What is up, fellow thermonuclear A Effers. I am Dan for Valley, coming at you, both with and without my fantabulous co host, Grant Hugh's. We started a part one of our mail bag. Grant needed to leave. We still did about like half or a little bit less than half of part two. Actually probably more than half, but we had a few other questions trickle in, so I'm going to tackle those. If I don't get to yours, it's because you submitted it after I recorded, or we just had so many we were inundated with them. Quick housekeeping notes as per usual before we dive in, and I'll do my solo mail back stuff and then we'll get to Grant after that. Please remember to subscribe wherever you're consuming us. This is your first time checking us out on YouTube, hit that sub button. Like comments helped the algorithm love us back. Also, this your first time checking us out via audio. Consider throwing us the permanent subscription Apple, Spotify, Google, Stitch, or wherever you get your audio pods. We'd really appreciate it, and do both beyond YouTube and the audio podcasts as well. If you've done both those things. Word of mouth recommendations help a ton, you know, retweet us, shout us out on Twitter. We love seeing that. It means a lot. You can join our discord as well. We highly recommend it partaking those discussions. We have a lot of good combos in there. The discord link is in the podcast and YouTube description. You can also DM me on Twitter at Dampa Valley for some reason if you can't get to it. Speaking of which, follow us on all the socials. The links and handles are in the podcast and YouTube description. It's at Hardwood Knox on TikTok and Twitter, and at Hardwood Underscore Knox on Instagram. Finally, I'm going to start a room in the discord, but I'll accept dms and mentions on Twitter. But for suggestions of like just shorter clips that will post natively to social like like Twitter or TikTok or or Instagram. Maybe we'll combine them and make one giant pod. But something Grant and I one focus on, and then Ian Fowler, who's our social media clip producer at the moment, just digestible, snackable segments. Maybe you know, start bench cut ideas or who would you rather have? Who says no that Now that we're leading into trade season, of course, just anything that could be short and we'll be in a minute or less that will answer it, rather than us chopping up longer clips where sometimes the context can get moneyed there. I believe that's all. So let's dive into the questions that we have left and we are up to Austin. Well, let's start with Leland had a question about Bradley Beale. Could you go into detail when it comes to Bradley Beal trades? Like? I agree, if teams wanted to outpid the Lakers for Beal, it would be easy. But even overlooking his no trade clause, how many teams would actually want to trade positive value for Beal? I assume you don't want your Knicks to do it. Clippers maybe, but they don't have a restart package for the Wizards either. Point is I think Beal is already at his highest value, which is net neutral, and it only goes down hill from here as he gets older. This is interesting. I think that Beal on his current contract, in a vacuum for this year and probably next year, would get you positive value. Will you will send you will send him out and you will get picks prospects in return. Even with his Nor trade clause, once we get into year three, year four, year five of this two hundred and fifty plus million dollar deal, maybe he becomes more of a liability. I don't think even at that point, unless he suffers a catastrophic injury, which I hope doesn't happen, or his play just falls off a cliff, you're not going to be at the point where you have to get rid of assets along with him. I saw that I was talking to Matt Maderno of the Belief Wizards podcast and went on the other day check out that episode, and he had asked, there were some people that think that you would have to attach something to be able to get rid of him. No, his nor trade clause makes him harder to move because it gives him a ton of Say that being said, you're going to get I will call it positive value for him. You're not gonna win that trade because he will most likely be the best player going out, but you can get a pick a prospect. More than that probably expirings as well. You're not going to take on a ship ton of long term money. What that package looks like. I don't know. The Lakers if they wanted to can go the route of russ and if there needs to be more salaries included, but they can go up to two first and two swaps. That's not insubstantial. But there are teams that if they wanted to, could outpit them fairly easily. And I think what's tough and this gets lost, you know, certainly even when I discuss it that general managers in this case Tommy Shepard, Let's say, for the Wizards, how much is he going to value at twenty twenty seven Lakers pick? Where in the back of his mind he probably knows or thinks that he won't be the one making mat pick. And so to take that as the crown jewel of any trade takes foresight that maybe not all executives operate with. And we saw Danny Ane yet he did it in Utah with Minnesota and Cleveland, but there was immediate stuff going back. He got control of their immedia drafts. He got some young players as well, in addition to the long term draft picks. I think that's what makes it tough. Even when you're talking about you know, pistons, Reddit was pissed or didn't lie. I shouldn't say pissed that's really demeaning, but didn't like my idea. That netted them too. I think it was two first round picks where they had a Lakers first round pick in twenty twenty seven to get Boyon Bodonovitch out of there. I would do it, but it's so far away that if you're a team that's rebuilding, it could be tough to see the vision. I still would take it, I think just because Boyon Boydonovitch, a case like his, is just such a transient part of your team for the next year or two, and you're not going to be really good while he's there. Why not take the Lakers picks it's a flyer down the line, or it's a pick that you can repackage in other deals when the Pistons specifically don't have a ton of these extra picks. As that pertains to Bradley Bill, though, it just depends on where he wants to go. If he says I want to leave and I only want to go to the Lakers, then that gives them leverage. Not enough leverage to give up basically nothing for him, but that would give them leverage. The Wizards might also prefer to deal with that over the off season. By the way, Bradleybill can't be traded until January fifteenth, after signing his contract. They might prefer to deal with that over the off season, want to be easier to work within the Lakers cap space so they don't necessarily have to take back Russell what's left of Russell Westbrook's contract this year. It all depends though, on whether Bill would only accept a trade to the Lakers. If he also names the Suns or the Heat or the Grizzlies as teams that he would be willing to play for. That changes everything the Lakers. You know, if there's even a single other team on that list, the Lakers are not in all like going to have the best offer that's out there. So I mean, if it's the Clippers, yeah, unless they're gonna give up PG or Kuai, which they won't, they're not going to call together a better offer. And the Wizards presumably would be actually rebuilding if you're moving Bradley Beal. We don't have any inclination that that's what they're going to do. He's just kind of feels like the next natural superstar who may want out or will be on the chopping block. Just because his team is not going to be very good. Could the Lakers outbid Dallas, No, not really, because you know dallas Is pick obligation New York will expire after this year, so there's going to be