
oh, maybe the Nets are gonna be shopping Ben Simmons again, or
should they get in on the Jeremy Grant sweepstakes, it's a little harder for
them to build out packages. And if you're adding Jeremy Grant to this team,
and let's say it's costing you Jaden McDaniels and or Jared Vanderbilt, like,
how much better are you really? Maybe you disagree with me there that
they're substantially better. You look at this Western Conference, though, and you
know the current playoff teams specifically, some of them are going to have to
drop out. And who are you picking to drop out next season? It's
fine if you want to pick Utah, but Dallas, Bowen State, Phoenix,
Denver, those are all teams that should be back. I would have
like the Grizzlies. Maybe you think there's still this flash in the pan,
but should we expect them to get a lot worse? The Clippers are going
to be healthier as well. And so we just named seven teams that and
like, what if the Lakers don't suck, they have Lebron and Ida.
Just what if the Lakers don't suck? And then you have Minnesota, then
you have New Orleans. Who knows how much better is Portland with Dame?
What do they do over the offseason? They're sort of a wild card,
and the Spurs are a wild card because they're so firmly in the middle.
It's they're going to be more than one tough cut. There's a chance that
neither into Minnesota makes the playoffs. I just think that New Orleans getting back
Zion and the progress based showed with their defensive hustle under Willie Green mid season,
Brandon Ingram, you know, like he was the best player on the
quart at times in that Phoenix series. That's a big deal. You have
CJ. McCullin, who makes so much sense for you, the emergencies of
Herb Jones and Jose Alvarado. It just feels like New Orleans is in a
better immediate situation than Minnesota. Next question comes from Aunty are all over the
place today, excuse me? Next question comes from JT. Alexander. Who
has the better chance of coming out of their conference? Heat or Warriors.
That's a great question. I think it's the Warriors, just because when you
look at the East, I mean, at this point, you're you have
to just win two more serious to get out of your conference. Maybe over
simplifying this, but their range of matchups is just more intimidating. You have
to go through phillim and either I guess Philly without and beat though. Yeah,
but then you have to go through a Boston or Milwaukee. I'm just
going to say Miami because I think that they're on having to go through Milwaukee
or Boston. I mean, I don't know. I might change my answer
to this. Yeah, I think I think it's still Miami. I think
they are closer to the level of Boston and Milwaukee. Those are all three
teams that are neck and neck and neck. And yes, we know the
Heat have to beat Philly first. Then looking at the Suns are such a
well oiled machine. They can maintain their peak for longer than any other team
in the league. Now, the Warrior's peak better than the Sun's peak always
seen in the playoffs. Arguably, Ken Golden State continue playing at that rate
for more than you know, minutes at a time. Sometimes it's really all
that they need. I just I look at Phoenix as just so deep and
domineering and just so like comfortable with itself and knowing how to make adjustments,
knowing how to play with each other. I think they're just the single best
team in the league, and to have to go through them, if I'm
Golden State, that seems like a tougher role for the Warriors than the Heat
having to go through the Bucks and nor Celtics. Right now, That's just
that's where I'm at. And maybe that's Florida thinking there, Christopher from Discord,
as you suddenly find yourself GM and the Nets, what trade do you
make involving Kyrie Irving to build around Simmons and KD. I don't know which
team would want Kyrie Irving. He has a player option, and so he
has to want to go to his next team. And I just I honestly
don't like you could talk like the basketball fits like, yeah, there are
teams where he would make a a ton of sense for where we still want
to play for the Knicks. I just don't know like what you're actually getting
for him. And that's just like, you know, would you want like
an Anthony Davis trade with the Lakers if they were willing to entertain that reunite
Kyrie and Lebron in La and like the fits are kind of hard, Like
where would Kyrie Irving want to play? You? Like, do the Clippers
want to have to deal with him? And if you're the Nets, like
do you like the idea of Powell a twenty twenty nine pick and like other
stuff like a Lucannard or a Terrence Man Maybe like that's something that you could
look at. I just don't the way that the Nets organization is run.
I would be shocked if they want to consider a trade for Kyrie Irving.
