What is krack Alak and hardwa Knox listeners, I am Dan Favalley about to
come at you with my fantabulous co host Adam frommel We aren't going to dive
into our first mail bag of the season. And also some Ben Simmons talked,
but it is not the discussion about Ben Simmons that you think it is,
so stay tuned for that. Just a quick reminder before we get started
to please, please, pretty please continue rating, reviewing, and subscribing above
all to hardwe Knox. Wherever you get your podcast, whether you use iTunes
or not, we ask that you head over there. Throw us a five
star rating, writer review those help us out a ton on the charts,
in addition to obviously subscribing and downloading every episode. If this is your first
time listening to hardware Knox, consider throwing us that permanent subscription. We cover
the MBA at large, have a ton of fun doing it. Do not
take ourselves too theorious too seriously, but pride ourselves on being thorough. That's
it. That's out of well, well, I guess. Follow us on
Twitter at hardwar Knox, follow us on YouTube, YouTube dot com or Hardwoo
Knox will come right up. We're also on Instagram at Hardwood Underscore Knox.
With all that out of the way, let's get into our first mail bag
of the season. Hello everyone, and welcome to the latest episode of Hardwood
Knox. It's our first mailbag episode of the now in progress twenty one twenty
two NBA season, so we're excited. Even if the response to our prompts
for questions was low enough that you might have thought I sent the tweets,
since typically I'm the one who doesn't get responses, but it was actually Dan.
So just you know, if you're listening to this, if you're enjoying
the mailbag episodes, if you're enjoying any episodes at all, just keep your
eyes peeled for those prompts because you have a chance to be featured in these
episodes with one of your questions before we dive into the actual questions that we
did get. How's it going, Dan, I am spectacular over here.
I'll take I'll take responsibility for the less than stellar response, and we normally
have so many great questions. I think I sent it out like in the
middle of football some day, so that's on me. I have to timing
better. We did get more responses in the Kansas City Chief scored points.
That's always a plus and that would normally be like a pretty high bar.
Yeah, I was about to say, right, it's like it's a pretty
low bar this season, so that doesn't make me as happy. I'm pretty
sure that you and I could both like play on that offensive line at this
point. So that's that's neither here. How are you doing I'm doing well.
I'm doing well. I went to a pumpkin patch with my parents,
my wife and my kid and took some some holiday themed pictures and got some
stuff for jack lantern carving later this afternoon today, So got some fresh air.
I'm I'm ready to go though and talk some basketball. Wow, if
you're listening to this, just think about how Adam has already carved his jack
lanterard like he said this, but it's already done. There will be no
pictures because I have I have no artistic talent whatsoever. I struggle with stick
figures, so it's going to be a disaster. But he won't know any
better, So that's that's what matters. Are you ready? Let's so I
wanted to again before we went into this mail bag with air quotes because we
have, like, I think, seven questions, but I wanted to talk
about Ben Simmons one. I know some people are exhausted from it. I
have, so I have some I have many layers of takes here that I
will try and make succinct. I don't like when people act like they're above
the Ben Simmons thing to talk about it. I understand if you don't want
it to dominate the NBA news cycle, but it's a real thing that's happening.
This is a wildly important player to what's supposed to be one of the
best teams in the league, and it's turned into a ship show that's headline
news. Now. If you want to make fun of the reporting, I'm
here for the jokes. I've made plenty of them on Twitter. It feels
like both sides are handling this situation very poorly. The two things that I
take issue with is, and they're on both sides, defense and maybe it's
three things, because I think the overarching point is we need to be able
to have like discussions where there's a gray area that not everything is so cut
and the people that think they're somehow pro labor by just taking Ben Simmons side.
I can't bring myself to understand that when you're talking about someone who is
going to make nearly one hundred and fifty million dollars over the next four years,
and this isn't a millionaire versus billionaire thing because he's impacting other people on
the team. It's not even just the front highly paid front office guys.
It's not just indeed, but it's like lower level guys on the team,
lower level guys within this organization. If this blows up in the Sixers face,
there are gonna be people that lose their jobs, Like are there's a
trickle down effect to this. I'm not looking at Ben Simmons, who is
rich and has the flexibility to do what he wants, as me being pro
labor. There is when we were talking about the middle of the pandemic and
NBA teams were saying, oh, we'll match whatever our players raised, like,
yes, you want to go that route where these teams are worth billions
and billions of dollars and they're putting the onus on the millionaire players to go
out and have an impact on the community first before they do anything. Totally
with you. The other thing and This is from someone who who thinks that
Ben Simmons has handled this situation less than ideally. We gotta be more sensitive
to mental well being here. We can't just automatically assume that he is faking
a mental health issue here. I, for one, look if you don't
think if if you think that this is a ruse, and I hope it's
not. I hope the thing that he's not mentally ready to play is not
a ruse. But if you think it's a ruse, I kind of understand
that based off how everything has unfolded to this point. There's that's not what
you're you can make a joke about, Like you want to talk about the
report that came out that his camp thinks that the Sixers were too good for
him to develop. Yes, that is fucking stupid. That is one of
the dumbest things I've ever heard. But like, this is someone who regardless
of what you if you think that he's not willing to improve, that's a
different discussion. But I if someone is going to say that they're not mentally
ready to do something after they just went through this entire process, where I
have to imagine, like, this isn't just a unilateral Ben Simmons decision.
He has people in his ear, Rich Paul or whoever else is at Clutch
Sports, Like, do we think it was Ben Simmons's decision alone to hold
out or then to show up. No, there are people in his ear.
This is still a very young kid who Again, even if you don't
think he's right in this situation, I would argue no one's right at this
point because the Sixers overplayed their hands. Whatever Doc Rivers wants to claim he
was misquoted, even though you look at that after the Game seven verbatim him
basically saying I don't know if Ben sucks or not is essentially what it mounted
to. No one has handled this situation properly. But we can't jump to
this conclusion that he's just faking not being mentally ready. I could see,
after everything he's gone through, after all the voices that we know are in
his ear, having to go back to an organization that James Harden trade aside.