more flexibility with things they can do. I do think that this is probably maybe Bell says he wants to go to the Warriors, but they get involved. Probably not just because you have to give up a core piece to get him, whether it's Clay Drey or Wiggins, to make the money work. But like there, if he's willing to play for another team that's not the Clippers, the Lakers are probably going to be out there, and so you need Bradley Beal to only want to play for the Lakers, essentially, whether that happens in the middle of the season or the off season. I would be fairly floored if Bradley Bial gets moved this season, just because it's a deal could be in place already, but it's such a small window between when he can be traded and the trade deadline on February ninth. And just also, the Wizards don't seem intent on rebuilding, they feel more likely to make a move where Okay, even if they trade Kyle Kuzma. They might be trying to take back and an impact player or a longer deal that comes equipped with some picks, and then maybe they're hoping to sort of reset make some trades over the offseason if they you know, the big thing for them is could they get their pick to convey to New York this year? That opens up a wealth of opportunity for them. It doesn't look like it's going to, but that's sort of the dilemma that they're facing at the moment. So yes, I don't think. I do think Bill's probably at his highest value now, and I don't think it's going to decline necessarily over the next eighteen months or so, especially given the way he's played unhealthy this season. That being said, there is something to the effect of if you if this does go wrong or go sideways and you're the Wizards, you don't want to wait too long because then you're you are just dwindling down your potential return. Let's move on to We had a bunch of questions from Austin. I'm gonna try it. I'm gonna give you four. You had a lot Austin, which I very much appreciate, but We'll give you four. Austin asked, with Jalen Smith being somewhat of a hot and cold player this season, should the Pacers consider a shake up in the starting for like Brissette or Jackson, even though they promised Smith the starting gig this offseason. I've been impressed with some of the things that Jalen Smith has done defensively this year. It feels like he's been more up and down on the offensive end to me. But yeah, I would absolutely try a change. And they you know that you had Andrew Namhard starting at the four the other night. Everyone on this podcast knows how I feel about O Shae Brissette, and so I would absolutely consider throwing came into the starting fold. I don't necessarily like I love Isaiah Jackson Miles Turner in theory, but it does make a lot of sense when you look up at Miles Turner is able to do on offense. There's like ball skills to Isaiah Jackson two or at least ball skills maybe not refined that he wants to explore. So look, the Pacers are an experimental mode. I would actually expect them to be. There'll be a lot of shape shifting and their starting line up, whether guys are injured or healthy or not as we play out the rest of this season. But I would I would absolutely try that. That's a no brainer for me, Austin. I've also wondered, like, because o Shaber set a name that teams might just circle on their their trade deadline wish list, is sort of this. I don't think he's a super low one player, but a lower end acquisition really cheap heading towards free agency applies a factor into the Pacers long term. It took him a while for his playing time to sort of get hammered out there this season. That's just a name that I would watch. Is sort of a like, take a flyer on this guy. He could be really good. Austin also asked what fringe contender slash want to be contender do you think will take a big swing at the deadline. This is tough because there's what I think is really difficult for me specifically, is what like what contenders will for contenders will do and what I want them to do. It's like I can sit here and say, well, I think the Raptors should uh, you know, go all in on a trade, not all all in Kevin Durant's not available or something. But they should make a buy now trade. Will they? Actually, I wouldn't expect them. I think it's more likely, and we talked we'll talk about this at length more with Grant or we might. Yeah, it'll be coming up in this mailbag. They're probably more likely to become sellers if not, And so like this is just tough. I mean, I already consider the Calves a contender and sort of you know, they can't really go all in. They just need to acquire a three. Josh Richardson or Gary Harris, assuming he's healthy, would be really good for them. Seeing a lot of folks like Robert Covington for them, and I guess, you know, upgrade and shooting there, especially if Dean Wade is not healthy. But I you know, is that qualified and they're not a fringe because they're a contender to me right now, like Golden State is the fringe contender at this point, they're sitting below five hundred. Steph Curry is dealing with a shoulder injury. We will podcast about that more if it's anything serious. Hopefully it's not. By the time you listen to this, Dallas, I think is an easy one. They're just so hamstrung. They don't have young players that teams are interested in. I know some fans I think that Jane Harvey and maybe Josh Green amount like first round pick equity. It's still not step laddering your way to a massive deal. So and I'm not all for them waiting. If there's a deal out there, like you should definitely explore it. But I get the value of waiting for your picks to expire, the obligations to expire that you owe two New York so that you can go make that all in trade. So the Warriors are there for me, assuming Steph is going to be healthy after that. I don't consider the Lakers a fringe contender. I probably look at if we frame it this way, Miami and Memphis would be two teams that I want to do something. I think a lot of people might be asking me to pick the Pelicans year, and we know how I feel about the Pelicans with regard to how they should go after Miles Turner. I was listening to Zach low podcast where he says he doesn't think the Pelicans need to do anything, which I would agree with, and that he wouldn't go after Miles Turner if it costs more than just an off handed first round pick that I disagree with, Like if it's on the table and you need to give up a little bit more than you on his fun and shoot us in like a top twenty protected first round pick and it's not costing you Trey Dyson Daniels, like you know those core players in the future. Yes, I'm still looking at it. And also Miles Turner will be interesting for Memphis. By the way, you could go lower end there too, if you're the pell, because not to go on a pell. We have a question about the Pelicans coming up, like they could go after someone who fits the bill of what we would like them to get, even if it's like lower end, like it's you know, Mo Bamba's name is probably gonna circle in trade rumors now he's playing well for Orlando, but ball Bowl is there. Wendell Carter Junior is going to be healthy at some point they're super big. Maybe, you know, Jonathan Isaac, we'll stay healthy in some alternate reality. Could you even look at you know, do you think you could reboot a Dwayne Dead just someone that you could pick up on that, like, would the Heat be interested in DeVante Graham trade just because he might give their half court offense some juice, and so you could look lower end. I don't think naz Reid would be kind of interesting for New Orleans. New Orleans, but yeah, I need to let's stop talking about New Orleans for a minute. So I think they're already a contender. But Miami or Memphis would be two teams where it feels like they are, at least Miami more so