And then again, even that market just becomes so limited because he dictates where
where he would go. And so yeah, if you were gonna move Kyrie
Irving, I'd probably look at like the Clippers. I honestly wouldn't look at
the Lakers. They want to give you picks? I doubt they'll want to
give you Anthony Davis, that's the team. And then I don't even know
what the Knicks have, just like enough intriguing win now players to where youngsters
excuse me, and picks plus like do you really want Evan four Day on
your team? Alc Birks on your team? I don't know if that like
West the whistle and I don't look the Clippers with Powell and Terrence Mann and
then they can now officially trade future a future pick we're getting this summer.
I don't know if that's even enough. So I don't if team like if
he didn't have a say and where he was going and that wasn't a factor,
that opens up your options considerably. I just don't see that that situation
out there. And just for the record, I think that Kyerman winds up
staying in Brooklyn. Next question comes from but to Simon asked, eighty two
games is too many and we have a better products. We cut it down
to fifty eight games, but the owners would never accept that. What's the
shortest regular season they would accept? And will we only see a short regular
season if a mid season tournament is added to make up for it? Yeah,
So I don't know what minimum that the teams themselves would accept, and
also the players themselves just because like their salaries are tied to league revenue two,
which is tied to you know, what teams are making at the gate
and from home games as well, and if you're shortening that too, you
know, even if it's even if it's seventy two, that's five fewer home
games. And I think the last I saw that, the league said like
forty percent of the revenue that they get is like contingent upon like the home
games, the operations and the stuff that goes into it. I think reasonably.
I know Daryl Morey has said, I don't know if that's where you're
getting the fifty eight number. He's been a proponent of fifty eight games during
the regular season and shortening the playoffs. I don't think we ever get to
that low. I think this is a situation sixties, like let's split the
difference and say sixty six feels like maybe a more optimal number. Sixty six.
Can you schedule more sort of series with teams so that you're cutting down
on the travel as well, I would say maybe seventy two, and you
could do the same thing with that, like can you figure out ways to
trim down the travel by having more of these you know, best of three
mid season series or just you know, just the mid season series in general
that we saw during the past seventy two games season twenty one, two,
twenty two, and twenty one. I do think whatever they shortened to it
will be coincided with the mid season tournament as a way to sort of drum
up interest and sell that they're going to be able to make up revenue from
alternative means. But even I do think even players and teams would push back
against giving up like those ten games. And then also it's five home games
per team there, just because of the money they be sacrificing that you can
argue that they'd be able to recoup it, especially if you're gonna run the
mid season tournament. But I think even the proposals for the mid season tournament
was will shorten the regular season by four games and include the mid season tournament,
and so you're almost expanding the product there. We'll trying to add the
element of maybe the one and doneness that Mark Madness has in the middle of
the year on top of the play in tournament. So I sixty six to
seventy two. If we're talking about what would be my drop dead number,
drop dead number to where maybe the evidence is overwhelming, or maybe they see
that they can recoup an off of the revenue from the forfeited games that they
move, that they move on from there. I just I struggle to see
it happening. Let's see what the mid season tournament proposal looks like. I
don't know if that four game even you know, shaving makes a difference down
to seventy eight. But if the league is concerned about players and load management,
they have to figure out a way panel that. I think the other
element that goes into this is historical records and perspectives. How much harder is
it to assign value to, you know, single season records when you're looking
at per games, if you're short shortening the season substantially, but then even
just the you know, the all time leading scores, when you're looking at
that, and if you're all of a sudden it's a fifty eight game season
as opposed to an eighty two game season, Like, how do we treat
those records? And I think the league likes the idea of having players chase
history. It's hard enough to sort of compare different eras, but like having
the similar schedules across the board, that's certainly something that works in favor,
and so I would be as of right now, maybe I just can't see
the vision. I would be fairly shocked if we see the league drastically cut
down on the number of games, even regular season games, even with a
mid season torment do fu, I asked, do you think the Raptors could
soon become a championship contending roster? I do they need like shooting and feel
like they need another creator, Like that's what they feel like they're they're short
of. I don't know that it needs to be a star because you have
Fred van Fleet, you have Scottie Barnes, Pascal Siakam or Gianna Noby.