Yes, there's this is why you get paid all this money in the
NBA is to be a part of those transactions. I know people like to
think that they're above transaction. Is now too I understand that it can take
focus away from the actual game. I totally get that. I want to
talk about basketball just as much as the next person. I also appreciate transactions.
I also appreciate the human element behind them now more so than I ever
had. There's a balance there. But part of the reason you're getting paid
all this money is because your name is going to be thrown and that's part
of them. That being said, there's a difference between being involved in James
Harden rumors and then just knowing that your team wants to get rid of you,
which is where I think Ben Simmons has been for quite some time,
at least since the end of last season. So you're dealing with that showing
up to a team that you don't think actually wants you long term. Now,
maybe you're embarrassed, maybe you're fed up with your teammates because Joel Embiid,
you know, and look Joel Beach response to when the report came out
that Ben Simmons doesn't think they were a good fit or whatever. I don't
think that was Ben Simmons that leaked at himself and we gotta stop calling them
leaks. But like that's not that's there's so many people involved in that decision
making part of the process. You're now going back to a team where it's
hard to own up and say, maybe I went about this the wrong way,
or you're facing all these guys who know you don't want to be there,
or you're facing these guys for the first time after you made what they
deemed this mission critical season ending mistake against Atlanta and look, newsflash, terrible
decision by Ben in the moment. I will argue until the end of time
there's never one reason any team lost a game. One play does not decide
an entire game. I still think that the criticism is fair game there,
but there are issues like the Sixers had opportunities aside from that moment to win
the series, to get back in that game specifically, I understand being frustrated
with Ben Simmons. I understand, and I think you should be frustrated with
him and the Sixers, But the mental health stuff is where I draw the
line with thinking he's faking it or making jokes about that. And my final
point this is a little bit longer than I want it to be, is
I could see him not wanting to face the Philly fans and I'm not calling
out the Sixers fan base. They are one of the most loyal, enthusiastic
fan bases in the NBA, but they're probably one of the more you want
to call them, honest or bruto, however you want to put it.
Now, you have to go to home games if they even play him at
home games at this point, and face them where they're probably going to boo
you. And they're not out there booing Darryl Mourray for his role in this.
They're not out there booing the Sixers because they failed the trade for James
Harden or because they failed to find a package for Ben Simmons. Yet there
I think most people, most fans have been pretty pro you know, NBA
Twitter seems to be lean more towards Simmons, and then actual fans of the
like the game or the Sixers seem to be more pro like, what the
fuck the Sixers are doing everything right? Just based off what I've seen in
I mentions. It just makes me wherever you fall in that it makes me
uncomfortable that we're okay still in this climate, not that we ever should have
been, but as this has become more of a focus, more of a
revelation and how important mental health is, especially for these athletes who are just
so exposed. I don't I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that we can jump
to jokes or to the conclusion that he's faking it when I think there are
legitimate, authentic, genuine reasons why he might not be mentally ready to play
right now. And this is me being talking from my perspective where I don't
know that I could play in this situation, so I'm not trying to project
that onto him. I just see a scenario in which this is a real
thing that he is struggling with. I had no idea where you were going
to take this, because with the topic of Ben Simmons, there are a
bajillion directions that you can go right now because so much is in flux.
And then you basically stole all of my talking points, So I agree wholeheartedly.
I was very uncomfortable when people were making jokes about the back injury,
maybe air quotes around the back injury, because we don't really know, but
you know, if it's a real injury, which it very well could be
given his history with injuries, that's a bad look. And then the poking
fun at the mental health stuff is an even bigger deal to me. And
regardless of how that would have developed, if it does exist, it's at
least in some parts self inflicted, because he has, you know, put
himself in this situation by refusing to you know, to find any compromise to
play the style of basketball that people have wanted. The lack of development,
maybe the lack of work on his game, all of that, But it
doesn't even matter, because self inflicted or not, this is still a young
human being who has had to deal with all sorts of vitriol just heaped upon
his shoulders for months on end, the subject of constant jokes, of constant
scrutiny, of constant criticism. That's going to take its toll, regardless of
whether you're the one who caused it or not. So yeah, like,
of course he might not be mentally ready to play right now, and it's
so easy to make the jokes. And I get the urges because we all
have to fight those back. To be honest, I mean, this,
this situation has devolved so much, But like that is a natural instinct to
poke fun at the situation. But I think it's it's just important to take
that step back and recognize all of the factors that lead us to get to
this point and then just have a little bit more grace than we like to
on Twitter. Yeah, and look, I have made jokes about it,
and I guess I can admit to being a hypocrite. There's I had a
tweet I did. I don't even I muted it. It was like did
a fifteen hundred? It went viral? Is that what it's called viral?
Where I had Ben Simmons and the Sixers handling the situation. They're both on
bikes, they stick sticks in the spokes of their bikes and they both fall
off. That is like, if you want to say that that's wrong and
that I'm being a hypocrite for that, that's fine. But it's like I'm
poking fun at the general situation, which some extent is comical. And I
think again, the criticism of how both sides have handled this fair game,
the mental health stuff specifically, just makes me wildly uncomfortable. And you don't
think the other thing is like the Sixers are still allowing him to be away
from the team now through this, like they seem to be taking more seriously
unless this is a facade, which I am when it just comes to someone's
mental health. I'm not going to claim that it is, but like they
seem to understand, like Joel Embiide even people were making fun that he slipped
it into the crowd before the Sixers first home game, like bennics Law brother.
But it seems like the team is now understanding that maybe there is this
immense pressure on Ben Simmons or that he really isn't a not the best state
of mind right now. If they can understand it, like we need to
be able to understand it too, And like that's where the I understand Twitter
is not the place for nuance, and I totally get that. I accept
that there are elements of me that embrace that. But like we got that
stuff is just so wildly uncomfortable and just bad bad faith right there with you.