than Memphis, feels like it's more than one player away, where Memphis is kind of like, yeah, they're there, but like they need like one significant player, where if it's the Never Nuggets and they don't have much to trade, it just feels like some odds and ends, it feels like a semi significant player for them. And so if you can get someone who's impactful this year, I would absolutely look at it. And I've thought about Memphis, you know, and then now's the time I'm trying to go through trade targets a lot for teams. I've thought about Poem Bogdanovitch. I've thought about Eric Gordon for them, even though he's kind of on the smaller side. And you do have Baane and Morant, so maybe you do have enough just sort of half court creation and then spacing when looking at the rest of the roster. But I would like to see them do something that would be more than just on a smaller scale. It doesn't have to be the all in play that people want. I also think that market needs to exist. And hey, right now, it doesn't like we don't have that all in worthy player on the chopping block. Who who's the best Like we know about how no one's untouchable, but who's the best player readily available for trade? Right now? It has to be Miles Turner. So like that's not something you're necessarily going all in for unless you're the Lakers. And so I look at Memphis in Miami, and like we've seen some things in Miami perk up, Kyle Lowry got better after his really rough start was playing entirely too much at one point. I think Tyler Hero has been solid for them. Kayleb Martin has been pretty good for them, even though you don't necessarily want him as you're starting four. So Miami could make a trade like for a Jake Crowder. I think they need a player who is better than that Jay Crowder, though I think he would make a world the difference. I would make the trade if you could, but I would think that that player needs to be substantially better than a Jay Crowder. Do I throw Orlando into this discussion after their four game winning streak as a fringe contender? What do you do about Phoenix too? And we have a question on them. Do you consider them as fringe contender when they've kind of been in the toilet lately? I still think they're kind of like in that Nuggets tier on and even the Grizzlies tier on their own. But if we're going to talk about the Grizzlies in that vein, if there's an all in trade to be made in your Phoenix, yeah I would. I would do it. But again we have a question coming up on them as well. Philly, they don't have much of trade and so I don't know what they do Portland's Sacramento. I don't think either of them are fridge contenders. I think it would be I want Toronto to do something, But when it comes to the question of will they the team I'll pick that I predict just does something substantial will be Miami because that's just sort of their emma where the Grizzlies, that's never really been how they've operated. Austin also asked, are the Martin brothers, Caleb and Cody actually worth much from my small sample space, they seem like some fifteen men off the bench bums, but you bring them up quite often as someone teams should pursue. Yeah, because I want to think that you're very wrong on the classification of the Martin with I mean, my god, if he wanted to say, I don't know what value Cody has when he's missed so much time this season, but like they're they're just good gap filler players and Kla Martin specifically, I mean, like this is someone who is filled in capably at points at the four this year, and he gives you a lot of different things options on offense, and like, you know, he can he can handle the ball a little bit. This you know, one of like the more wild says it sees he's already one point six points per isolation possession right now, and he's using an ISoP possession per game. He's shooting sixty six point seven percent in those situations. Like this is someone who can play off the ball on the ball, he moved around positionally defensively. I think that there's like a little bit of playmaking to his game as well. I think that there's real value in getting someone like him and being him, being so plug in play and versatile, that they could make a really big impact. I had thought about him as an answer we had the question of who's the worst player that could get traded that might swing like the playoff discussion or a playoff race. I thought on him as an answer. I think I actually ultimately ended up on Gary Harris, But like, these are good players and they're deals I think are reasonable. Again, Cody Martin, the injuries, you know, getting like basically close to the full mid level type money. I totally understand why there might be some some hesitants there, but like these are too when they're healthy, Like they are two very useful players, and so yes, if you want to use the Cody Martin, what does he have? A quad injury that's kept him out for basically it feels like the entire year at this point, So like, yeah, I don't trade for him, I guess because they don't have a timetable for his return. But Caleb Martin. I don't know if he would even be looking to trade him because he's like kind of important to what they're doing this season. And then our final question from Austin, why the fuck is there a need to keep adding more and more awards? I think a lot of people share this sentiment, other than the fact that the NBA can slap a sponsor on them. Clutch Player, that's just corney as hell. Anyways, which who should pick for it? Yeah, I like, I don't really have a problem with any We can talk about it, but it's like it doesn't not that it doesn't interest me, but it's cool that like most Improved Player, I guess, is named after George Miken, even though I don't, you know, like, what does that actually mean? I get celebrating the past of the game and not naming it after current players. I don't know if these trophies needed to rebranding in the first place. The additional ward is just hey, like we want more things to talk about, which I guess is just I mean, aside from being dangerous, is is pretty fine. I think the zach Loo mentioned this too, But like the clutch Player, discorse is going to plummet and descend into the depths of hell at some point, and it's I think it's going to turn into like sixth Man of the Year type criteria. But just in the clutch. If I had to pick right now, I think candidates would include Demard Rosen's probably there once again. Damian Lillard, shocker who you know the ward should really be named after at some point, is going to be there as well. I think Shay he's been pretty good in the clutch. You're also like sort of consider team record there and so you know, Demard Rosen has been good, but the Bulls are three eleven in clutch games and he hasn't been as good as last year. Like John Brunson's been like low key good for the Nicks in the clutch at sixty plus percent through shooting. Darren Fox he's hit some really big shots for the Kings this year and they've won a bunch of clunch clutch time games. Even Donovan Mitchell. Steph Curry hasn't really hit the three, but has made some big shots, and now he's injured, so we'll have to see. Those are names that kind of spring up if you were to make like the statistical case and just say like clutch win probability at it from impredictable. I wanted to see who led the league. It's Shay Gil just Alexander, so it's good that he shows up on the list. Demard Rosen is actually second, Jeremy Grant is third, Anthony Simon's is fourth, and Kevin Durant is fifth. And you could pick Kevin Durant for whatever, Zion and Steph for six and seven. By the way, Jannis is eight, Dame is nine, Kelly Olynic is tenth. How about that? So I had to pick right now, and let's I don't know. I feel like I want to go with Shay, but the thunder of