If you're refining whether I think there's like a trade out there that they could
make if Bradleybyal wanted to come to Toronto and free agency, that's someone who
I think if you're keeping van Fleet and Siakam like you're all of a sudden
and Barnes like you you're all of a sudden there, I don't know that
they need to go that route though, just because I don't know if the
player that they would ideally need is available. I think if you just put
more even specialty shooting on this roster, or I floated them as a victory
Ladipo destination in free agency, just sort of another creator who might be able
to hit enough of his threes, I think it makes a big, big
difference on the trajectory of this team. I don't know if that that's the
way they're thinking. They seem to value this model of having the like size
the players and some of the projects. We saw how invested they were and
pressures that chews development this season, But I do I think that they could
absolutely become a championship contending roster shoo I picked them to beat the Sixers in
Round one, I said on multiple interviews podcast radio shows, if you told
me they came out of the East, it wouldn't surprise me. I was
definitely underestimating the extent to which their offense could struggle. How they're built,
and that's a way to where when you can't rely when things look they can
get out on the break, they can hit the glass hard, but when
you're not able to do those things consistently in the postseason setting when things slow
down. I think Siakham has done a great deal to improve in those situations.
Maybe Scotty Barnes gets there. Van Fleet provides value there as well.
I just don't think he's that guy. They need to address that more than
anything, in my eyes, and that's a solvable problem. I don't think
you need to go get another star for that, and it's certainly not Rudy
Gobert who addresses it. Let's make this the last question. Julian Morales asked,
do rebounds per game even matter anymore? I don't think that they don't
matter. There's just more ways to dig in to them. How many of
those rebounds are contested? What's the player that's getting them? As designed so
that apply a certain players can grab rebounds where maybe you're looking at And this
has always been like the Steven Adam argument during his Russell Westbrook days, like
you probably need to just look at his box outs like those. The hustle
stats on how they're boxing out players matter as well even if you're not grabbing
rebounds. But rebounds do still matter, like grabbing defensive rebounds. It's a
way to end possessions of the opposing offense, and also a way to get
into your offense. If you have someone who's grabbing a rebound and then being
able to run the break or throw an outlet pass like a Nicole yok Which
or Kevin Love, that has inherent value. I think we're past the days
of looking at oh Andre Drummond led the league in rebounds per game, or
so and so led their league and rebounds per game and just thinking that that's,
you know, incredibly important. I don't, but I don't know that
there's like everything in basketball matters. It's like the triple double argument, like
there needs to be additional con context relaid around it. But there's there's like
there's an importance to rebounding. And I look at how what the Raptors and
Grizzlies did specifically this year. I mean even the Pelicans at points, like
killing it on the offensive glass has this inherent value to the offense, creating
those second chance opportunities, higher quality looks around the basket. That stuff absolutely
matters, and but so do and again it's defensive rebounds as well, grabbing
contested defensive rebounds, but so does boxing out, and so does just actual
defense where you're causing those those misshots to end the possessions and enforcing turnovers.
There's a lot that goes into it. But if you're looking at total rebounds
per game to try and find the best rebounder in the league, I would
argue that, no, that's not that's not the way to do this.
Like, there doesn't need to be a rebounding title. To me, feels
different than a scoring title, if if that makes any sense, Like those
are being inherently more valuable to begin with, But do you think that,
Like, as an example, is Jianna's attempt to people are the best rebounder
that I've seen, No, but the opportunities that he creates by grabbing eleven
point two defensive rebounds during the playoffser game, that's absolutely huge, and it
leads the league this year. But it has a lot to do with minutes
played, the type of role he's playing on defense, and then how the
Bucks want to get into their offense after grabbing those boards. So those things,
to me matter. I don't think rebounds don't matter in general. It's
just not something I'm inclined to look at the numbers specifically and say and draw
any profound conclusions from Thank you all for sticking with me through this simmal mailbag.
Hope you enjoyed it. Please remember to rate, review, and subscribe
to this podcast wherever you get your podcasts. And until next time, I'll
leave you with the shout out to the one the only just appeared in a
playoff game for the Dallas Mavericks. Even though they lost, they were still
glorious FRANKIEO Team