But you're ready to jump into the mailbag with that out of the way,
Yeah, let's start with a question from doctor Ramblings. Before we get
there, I want to start with my own question for you. Wow,
that was you just overrode a list You just cut in line. You didn't
even let the listener go first. Because I know that the listener questions are
going to be better than mine, so I just wanted to make sure that
we got to my inevitably worst question. I've tag you in the mail bag
tween to thank you for the question, like I do with everyone who asked
as you should. As you should, But I wanted to quickly look back
at the twenty nineteen NBA draft where the top five picks where Zion Williamson,
John Morant, R. J Barrett, Dejandre Hunter, and Darius Garland.
And I'm curious, given the start that we've seen from John Morant this season,
given the continuing health issues, the potential uneasy situation in New Orleans with
Zion, would you draft Zion and Jaw in that same order right now?
Have we reached have we reached a tipping point where like Morant, because it
was a legitimate question coming out of their rookie seasons, coming into this season,
like John Morant has been good enough that you can make a realistic argument
that he should be the top pick. And I'm curious if enough has happened
to this point that you're willing to kind of switch there, you mean,
flip flop Jaw or Zion. Yeah, should in a redraft, now,
would you take John Morant or Zion Williamson at number one? I would still
still in a vacuum, like we're not saying that they're gonna end up in
New Orleans. I would still take Zion, but I think we're probably coming
closer to it being a discussion. The primary reason for me why would just
be Zion's health, because when he was on the court last year, he
probably should if he was played in more games, and even he maybe should,
he might have just been a snub. He played like an ll NBA
guy, So he feels like that automatic r MBA type player. But it
does if you're going to factor in health specifically, and there's a chance that
jaw gets better and his you know, start sitting his threes more and even
his mid range game is more efficient. It feels like it's more of a
discussion now than I think most people would have assumed it would be at the
end of last season. Even yeah, I think I think I'm ready to
make the switch. Honestly, Oh, I still think Zion is just this
generational talent, like an easy All NBA inclusion. When he's healthy and playing
at full strength, he has the higher ceiling, and you know, if
if we're looking at it mathematically, like he's probably going to have a higher
range of positive outcomes, but right now I also think that he has a
lot more lower outcomes. And I'm just you know, it's it's hard to
read in like this is a good way to come out of the Ben Simmons
discussion into this because I think they're they're related to some extent, Like it's
hard to read into what exactly his mentality is. Like we know that he
has showed up to camp out of shape multiple times. We know that he
had this foot injury and reportedly balloon to over three hundred pounds during the recovery
process and didn't tell the team about it and does not look ready to play.
We don't have a timetable for his return, and I just I keep
getting these like later career Shack vibes where he knew he was that good and
could play himself into shape during the regular season, and that has to matter.
I think so, like peak Zion is still unbelievable, But given the
importance of the point guard position in today's NBA, given the control of the
offense, we're seeing from Jaw through just a few games during this now in
progress campaign. I think I'm ready to flip flop them. But I also
I do that fully cognizant of the risk because if Zion is healthy, if
Zion is motivated, that has the potential to look really bad. Yeah.
I think that's a spicy take, not an illegitimate one at this point,
And where I would provide the pushback is how much of this is just can
he plead being twenty one years old? And like, how in tune?
I know you aren't a professional athlete, but how in tune were you with
your diet and your body? I'm still not disciplined? Were you? But
that's my point is there's a chance and I'm not saying the injuries that could
be related, it could be not related to it. How much? How
much are the Pelicans responsible here? If they're responsible at all for just like
the you know, would this are reviewing his injury situation differently if there was
more transparency would be my question to that. But you could fast forward.
I can envision a scenario where as Zion grows and matures and is in better
shape, like even if it maybe takes three or four years or something,
we're talking about a generational guy. The flip side of that argument would be
there are a lot of people that subscribe to the idea because he's built so
uniquely even if Zion's in peak shape, like just looking at peak Shack,
that his prime could technically be shorter because of how much of a of an
anomaly he is, in which case that is inherently gonna make John Morant more
appealing, because would you rather have let's say ten a decade of MVP caliber
play or twelve to thirteen years of second team All NBA. I'm just I'm
throwing scenario right right, Yeah, And I think there is something to the
idea that his frame is uniquely built and it is set up in a way
that is going to lead to injuries because he plays with so much force generated
and it's going to take a toll on the joints, it's gonna take a
toll on the feet, and his frame is not built to be under two
hundred eighty pounds or whatever if he's gonna play with the powerful style with which
he operates. So to me, I'm kind of looking at it like if
we assume health, I still don't think that you're gonna consistently get more than
sixty five to seventy games from Zion during an average season, even when he's
fully functioning. And would you rather have seventy games of Zion or eighty games
of John Moran? And I think that the scales are kind of tipping towards
the Morant side right now, because I don't even know if we're gonna get
seventy Bookmark this take at Frammel zero nine. Again, I fully acknowledge just
how poorly this could age. Because Zion is a generational talent when he's able
to operate, like once he started running the show and running pick and rolls
this past season, like it was transcendent. He was unbelievably good. You
can make a legitimate case that he's going to push his way into the top
ten player conversation, But that precludes availability, and that that has to matter.
I still think, like I need to see how this season unvolves.
Probably, I still think we're just a scotch away from it being that far.
It's too early for this. Like I said, I think the take
is spicy, not illegitimate at this point. Now, can Doctor Ramblings ask
his question? Damn I guess yeah, if we don't want to Doctor Ramblings
asked, the Nuggets are twenty five to one for a championship. I don't
see a team in the West being a runaway favorite. Why not the Nuggets
if Jamal Murray comes back healthy. Those odds seem juicy to me. I
would jump all over those odds. I think the Nuggets are an eminently reasonable
title pick this season. But I have a feeling that baked into those odds
are the uncertainty because Jamal Murray is ultimately returning from an ACL injury at an
unspecified point in time, we don't know if it's going to happen shortly after
the All Star break with five games to go and have a limited ramp up
period before the playoffs. And as good as the Denver rotation is without Jamal
Murray, I mean Monte Morris, Facundo Compazzo, Austin Rivers, Bones Highland,
Like that's a good backup guard rotation, but this team isn't the same
if Jamal Murray isn't available, and that has to be baked into the odds.