six and eleven and clutch games, and so what do I do with that? It might just if you have to balance winning and just performance. Damian Lillard, even though the sample size is smaller, might might just be my pick at the moment. Thank you for those questions, off Austin. Those are all good. We have a pair of Pelicans questions, one from JT Alexander. Are we allowed to consider the Pells a title contender if this current iteration of the team hasn't won a playoff series or is a view or is that view completely arbitrary. I get if you need to have like some semblance of skepticism towards the Pelicans, that's because they haven't won a playoff series with this core before. But we saw them put up a fight shorthanded against Phoenix last year, and they've done a bulk of their damage this season while having to navigate injuries and absences. CJ's missed some time, hasn't always looked great this season when from a scoring perspective, brand Ingram is still miss time right now, Herbe Jones and missed a bunch of times, Zion missed some time himself, and they're just floating around top five in offense and defense winning games, sitting at the top of the Western Conference. So I think, yeah, it's fair to call them contenders right now. If the criteria is like you have to have a track record of doing it, that just becomes really tough and we'll be like, are they Cavs not contenders because they haven't won a playoff series with this core? You know? I don't like that. Just that rings a little hollow to me. I think it's just because they're not sort of stocked with their traditional amount of veterans that people might doubt them that way, It's fair to have concerns about Zi, like can they stay healthy? For one, It's even just about tie on at this point, if we're being honest, and look, windows close, title windows close so quickly the NBA today that there's not even time to be like, oh, this team won a couple of playoff series because cores aren't together that long. We've seen title windows sort of dissipate in two maybe three years tops of late. And so like, I'm not saying there needs to be a rush to coronate, but like we don't need to say, oh, the Pelicans aren't contenders because they haven't done that before. Zion's an MVP candidate and the Pelicans are championship contenders. That's just the fact that matter right now. Should they be championship favorites so they actually favors to come out of the Western Conference? Do they need to make a trade. Those are all different discussions, But as of right now, when you look at the inner circles of championship contenders, if you still want Boston and Milwaukee in a tier of their own, But when we're talking Cleveland, when we're talking. I'm just not ready to throw Brooklyn here. When we're talking Memphis, we're talking Denver. Yeah, to me, they belong even if as the tiers Phoenix right now, just because of you know, the way that the Suns have been playing. I might have had like Memphis and Denver and Phoenix in a tier above the Pelicans earlier, but just not anymore based off the results that we've seen. All we can do is watch the games, look at the data like take in and evaluate what the rest of the league is doing. And so the Pelicans, it's it's fair to consider them contenders. You don't have to consider them favorites even though they're first in the West. And you can even say, if you want to sit in here and say, look, I trust the Warriors if they make the playoffs to be to win a championship more than the Pelicans, I think that's fair. But I don't know if we could sit here and say, just because the Pelicans haven't done it before, they're not contenders. That wouldn't be in the spirit of trying to interpret which teams are contenders anyway, But especially with windows closing and opening so quickly now, you need to kind of like, keep with that pace, and you don't want to wait too long because like teams aren't waiting too long before they tear down what they consider a non contender or contender. That's past. It's it's expiration date. Our next question on the Pelicans comes from Leland, and he asked if Pelicans wanted to be frisky in the Western Conference. There's a scenari is their scenario where the Pelicans could trade their way into being the favorites so many assets? Could they make one superstar trade or two key trades, or maybe even one of the former one of the ladder. The answer here is probably yes, that they could trade their way into being favorites. I don't know they'll never be the betting favorites just because of how those markets are determined and how they work, but they absolutely could trade their way into being Oh like, yeah, they would beat the Grizzlies or we have confidence in them above the Warriors. With that being said, does the Turner trade do that for me? It would? It depends on what they give up. But if assuming they're not giving up any of the like let's say the core six or seven guys when it's Herb Jones Josi Avarado, Trey Murphy, Dyson Daniels, Zion, CJ Brandon Ingram and then like, do you want to give up Larry NaN's shouting that trade given how good he's been now, like you would prefer at this point to give up money, you know his val and shootas even and then Picks. If they make that trade, they would come close to being there for me, the superstar trade for which they are built. Again, that rests on the market, and I don't know it would take a very specific kind of superstar at this point when you look at Zions in the MVP discussion and like you have the Pelicans of obliterated opponents when he Ingram and we'll call them have played together today, even if you think there's some complexities to how the offense must work with them. If it's not Kevin Durant, who is it. Pascal Siakam would be pretty interesting for this team to play him next to Zion. I guess maybe you could still be concerned about the spacing there. Miles Turner feels like functionally a better fit. So yeah, actually with Ingram McComb there, Pascal Siakam is probably not a grave and I would love to see it, just to be clear, if it's Karl Anthony Towns, like you're really rolling the dice on your defensive risk there, but that would make some sense. It's so it's like Kevin Durant. That's the superstar to keep coming back to. I'm trying to think of superstars that could technically hit the market this season. So I think that and I've framed it this way, and I've said this before, I'll say it again. It's not even Myles Turner. If if we're looking for the Pelicans to really juice up their championship stock, and again they may not need to. They could they could stay the same and be content, but they don't need to acquire a player as good as Miles Turner to make that jump. That is the point that they're at. It's you know, I'm trying to think of what the level would be. Is it is it a mobamba? Maybe that's two, a little bit like two if you here, you know like that it's like that level of player, Like it's if it's someone who's maybe like your eighth or ninth guy, Like that's the tweak that you're making. So that's really what I would go with is if they could make a big swing if they want to. Let's make that clear. They had those Lakers picks, They have all their own picks. They have some been string young players. If a star does become available, but I think it's really hard to find the star, even if it's a top twenty, top twenty five guy, that would really make sense for them to go all in on. Aside from Kevin Durant if he does rereach the trade market, could they use like another just sort of like three point volumest Absolutely so, like you bring up like a Malie Beasley could work in that role for them. Jordan Clarks is probably too small for that, although he would help. Gary Trent Jr. Maybe I don't know if they would trust his shot selection. Is Josh richardson high volume on threes enough for them, He at least wouldn't compromise the defense. So those like those are all names though that would work where if you acquire them, I think you could say, holy shit, the Pelicans really souped up their their championship stock. Here. Gary Harris Steven, assuming he's healthy, he's dealing with some hamstrink stuff right now. Is that it was maybe that too, a little bit low end, probably not like the Pelicans are so good that the answers no and like, so if you were to take sort of a risk on a player, then then it's a little bit different where it's a very high impact player, but the fittest sort of risky you could go one where they like if Pasco Skacham did for some reason become available and they decide to kick the tires on that. So the Pelicans tend your questionly, then yes, they are built to do whatever they could do small they could do two medium size, they could do one star trade, they could do one star trading and then kind of a smaller trade. I don't think the superstar trade market right now exists for them to be involved, or for that matter, many other teams to be involved. But they should be on the lookout for, like even the medium size moves where they just might be a little bit reluctant to give up more. I think they should be on the prowl for those miles. Turner again is the name that I will continue to drive home. But even if it's a smaller scale, that's a team that I think can target smaller scale and it still ends up making this massive difference for their championship chances, which again as of right now, I would argue, seem already pretty high. And it's not like, you know, they shouldn't be so desperate as to throw the the idea of money out the window where it's, oh, you know what, like if the maths will want to give us this version of Tim Hardaway Junior right now, like let's eat that money and do it. I'm not saying they should go out and do that, even though in theory Tim Hardaway Junior isn't good fit. But if it's someone who's gonna provide you with some functional shooting and volume there, or who's really going to improve, Like you're set up in the front court next to Zion who I still think turning would being upgrade over Larry Dances Junior and Jonas pund Judis there. I think you look at it, or maybe it's just fortifying both of those on the lower end, like we said with with them Bamba you could so you could look at that or and I'm trying to think of like, you know, if you got like a I don't know if you would play like a Garrison Matthews for this team taking a flyer on him out of Houston, depending on what the cost is, Like that could be something that works. I thought about, like discourse sort of straddles the two lines of oh, is it too big of a swing, but maybe it works? Would be bogged in mcdonovich, but is that too Just like you have McCullum, you have Ingram and is Bugganovich is gonna give you enough like three point volumes? If Kevin Hurder was available, what she shouldn't be because of what he's done for the Kings this year, Like that would be more of a type of player you could go with. But but danovit should be sort of an interesting and depending on what the asking prices for him. Let's get to these last few questions here they will come out of discord. And these were some stragglers that came in after he recorded Usher has two. If the NBA's two to four point line of season, do you think Curry would easily be the MVP given how that may inflate his scoring numbers, or do you think his efficiency would dip since he may try and hunt those shots down more frequently? Completely hypothetical, but just the thought exercise. Love the show as always, Thank you, Usher. I really appreciate every time anyone says kind words. So I guess, yes, like, could it be Steph? Could it be Could it be Steph Curry just because there's a four point line? Yeah? I mean his three point volume now and imagine he'd probably take the most four point years in the league. Could also be someone who's like maybe not hitting those off the dribble deep looks, but they're comfortable firing away from wherever, like just Trey mur if all of a sudden become an MVP candidate here. I think if they added a four point line, I wouldn't guarantee it, but we could frame it this way, the MVP odds of Steph Curry would significantly improve. And I think you could maybe even say the same for Damian Lillard would be another name to watch out from the I wouldn't even throw a Trey in that commo just yet, especially the Hawks have been all over the place. So those are the b the two players that I think would benefit in the MVP case the most if the MBA instituted a four point line. Ushers also asked, fuck it? Can I be annoying and ask the second mail back question, but the Sun is just looking miserable. I think it's safe to say CP three is finally taken too big of a step backwards to be the main co star for a book. And while I think mcale and DA have real value, they're not consistently good enough to be the second best player on a contender. I've always been on the mindset of maximizing the CP three era, But if it's not possible to get a piece good enough to take us over the top, cough cough KD, could we just keep our assets and wait for better opportunities. It feels like the only one untouchable pieces book, and even though I like Michael and DA, they have to be seen as third options at best. That's a really good and honest question about the Sons, and I would actually agree here roughly. So if you're the Sons, this is I guess this is how it would frame it. If you can trade your twenty twenty three pick to make an upgrade that is a or roster edition where it's salary that pick and you're getting Boyard Bogdanovitch. I don't know if I would give up that pick for Eric Gordon. I would probably want something else in that deal kJ Martin, but then you probably think up a little bit more. But a deal of that scale where you're not trading twenty twenty four first or beyond, it's just salary that twenty twenty three pick and then whatever seconds you're including here, so you're not even giving up core players. You could trade Jake Crowd or Dario Schartz is expiring deal as well Landry Shammitt. You can move those guys. I make that deal because I do think that maybe you don't need a traditional then second superstar where CP three is still going to give you good moments as a passer at least a da and Michael Bridges. You can count on them to combine to make a consistent third best player on a playoff team, like just sort of getting someone else who enters the conversation as one of your six best players, or someone maybe you consider putting in certain closing lineups during high leverage moments. That goes a long way, and so it doesn't have to be a star. But it's like, are they a team that really shouldn't go towards the middle where if it costs giving up more than one first round pick, if you are looking at giving up a Mchael Bridges or a DA Yeah, I don't think they should go there unless the superstar market develops, and like Katie would be perfect for them, It's really tough to figure out what's the other name that you would want for the Suns. If Bradley Beale all of a sudden became available, he makes a lot more sense than CP three as a co star for Booker right now, especially with the way that we know book can run an offense. I don't think c P three is as integral in the sense that you don't need a superior visionist on the ball to maximize book at this point. I think he could just do it. And so Bradley Beal is good enough to put on the ball a bunch that you could work that. I don't even know what I'm not even going to begin to think about what a deal like Bradley Beale the Phoenix would absolutely look like. You would be only the dice a little bit with