Now, if you want to say, like, yeah, those seem
pretty juicy, Like I'm gonna jump all over those then go right ahead,
because at peak powers, this Denver team is one hundred percent capable of winning
a title. Yokich just continues to be unbelievable against the Spurs on Friday Night
thirty two, sixteen and seven, and it looked casual. It didn't look
like a standout performance. You saw a few of the Sambar shuffles. You
saw him get exposed on the interior a little bit during the first half when
he wasn't fully engaged, but in the second half when he was there like
an unstoppable force. And there is no counter to him right now, and
he could easily carry a team to the playoffs through the playoffs even without Murray.
But you don't want to bet on the Nuggets that whatever those odds were.
I think twenty five to one is what you said. If Murray isn't
there and right now, like we have, we have no knowledge of when
exactly he'll be back on the court, what he's going to look like,
what kind of ramp up period is going to be necessary, and the Western
Conference is stocked with contenders, I would agree with the thing you said.
They're also Yokas through that pass where he like bent corners essentially like just and
then Porter just bricked it, right, But the past itself was incredible.
I think it comes down to whether Jamal Murray is gonna be available. The
other thing, he's just like what does he look like after torn acl not
playing for almost a year. Because if if Jamal Murray was healthy, had
the Nuggets begun this season at full strength, the team's at full strength.
So we'll include the nets here, Like, let's pretend that Kyrie Irving isn't
a dumbass. You I don't know capable of doing that. You probably have
the nets, or I shouldn't say dumb ass, that's rude, contrarian without
a cause? Is the bay he's a dumb ass, So the nets,
and I think I would probably put the full strength Like that's how perfect this
team would seem on paper with a healthy Jamal Murray. Right if you want
to make the gamble that Jamal Murray will be available, and let's say like
eighty percent of the Jamal Murray that they need for sure, there's also an
out. Could they win the title without him? I think so? So
why that's how wide open it is right now? I think like I think
the Nuggets his fourth best player. If you're looking at the championship discussion.
I have not made an official title pick and I'm not prepared to yet because
it's just a weird season where there are so many teams that are are fully
competitive and capable of getting there, but like Denver might be my leading choice.
Oh that's interesting with see, I need to see Jamal Murray before I
could get there. Full disclosure. If we were doing stock Up stock Down,
which maybe that's the separate podcast stock Up stock Down on our preseason award
picks that we did not put on Hardware Knox, yet I had the Sons
as my title pick. This was post Kyrie news. Otherwise I would have
assumed that it's the Nets. I would probably say my stock feels a little
bit down on that team seem to have figured out like their offense, and
they're gonna need either put a bunch more consistent pressure on the rim or get
people to start hitting these pull up threes. My point being it's so wide
open to where if you told me that the Nuggets won it this season without
Jamal Murray, I wouldn't would I assume that, yes, the Nets didn't
get Kyrie Irving back at some point, I might, but that does not
seem blasphemous by by any stretch. Yeah, so yes, jump all over
those odds if you're feeling intrigued at all by the Nuggets, because they are
favorable if we assume that we're going to get anything for Murray. The next
question comes from Thomas Rodriguez asked Tyler hero plus minus versus other third year player.
I don't really know how to put this verses, but Tyler heroes a
plus twelve through his first three games this season. I think it's been three
games. I didn't check that he is within the top six of third year
players. Can you guess which third year player ranks first? I have no
idea. I don't really pay attention to plus minus because it's so misleading.
It's misleading, but when it's such a small sample size, I'm not like
net rating would just be through two or three games just seems like a little
bit ridiculous. Can you get Oh, you're not even an adventure? No,
I'm not even an adventure I guess, so technically, I know some
people are going to provide a pushback on this, but it's Michael Porter Jr.
And I think the argument there would be, okay, well that he
missed his rookie season, YadA, YadA, but he's the third year player.
And speaking of misleading, like his game against the Spurs, the same
one that we talked all this praise for Yoki Chen was as bad as you're
ever going to see? Fair enough? Can you I need to get Can
you guess who was in second place? Are you even? You don't even
want to venture? Yeah? I'm not going to venture? Yes, all
right, that's I find that like a little bit rude, but that's fine.
Second is Terrence Man? All right? Fourth, and this is just
what I wanted to get down to. Is RJ. Barrett proving great for
all that he's the greatest player alive? It sounds about right. But let's
let's talk about Tyler Hero because it seemed like he, uh, he was
due for a breakout following just the magnificent preseason efforts, even if his sophomore
season was a bit disappointing and he has come out of the gates swinging,
can I can we can we talk about that for a minute. What is
disappointing about a second year player his age twenty one? Season, averaging fifteen
point point one points three, shooting thirty six percent from three on I think
seven attempts per thirty six minutes of six and a half times per thirty six
minutes, and shooting forty nine point eight percent on Tuesday. It's pointing about
it's relative to expectations because coming off of his rookie season, which finished in
the bubble where he put all of the shot making skills on display, a
full fledged breakout was expected his sophomore season, and it was dialed up another
notch because the Heat allegedly refused to include him in trade packages. Were those
expectations unrealistic? Sure? And you know we've talked about this before when I
tried to continue to call him overrated when he's probably not there anymore, because
the expectations dwindled following that lack of growth. The sophomore season was fine,
like he was a useful piece. But now like he has it looks to
me like he is fully blossoming. This is the player we expected to see
coming out of that bubble experience, where not only is he this aggressive shot
hunter, but he looks more capable of finding open teammates when he draws a
little bit of extra defensive attention. He seems to be capable of creating for
himself at every level of the half court game, like this is this is
what the Heat wanted to see. Again, if they truly did not include
him in trade packages for notable star players the outlook. So anyone who listens
to the podcast regularly understands that. I think that was more so the Heat,
recognizing me, could not acquire James Harden, so he might. I
made sure to say allegedly yeah multiple times. The expectations then, I like
if his sophomore season, I think he got valuable reps, is like a
point guard, which is probably gonna make him more suited to win sixth Man
of the Year this season. He was not my six Man of the Year
pick. I'm kind of looking back, I wish I would have picked him.