this contract. Is CP three a part of that? And what is that like? Because the Wizards are looking for cap relief and picks attached to it. But if there's not going to be that level I'm gonna say another top twenty or twenty five guy who actually fits the roster. I don't know. Karl Anthony Towns would be a fun name with Devin Booker just because they're there their homies, but and he wouldn't be a bad fit on offense. But what DA brings in theory on defense, I think it's more important. And I mean maybe not because like the Suns have been able to get all this value out of the starting these retreats at fives or just second chance first, like the unknowns or hidden gems, let's call them at the five. But DA is significantly higher end than that, and what he brings defensively is super important. Still, like if names pop up, say Siakam has always been someone I think Suns have been lusting after. So I'm I'm with you in the sense usher that yes, hold for the bigger opportunity. If there's not one out there, don't go for the double, don't go for the if you need to hit us. If you're going to hit a single, don't go for the double or even the triple. You go for the home run, or you go for the single slash even if it's a double and I would just frame that as if it cost you this year's first round pick than any of your non core players and seconds. Okay, but if you're giving up multiple firsts and maybe a Cam Johnson, maybe a mcail bridges, it needs to be for a caps lock star. And I do think we're at the point where, yes, it's fair to wonder doesn't need to be a caps lock like we I think we so offer of you guys. Yeah, Kevin Durant was slowing round out there. It was different because you know how good he is. But does it have to be a more decided player now if you're going to go all in like I think before, if CP three was going to be who he thought he was this season, like, yeah, you could go for the double, you can go for the triple, and it's just sort of oh boy, and mcdonov to takes you over the top, or maybe Eric Gordon even and maybe they still do. It's just less likely And so I think the cost of getting them is not more prohibitive, but you need to be more stingy about it. And we don't have to worry about the Suns being stingy under James Joe and Slash Robert Sarver still does own this team, which is just another interesting aspect is how much are they want to go all in on this trade when you know ownership is so unsettled. That's why they're gonna be fascinating. I think they need to do something. But I'm I'm with us here in the sense that no, it doesn't need to be something for the sake of something. It needs to make sense and either needs to be more lower cost or if you're going all in, make it for the right player. Otherwise weighed around because you still have time, like book Bridges eight, and they're all young, they're all under contract, even Camp Johnson. You're gonna have team control on him after this year, and hopefully he'll be healthy and he'll he'll up his value not just for trade purposes over the summer, but just in general to your team. But just having Jake Prowder sitting there not doing anything on this roster like that's like, that's just some low hanging fruit here that I think you could even just if you get Josh Richardson on this team for a second, just do it. Just like that's a move where it's no, I don't know that it boost your championship chance as much as I would have said at the beginning of the season, but it helps you in the intern especially. Look, you're not gonna start Damily anyway. You want to give a starting spot Andry Shammitt When there are certain injuries on the board, like Booker, I'd rather have Josh richardson there. This will be I believe our final question. Uh no, we have two questions. So Retro, Braden Lonzo is an interesting by low guy right now. Do you think the Clippers could trade for him and afford to let him rehab his knees this season and bring him back next year? I responded by saying, to the Clippers really need someone else with lower body issues. Retro said, yes, you need to go all in. I don't think the Clippers could get Lonzo just because unless you're willing to go up to twenty twenty nine. First, and again, you run into the issue once more of you know Cardessavas, is he gonna want that value all the way in the distance when he's probably not the one making or even moving that pick. Get into a whole weird conundrum there. But the package laid out included like Jason Preston, John Wall, Robert Coming. I just don't think that does it. A bunch of transient players assets mostly for Lonzo at that point, I'd rather he's not you know, if you're the Bulls and you're trying to get worse or just not be too good, he's not. He's not hurting you either way because he's not playing right now. So I'd rather see what he looks like post recovery. He'd be maybe worth more to UVA Trader, just more as a player than what the Clippers could offer for another team. I thought, you know, I thought about the Okay, see for this. I know they have Giddy and Gil Jolexander, and Giddy's been playing pretty well, right I'm like, okay, see buying like medium on Lonzo and he's out for the season. So whatever they're trying to do this year, whatever, you'd come back next year with SGA, maybe another nice pick from this year's draft, Josh Giddy, Chet Home grin healthy, ken Ridge, Williams still there, Hushmont Jang in a bigger role, Jalen Williams, Alexey Poker. Chet's like that's a like like this team is already sort of just interesting when you try and scale head on paper. But if there's a if there's a fun buy low or let's say like buy one like medium or low ish online or medium ish on Lonzo, Okay, see, would be it for me. I don't know if anyone shares that those thoughts there, but I think for I think for teams in general. Yeah, if you can sort of withstand like the rest of this season, and you want to go after Lonzo and the Bulls are willing to move him, but you're on the dice, why not like just the high IQ player, really good defender and he's going he'll disrupt on defense, could play with him like as a as a team defender really well. And he's also got the at least as far as we saw off from last season and even just later on, and his port with new Or leads like he has the three point volume in efficiency. He's never gonna be the half court slow a down run, pick and roll, put pressure on the rim type of guard. But if you're not looking for that, if you just want a really high IQ useful player and you're not thinking about you're not thinking that you're going places this season anyway, Yeah, he would be absolutely perfect there. He'd be kind of fun in Golden State too, but they need him more immediately unless Steph is going to be injured. Okay, see, though is my favorite one. I know some people might like Orlando for that, but I would prefer them to have like more of a like creator in the half court if they're going to go to the guard round. Not that he would be a bad fit, but I don't know if he's the one. I guess you're buying low. It doesn't really matter. So Orlando could definitely work there. Houston could definitely work in that scenario. Speaking of Houston, Nugs asked, would you trade MPJA straight up for Jabar Smith Jr. If I'm Denver, Absolutely he could. He looks like I might be a monster on defense already and you could slide him next to Yoga Chan, Aaron Gordon and KCP like don't line up totally crap. If I'm the Rockets, absolutely not. I mean, Michael Porter Junior might have the higher end outcomes still, just if you believe him is more of an established commodity, But I prefer the unknowness of Jabar Smith Junior, especially when we're talking about the injuries of MPJ. We haven't seen a ton of self creation from him on offense either to this point. Either