Do you know who I picked to win sixth Man of the Year or
should I just save that for if we do the stock up stock down past
save it? Okay? I'll tell you off air, though, because it's
going to excite you. I think so I'm with you, and I think
that this is gonna end up being a breakout year for him because the heat
are also better stuited, especially when Kyle Lowry's there to make life a little
bit easier on him. Just looking at what Kyle Lowry can do from the
point of attack, he's more of a three. He's a higher end threat
than a ground draggitch, and you could also argue that he's just more available.
I love the idea of playing Hero and Lowry together, where I think
with Drag and Hero that becomes an issue defensively. Anyway, this is what
he's been spectacular to start the year. Nothing to disagree. I just have
a fun stat for you. He's only played in two games. Only one
player in the NBA is averaging more made off the dribble jumpers per game right
now than Tyler Hero. Do you care to venture a guess who that player
is? Kevin Durant. You know Steph Curry had that trash game where he
posted a trip forget. So he's having He's having a great year, and
I think that he's gonna end up being I don't know if he's going to
be a star, but like this is someone who I don't think he's going
to shoot fifty eight percent on twos forever Pretty's shooting like thirty six on off
the dribble threes right now. I think that's a sustainable number and that this
is someone who could run second units. Maybe he's part of your closing lineup,
depending on whether you want PJ. Tucker on the quarter or Duncan Robinson
on the quarter or whoever. But he's good and he looks more confident when
he gets into the lane as a decision maker as well. Twenty eight and
a half points per game, it's obviously going to regress a little bit,
but at the same time, like I'm not sure by how much it's going
to aggress, because this Heat team is still built to need someone like him
who can generate offense from anywhere. Ideally, you're not asking Jimmy Butler to
score twenty eight points a game. You're not asking Damn Auto Bio to be
a twenty point per game score. Kyle Lowry has always been more valuable in
areas other than scoring, and I think Hero is fully primed to get enough
opportunities where like you told me, he finished the season averaging upwards of twenty
a game off the bench. I think I can see that somewhat. I
can see it. I'm just curious to see that. What does it look
like when Kyle Lowry's really in his bag and not taking eighty shot eight shot
attempts in the one game that he plays. Let's move on to this next
question, though. Is there from Aaron S. Nelson, is there a
way to determine good mid range versus bad mid range shots? And I feel
like I have a very simple answer if I could go first here. Absolutely,
if you're taking a catch and shoot two pointer, it's a bad mid
range shot. If it's a self created mid range jumper where you're dribbling into
it, I don't necessarily means that it's good, but that's more of an
acceptable mid range shot to me. I don't think the mid range is dead.
There's definitely a place for it. I think the Marjorros and certainly showing
that with the way he's punished defenses and mismatches with the Bulls so far this
season and how that's opened up the offense for everybody else. But if the
end of your possession concludes with a catch and shoot mid range attempt, there's
something off with your spacing, and you have also forfeited a more lucrative opportunity
by having that catch and shoot player staffed beyond the three point line. Even
then, I think it's situational. I mean, if you if you're the
Atlanta Hawks and you're running out of lineup with Gorgi Jang, you probably don't
want him stepping out to the three point line too frequently. And if he
happens to knock down a catch and shoot elbow jumper, which he's made plenty
of times throughout his career, it might not necessarily be the end of the
world. I think ultimately the answer to this question is that it's entirely situational.
It's far too much of an overly simplified answer to just be like,
all mid range of shots are bad because they're not. Like we've seen Chris
Paul make a living out of snaking out of the pick and roll and hitting
an elbow pull up. We've seen Kevin Durant shoot over everyone. There are
so many players DeMar de Rosen, and the list goes on and on who
can capably operate in that zone. And even if it lowers your expected points
per possession, because you know, even if you shoot shoot the three pointers
with a slightly lower accuracy, rate, like it's going to yield more points
per possession just by virtue of being worth three points to set of two.
But at the same time, if you're never taking any mid range shots see
the Houston Rockets, then defenses don't even have to worry about covering those areas.
Like if you do put enough pressure on an opposing defense by showing that
you're willing to take the occasional mid ranger if it's open, if it's the
right player taking it, then all of a sudden, you force the defense
to have to focus on more areas, and then you open up better shots
from more efficient areas. It's all interconnected, and cutting out an entire section
of the court is more detrimental, even if it leads to more advantageous shots
from a pure efficiency standpoint. If you want to go with nuance, you'll
like Adam Vans are better. But if you prefer the blanketed, sweeping,
oversimplified statement, you'll side with mine. I would agree with you there,
but there's I hate that mid range has just been ascribed as negative connotation and
completely where it's any mid range where demarda Rosen and less of a player because
he takes a lot of mid rangers. No, you know who's less of
a player, because Russell Westbrook will take a lot of mid rangers and then
miss them. At least the verston of Russell Westbrook before this year. Now
it seems like he's missing more threes. But I digress there. It's Demarta
Rosen as a player is probably more difficult to build your team around because of
the limitations on his overall range. It's not because he's a good or mid
range heavy scorer. In general. Most of the time you hear anybody say
the analytics say blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, they don't really know
what they're talking about, because analytics don't really say anything so much as give
you the data that you can then apply with the proper context in the proper
situation. So if anybody's like, oh, analytics say that you should just
only take three pointers, No, analytics say mid rangers are bad. No,
they really don't. Next question from Kim are the Chicago Bulls back up?
I like this Chicago Bulls team. I was. I think I was
pretty firmly on the over whatever it was set at when we did our over
under podcast. But like it's a fun team. I think that there are
still going to be major defensive concerns, but it's a dynamic offense. Lonzo
Ball is fitting in really well right off the bat. Patrick Williams continues to
be super intriguing. I don't know that I would go so far as saying
that the Bulls are a playoff lock, but I'd be pretty surprised if they're
not in the play in conversation, so I have you as under for the
Bulls as you lie to our listeners there apparently, so the things that I
want to see I already mentioned. I like the opportunities the Rosen's creating for
others, and he's been able to punish some mismatches and gives Chicago another ball
handler in the half court. I think that's important. I want to keep
some things in perspective. They have beaten the Pistons twice and the Pelicans,
so that's something that it doesn't concern me. They're beating the teams that they
should beat, but like, let's keep that in perspective here. The other
thing with Chicago is their offense still has a ways to go. They're getting
to the free throw line in a really good clip. They are about lead
average in offensive rating through three games. They're not shooting the ball particularly well.
What's really been good for them, and I think this is a product
of who they're playing, where the Pelicans don't seem like they have a primary
ball handler right now, aside from anyone other than Brandon Ingram, which has
been a problem, and then the Pistons just being the Pistons. The Bulls
are third in points allowed per possession. They are forcing a ton of turnovers,
their third and opponent turnover rate, sixth an opponent affective field goal percentage,
and their second an opponent free throw attempt rate. I just looking at
the personnel, I'll be shocked if they're a top five defensive team all season.
I think it's good that they're beating the teams they need to beat,
but I still need to see more from this team. I do think though,
if you're looking at their first few games and saying it's the offense that
needs to figure it out a little bit still, that's I don't know if
that's the ideal scenario, but if that's what you're saying after a three and
oh start, and I know that their schedule has been fairly light. That's
you know, that's fine because I think you look at this team and you're
like, Okay, Zach Lavine shooting the ball pretty well. The Marta Rozen
has been you know, fine, you're probably a lonzo ball has been good
for them. I think Vooge will shoot the ball better. So like,
there are you know, there are things to like, but I do also
get a little bit concerned. It's nice to see Javonte Green so far I
have like a regular role, but sort of once you get past their top
six guys, I just have a lot of questions when you're leaning on an
Alisa Johnson or even a Javonte Green at Troy Troy Brown Junior, etcetera,
etcetera, etcetera. There are definitely some ugly lineups that they can throw out
there. The rolling team rating that we use at NBA Math, which looks
at a team's offensive offense of a defensive performance relative to the league average,
and then also adjusts for home and a way back to backs, the difficulty
of the schedule, and all that over a team's last twenty games. So
right now, the data points are for the Bulls are based on three games
from this season and seventeen from the last season, but they've sneakily been a
pretty league average team since roughly late February this year. So this team has
already shown that when you adjust for those contextual factors, that it is at
least competitive, and this roster is unquestionably better than it was last season.
There's more upside, there's more top level talent, so I don't know how
exactly it's going to pan out again. There are still some ugly lineups,
there are some depth questions, there's some scheme fit questions with so many players
who operate best with the ball in their hands. But this team isn't bad,
which is a lot more than we can say about some of the Bulls
teams of the last few years. That was the way to put it kindly.
The other thing to know, too, is that I don't I don't
really think that this has impacted their offense too much. But Kobe White has
yet to play as he's dealing with the shoulder injury. This next question comes
from Andre, and I'm assuming that this is this person. They might apologize
if I got it wrong. What's the most interesting stat you have ever seen?
Wow? I have one. If you're ready talk about a tough question
when you did not see the question before starting to record. So if you're
ready, like, go for it. This is this is just like my
favorite stud of all time because it was put on a TV broadcast. It
is so utterly ridiculous and cherry picked, but I respect it. Thad Young
pa broadcast graphic it was from I think it was when they were Fox Sports.
I don't think there's still Fox Sports players with eight hundred games, at
least eight hundred games under their belt to average at least thirteen point five points,
five point nine rebounds, one point four steals, shoot forty nine percent
from the floor, and thirty percent on three pointers. So those are the
benchmarks. Is just whenever you're using the decimals of thirteen point five, five
point nine, one point four. Now, the company he joined at the
time was Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, and Lebron James,
and there were stag Young. I respect the hell out of whoever's call it
was to put that up on the broadcast. That is my favorite stat I've
ever seen because it was just on TV and like so utterly ridiculous and those
in the end, those are my favorite stats. There are stats that I
lean on more than most when you're actually looking to instruct and inform yourself.
However, the cherry pick stat like the cherry pick stats are where it's like
you look at, Okay, the someone posted like Lebron's record over the past
year, or Lebron's record this season without Alice Caruso, Alice Cruzol's record without
Lebron, Like, those stats are funny to me. But this one was
just so ridiculous and did in such what you would think is a formal or
official environment. I just I have no choice but to respect the hell out
of it. It's still to date like the favorite, like my favorite thing
that I've ever seen, just because it's so ridiculous. I've got one,
don't. I don't know that I would say this is the most interesting stat
I've ever seen, because again, like that's that's tough top of mind.
But I do have one, and it's historical for you. Larry Bird played
exactly one hundred different players at least thirty times during his career. He had
a winning record against all of them but seven Byron Scott, Magic Johnson,
Michael Cooper, James Worthy, Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Kurt Rambis are the first
six, and they might have had something in common, like all playing on
that dynastic Los Angeles Lakers team. And then Jack Sikma who did not.
I mean that is actually like an interesting stat It is so Jack Sick,
for the record, just owns Larry Bird on the basketball court. Yeah,
I don't know, was there ever any doubt, Like if you don't like
it is a travesty that Jack Sigma did not take Larry Bird's place on the
NBA seventy five list. I can't believe Dwight Howard didn't make that list.
I don't really want to waste breath on reacting to it, but yeah,
that's just like do we forget how good prime Dwight Howard was. That was
a bad exclusion. There are a lot of There are a number of bad
exclusions because do we want to dive into this rabbit hole. I'm just I'm
over. I don't like the holier than now responses to the snub where it's
like, we get it, Dwight Howard is off. But then there are
people that are just like so like angry or on a soapbox about it,
like that's the stuff that that's the discourse I can stand. It's like,
spare me your holier than now stick. You're almost as bad as the people
that snubbed Dwight Howard in that case. But there are obviously the jitimate qualms.