to this point, excuse me, so, No, I would not I would not do that trade at all if I was if I was Houston, but yeah, if I'm if I'm Denver, and that's just sort of like stumbled into that. Oh hell yeah, like hell yeah, bring him to me. That'll do it for this first portion of the mailbag. We're gonna get to the second, which would make it the third portion of this mailbag. Thank you all for the great questions. As always, it'll be me coming back with my fantabulous co host grand Hughes. This is from Herb Jones Enjoyer. If you could change any rule in the NBA, what would you change? For instance, like MLB having different length fields, teams could have different levels at three point lines. I don't know what, and I feel like we might have had this question on a different mail backs when I try and hope it don't get the same answer. I don't know what the change is, but we gotta get rid of like these these charge rules. They're just like you're putting everybody in danger. You're putting the players trying to finish the person who sacrifice themselves for a charge. I've seen some people say that we should abolish the charge completely. I don't like the idea of saying that a defender essentially can't exist in space, but like we we gotta do something to just like some of these are just so egregious and you're putting players in active risk just to get a f alcohol. Then I don't know what how you make it punitive enough or dissuade it enough. It's you can't really move it like the quote unquote like restricted area out further because like I feel like that could actually do more damage than it being closer to the basket. So I don't really know what the answers, but there needs to be something to cut down not even just on the number of charges, but the number of times that they are attempted. Yeah, I think it's so it's so difficult because you really do like what you said is a defender is entitled to be standing still in a somewhere like anywhere in theory, and you can't so you can just knock that dude, Like that's never gonna work. I think maybe you get really strict about the defensive player has to be just dead set, not moving at all, and be super strict about at the at the gather of the offensive player or like like it has to be you got to be there waiting and for it to be a charge, the guy has to see you standing there and just knock you over running in the year something something really strict where it's you don't have you know these experts at it, like Blake Griffin or Kyle Lowry or Kevin Love where they're super good at timing, like the offensive player commits and then they get set and it's close enough where if you sell it it's called a charge even though it probably shouldn't be mine. Is this is I watch some of the MAV's game last night, and it's Luca specific, but we can apply it universally. Dribbles per touches, that one no separate. I have another gripe we've If you argue a call, the refs have the option to challenge you, and if you are wrong, it's two fouls. You get two fouls. So every time you throw your hands up and then you look at the replay and it's like, yeah, he like half we murdered the guy and he's acting like he didn't touch him. The ref can say, like, bullshit, sir, I'm going to challenge your challenge, and it's gonna be two fouls. It'll never happen because you don't want to make it confrontational. But I'm just like, I'm sick of the dead obvious fouls where it's just like this is a crime against humanity. Is the reaction of the players. He's conserving himself for the next offensive possession, is what he's doing. I just I'm sick of it. I don't like and maybe because I watched a lot of soccer during the World Cup, the flopping is really killing me. It's just part of soccer and I get it, and it's it has the effect of like turning into a finesse sport where you're not supposed to knock people over. And that's good for basketball too, but I just it shouldn't it shouldn't be acceptable to know you obviously foulow the guy and pro like Patrick Beverley does every foul he commits. It's the same thing. If you're wrong and the and the ref callege you want it, it's two fouls or we could do something else. It's like double the free throw a tempt something. We gotta we gotta figure it out. I love that, and mane, I'm gonna think about it. The other obvious one for me was I want to change the goaltending rules, Like let's go full FIBA on the rim. You can whack it off. Let's teach like, let's teach people like DeAndre that they need to really go up with force consistently. Yeah, go dunk more basketballs. That's a good one. This one is mine to you. Better solution to prevent tanking. This is from Real sear Up twenty two nineteen one flat lottery odds. Every team gets the same chance, even the champs to rookie free agency. Rooks consign wherever they like, so I have to. I'm kind of gonna punt. Actually think the play in and the flattened lottery odds are like pretty close to as good as we can do because the other ones are so extreme and you won't really know what the fallout would be. But let's say if you flat totally flat lottery odds, there's gonna be a riot when like the Celtics win the first pick and they get win Banyama or something like that. It'll just take one instance where it's just it's not the fallout could be too significant, and like they're just it's a reality that certain teams just the way forward is to get a young, cheap player that's really good and you've lost a bunch of games, and so you have the right to get that guy. It just kind of I think there is some logic to it, even if you are rewarding failure and that kind of feels icky. The other thing, if you went full rookie free agency, I think you would just have a class divide that guy even wider. You'd have to. I've seen proposals where it's like you can give each team has an X number of credits or something that they can spend however they choose over a certain number of years, I guess. But it's like, if it's a free for all and it's about money, the LA is the New York's, the big markets are just gonna have more to offer, and if all things are equal moneywise, what you're gonna have our teams in mid markets having to overpay and hamstring themselves financially because they wanted this one guy and now they can't. It'll just be well, how do they get enough talent around them, or how do they keep this guy on his next deal. I just think like it's taken a long time to get where we are with teams. You know, we've got four or five teams that theoretically are tanking, even they're not just egregious about it. That's not bad. That's not bad. I don't mind it how it is. I think I'm with you there. I even gaving when I was looking at this consideration too, if you want to rookie free agency because at the same concern as you do, if you still kept the rookie scale amount where it's like if you finished with the best record in the league, like you only have x amount to offer the rookie, I don't know if that would do enough to dissuade like, oh, okay, what are the bird rights rules? Like top rookie just signed in New York or with LA for three seasons and then they'll get their money afterwards. And the other thing is just like can they will that increase like tampering or just like shady stuff off the court where it's like it's supplemented by the sponsorships that they would get and I'm all, I want players to have as much agency in their own careers as possible, But I ultimately don't think that if you want to incentivize teams to be in these small markets and be hyper competitive and spend to be hyper competitive, that creates two uneven of a playing field. I do think if you're going to go to the rookie free agency route, like, there does have to be some type of I don't know if you reference it before with the credit