And I think you look at the panel. I think it's cool that
they were you know, president and former players on it, but there are
people on that panel where it's like what are they doing on there? Right?
Yeah? And like I believe like Jannis was on the panel, and
nothing but love for Yannis, but like he also hadn't watched the NBA until
like the mid two thousands when he learned in a internet cafe, like who
Kevin Durant was midway through his career and like you know, again like no
offense to the guy, but you're not going to learn about the entirety of
NBA history well enough to formulate a list of seventy five players within the last
decade like that. I I yeah, I think if you include players at
all, and this would just be maybe I'm wrong, and maybe there are
maybe players were able to separate themselves they're already members of the media and remove
their playing days. I would still think that players are gonna favor others who
played during their era absolutely versus you know, like Steph is gonna favor or
game over maybe prim Dwight like that, Maybe that's too close, like Steph
is gonna favor game over James Worthy or whatever. I also just I struggle
with any sort of list like this when there isn't any inclusion criteria. I
don't really know what the ranking yeah right, And I don't like, are
we looking at the players who are fully integral to the history of basketball,
in which case like sure Dave de Buscher belongs, Bill Sharman belongs. Are
we looking at the best careers because then like they probably don't. Are we
looking at the best pure basketball players? And because that isn't clear from the
get go, it's just hard to know well enough to really care who was
your biggest snub? Was it Dwight Howard? Yeah, it's it's Dwight Howard.
But I think that if you aren't mentioning Poalcasol and Alex English as significant
snubs, then I don't really care about your opinion on this anyway. I
wasn't to see the number of people that seemed outraged by Kyrie Irving not being
on it. I don't get that one. Like to me, you know,
like you can you can come up with name after name, Adrian Danley,
Kevin Johnson, Pau Gasol, Dwight Howard, Bob Lanier who was actually
on the voting panel, Alex English. I would say artist Gilmore deserves a
lot more love in these conversations, like the list goes on and on and
you can find players to remove, but like I don't really get the argument
for Clay Thompson, for Kyrie Irving. Here's here's here's a hot take that
I was actually discussing with friend of the podcast and a friend of both of
ours, Jacob Born, who's also a big Golden State Warriors fan. He
was mad about Clay. No, he actually does not think Clay belongs.
I don't think it belongs either. But right, so, so here's my
question, Steph obviously belongs, but the Warriors dynasty, who do you think
is actually the second most deserving player? Because I think you can make a
real case for Draymond Green over Clay Thompson in this converse. He can,
But I also think it might be immaterial because if either of those guys are
going to make this type of list, we need to see more of their
career unfold. Agreed the toughest one for me, aside from Dwight Howard,
and I think that this would have been a stretch. I was a little
bit surprised that Mana Genoble wasn't on it, but that might just be like
only having one member of that Spurs dynasty is interesting, and I'm not including
like the David Robinson era of that dynasty, like Tony Parker and many genobli
It's really hard to tell the history of basketball without giving them a little bit
more credit. No, Ben Wallace is really interesting. I just felt like
stylistically, and you don't know if you're ranking it in importance to the game,
but like stylistically, I feel like Manage Genoble had a very huge impact
on just the way that the game is played. Or I mean they've been
like Dianzel Russell came to the league talking about like how he admired that's just
someone more recently streaming to mind about how he watched a lot of Mana Genoble.
So I don't know that I was surprised, and I feel like I
have too much of a soft spot from manager Noble, but he was the
Him and Frank Nielichino, those were the those were the other shocking ones.
Imagine how he did. This conversation would have been if Grank use we're on
here now too, oh Man, talk about someone who appreciates mataj nob Let's
get to these final two questions. This would have feel like could be a
quick one. It's from at It's at sd M eighty four. Underscore didn't
have a name attached to their handle. I always wondered what the game would
be like, or I always wondered how the game will react if they remove
the three point line. Why would they remove the three point line at this
point, I thought, like, if you want to move it back or
institute of four point line, I think either of those are way more likely
than to remove the three point line. Yeah, I mean, I think
that would just have a tremendous adverse effect because you would be going, you
would be harkening back to the early pre ABA merger days, which, yeah,
there was a lot of interesting, compelling basketball being played. It was
so way more big man dominated, way more We're going to throw the ball
into the low post and let guys go to work, because all of a
sudden, the post up becomes the primary source of offense. Like, the
reason that the three point line has an effect is because it's worth an extra
point and it changes the math associated with each shot. So if you're now
entering an era of the NBA in which a shot from two feet is worth
the same as a shot from twenty three feet, why the hell are you
going to take the twenty three foot shot Like it's You're going to have a
lot more congestion, You're gonna have a lot more injuries because athletes have gotten
bigger, faster, stronger, and more physical since the advent of the three
point line, And now you're going to put them in a more consolidated,
heavy traffic area of the court with a lot more physicality. You're gonna have
a ton more injuries. You're gonna have a lot less entertaining play. And
like, I'm all, I'm all for bringing back post up play because it's
entertaining watch a guy like Kevin McHale go to work with just like a dizzying
array of low post tricks. It was really fun to watch Al Jefferson operate
from the low blocks it's not a particularly efficient strategy in today's NBA if you
can expand the size of the two point area and move the three point line
back and make players not prioritize that shot at as much, but still force
defenses to cover out to those areas. And yeah, maybe you bring a
you bring some low post play back into the equation, but just removing it
entirely would be a disaster. Are you pro? And also, if you
removed the three point line, what would Duncan Robinson shoot? Is he gonna
take a shot that's worth two points? I just can't. It's probably not
going to be in the NBA? Right Are you pro or against a four
point line? I'm against it? And maybe I'm just a little bit too
much of a traditionalist with this where it's like, to me, it feels
like more of a gimmick. Can I get that? That was also the
counter argument against the advent of the three point arc at first, but it
feels like just an unnecessary inclusion. We already have complaints about homogeneous offensive styles,
even if the ways the teams generate their three point heavy offenses are still
divergent enough that it's entertaining to watch the various ways that three point looks are
generated. But if you just if you include a four point line where like
you're just gonna have a select number of guys occasionally like hoisting up a shot
from forty five feet, Like do we really want to watch that kind of
with you? I might be with it if it's like maybe only in crunch
time, or like, does that help it like a race deficits quit like
make games closer if there are blowouts, And is there a way to like
sort of implement it only if the score gets to a certain point or a
certain time left in the game. But I could totally understand where you're coming.
I'm a way bigger fan of removing below the break threes, just like
having the arc trailoff into out of bounds territory and removing the corner threes from
the equation. I think that's a much more compelling change to me, because
you're still like keeping the shot values relatively similar, but by taking away that
area of the court, I think you're going to promote a lot more creativity
on the on the interior. Interesting, I might be more pro four point
line than I am of getting rid of below the break break threes. Though
this last question I thought was really interesting comes from why did I lose it
already? Oh, Jake j Which team do you think would have the best
starting five if you can only choose from their bench? I mean, my
immediate instinct is the Atlanta Hawks, just because I think that it's the deepest
team in the NBA, and once the pieces are healthy, you know,
and we're assuming here that the starting lineup is try Young Bogdon, Bogdanovitch,
Jandre Hunter, John Collins, and Clint Capella, and that still leaves you
with a bench lineup of either Delon Wright or Shariff Cooper or Lou Williams at
the one, Kevin Hurder at the two, Cam Reddish at the three,
Danilo Gallinari at the four, and either Gorgi jang Or and Yaka Kongwu if
he's healthy, at the five. That's a good bench lineup. They were
the team that I gravitatewards immediately for the sake I figured you would pick them,
so for the sake of just a little bit of variety here, I
thought about the Knicks. Derrick Rose Manuel quickly, Alec Brooks, Obie toppin
Newrland's Noel. That's I know, like he was not off to the best
start. That's like, that's I don't know if that's a viable starting five.
But that's not a terrible starting five by any stretch. No, it's
definitely not. And I actually think that you could throw out and here's an
interesting one. The Lakers might be an interesting one because Ross isn't on the
court exactly. No, but I mean, like, again, we're assuming
health. But let's say Malik Monk, Taylan Horton, Tucker, Wayne Ellington,
Carmelo Anthony and Dwight Howard. It's not a bad lineup. I don't
know. That might be a little much for me. I thought, wouldn't
you here, I guess to frame it this way, would be you wouldn't
think that the Pelicans would be a better choice than and I'm not doing a
tongue in cheek here, like a Zion hasn't played so he counts. You
don't think the Pelicans would be a better option than the Lakers, because if
we're let's just assume that Herbert Jones wouldn't be in the starting five. He
started the past two games for New Orleans, so you would be dealing with
I don't even know if he would make your bench cut, but you know
you're dealing with Thomas san Ranski, Trey Murphy, Josh Hart, Naji Marshall,
and Jackson Hayes. I might prefer that to what you named the Lakers,
to be honest, there are a lot of candidates. I mean Sacramento,
Davion Mitchell, Terrence Davis, Buddy Healed, Marvin Bagley, and Tristan
Thompson or Alex lenn Is intrigued Toronto like a Malachi Flynn, Gary Trent,
Junior, Esac Bonga, Scottie Barnes, Chris Bouchet lineup. There's there are
definitely some intriguing candidates here. It's so tough to do this, this exercise
because we're so early in the season and there have been like starting a lot
of changes already. Where Gary Trent like started the past two or three games
from Raptors, it's like, would you would you can? Also, I
thought that was one of the funniest things that happened, was you can you
can throw drawjict into that line up too, and it's still it's still eminently
intriguing. I thought it was funny. Massa I said, Gary tren Junior
was gonna start, then Nick Nurse said he wasn't going to start, and
then Gary tren Junior started. That's just that's a fun a side. Do
you have anything else you want to get off your chest before we roll out
of here? This was a look it was interesting to me. Back for
the mail bags, I hope that people continue to send questions. You can
always DM them as usually I know a lot of people used to do that.
So we are back up. We're back to covering the league at at
large and this was fun. Would you have anything else that you want to
get off your chest before we I think the at the only other thing is
just a prompt for our listeners. Look if you've made if you've made it
this far into the episode, for and foremost, thank you, But secondly,
we want to do whatever we can to entertain you all. So if
you have an off the wall idea for a podcast like Dan and I have
always enjoyed doing the Weird Series. Sometimes they don't make it all the way
through to the finish line because other things come up, Like we've tried to
rank the best ten players for each franchise in the last decade, We've done
stuff with jerseys and one on one tournaments and all sorts of stuff, and
we're always interested in those more off the wall ideas. So if you have
anything that you think would be compelling, let us know we are We are
not too proud to accept content suggestions. Yeah, well I'm not Dan virgin
Is, but I make him listen anyway. Yeah, I'm I have no
sense of humility whatsoever. I don't care what you guys think. They all
our listeners. No, that's not true. Yeah, if it's a reoccurring
series idea maybe you want to hear throughout the season, or what you want
to see more or less of from us, that's also fine too. We're
always open to suggestions to that point. As noted at the beginning of this
Please please remember to rate, review, and subscribe to us wherever you get
your podcasts. Subscribe, having and downloading every episode is the best way to
help us, as is leaving us a rating and review on iTunes, whether
or not you use it, and if this is your first time listening,
consider throwing us that permanent subscription. We are pleasantly sub mediocre and only modestly
insufferable. That is, that's a hallmark, that the benchmark of greatness for
league wide NBA podcast in my opinion. So until next time and as always
well leave it. The shout out to the one, the only any one
in the world who is not Jason Kidd, but also shout out Frankie Aquina.