system or the rookie scale stays in place with your the amount you can offer a rookie is directly like and maybe they increase like what you can offer like based on how bad your record is, so am exponentially so like that it's a market a difference from even the number two or number three teams, just to see if, like you know, college kids coming out are they're gonna want to take that that money. I just feel like it still creates this or at least threatens to create this stark imbalance more so than we already have. Yeah, I think the best solution would be is if you think there's still too much tanking, maybe you just flatten the odds a little more. You never get to where everybody has equal chances, but you could just incrementally disincentivize finishing with the worst record. And then I think maybe the flip side is you maybe create incentives for you know, being a thirty win team as opposed to like a nineteen win team. I don't know how you really enact something like that, but you know, the last twenty games of the season of your record are like the separate thing. And so maybe based on how that works, like, yeah, if you're the thunder and you finish with nineteen wins, but you go, like, you know, six and fourteen over your last twenty, you're gonna have a better chance than a team that you know, one less overall or was worse over that. There's just ways you could try to incent buys wins late. Maybe, but they could do like could you do a tournament amongst the lottery teams, Like while the real playoffs are going on, like you have another tournament going on where you actually have to win to be like increase your your draft odds for the lottery. I don't I don't know if that would be up that would be hey, that'd be more, that'd be more games, more rev right, it would be from fan engagement. It would be great because you'd be going to see a team that cared. Except like, now, these players are trying hard so that they can get a high draft pick and get a guy that's gonna come take their job. It's like that's why financially, like if you give them like a bonus, I guess, but yeah, for sure, Yeah you could definitely do financial bonuses. I don't know. I think basically, I think we're both kind of like it's pretty good right now. It's it's definitely better than it was. What did you think about the wheel where it's like you your mark to have a certain pick inside a certain like range of the years, the theory as you plan your rebuilds around that. I'm not smart enough to understand all that. I feel like, I mean, I don't like it right off there in that that any consolation, I don't. I'm not really a fan of it because I think that there are injuries and the whims of players, which is fine, that can thrust you into different timelines where you can't look. I think we're at a point where you could plan, like not as far out as ever to where it was just like remember teams were planning like free agency, like three years from now, or they would like build these teams right like we have four years together or something. You can't even plan two seasons ahead anymore. Yeah, I think it imposes like an inflexibility on a roster rebuilding that it could just like kill a team potentially. You know, they takes away the freedom I think of kind of structuring and how you want even though yeah, you're right, you can't really you know, think, let's talk about twenty twenty five free agency. It's not really a thing anymore. Got a team specific one here from Rome eighty one eighty with the Raptors being painfully averaged, do you think they should what do you think they should do come December fifteenth? And what do you think they will do? And then there's all these options. You know, I think Siam probably may them too good to tank. Do you move him in a big trade? If so, who else might be involved? What might the return for Siak can be. It's just kind of a breakdown of like is it siakam? Is it og? Do they do something smaller with Trent or even van Fleet. I'm injecting VanVleet because that's part of my answer good targets for them. Basically, what should the Raptors do, not necessarily December fifteen specific, but with respect to trading or not trading and building this roster, what they should do I think is actually try to level up. And I'm not saying trades Scotty Barnes, but like you have your own picks, you have contracts that can out, like Gary Trent Junior, like Fred van Fleet, I wouldn't be opposed to trading him, whether you're rebuilding or trying to make a win. Now move find the half court engine who's not Pascal Siakam or Scotty Barnes, and like that, you know every I don't even know if it has to be in every level, but like the outside level shot creator who was going to put defenses in rotation from these you know zero standstills a little bit more and is going to hit the top off the dribble threes and can do more inside the arct than maybe a Fred van Fleet at this point, or operate at a higher processing speed than from a standstill then a Pascal Siakam or a or a Scottie Barnes. And that's what I would do if I was the Raptors. Now does that market exist for that player is a different story. I still think that they could make like an Eric Gordon, like they can, I would buy if I'm Toronto, and it could be a small buy where it's like, if you get Eric Gordon, no, that's not the answer, and you're not giving up Fred van Fleet or your future for him. But I do think that's someone who with the rim pressure reprovides the long distance outside shooting and then being able to fit schematically in their defense, I know he's not the size of player that they typically want. And look, that's the other thing is I would tell him the fucking dictate from this, you know, like archetypical model that they have, Like it's okay to have players who are not between sixty seven and six nine be prominent parts of your rotation. So that's what I would do. If that market doesn't exist, or if they just think, like hey, Gary Crunch junior a player option this year, o Gianna, Nobi, Pascal Siakam extension eligible this year, Fred van Fleet headed to free agency this year and they don't want to pay these guys, then I would look at moving Fred van Fleet for sure, Like I think there's a team that would give up real stuff. The Knicks might even still give up real stuff for him, even with Jon Brunson Orlando, like just to have him in their house, like so that they don't have to try and go after him in a free agency situation. I would look at moving him if you wanted to go to sell a route, because I still think that, like Pascal Siakam is top end and you don't move him unless you're going the full scale tear down. And if you're going to do that, that's not something i'd recommend because I think they're better than that. I do think that where they are at right now, whereas Rome puts it, they are like average painfully I could put his painfully average. I think there's a higher end outcome with this exact roster still in place, And we were both pretty high on them coming in the regular season. But it's kind of it feels like it's kind of time to stop straddling at this point. I thought they could really juggle it, like the whole two two. It wasn't really two different timelines, but the whole like, oh we're gonna Scottie Barnes might just become the swing swing piece immediately when we're contender, you need to either get their after or maybe it's just make sure you're not locking yourself into this course you remain flexible enough to make changes one way or the other. Yeah, I think I agree that there. So I just was looking at the day because thinking, you know, how how bleak is this really or how uninspiring is it? Maybe that's the better word. So their best five Van Fleet, Trent Barnes, and an Obi Siakam there might they have a slightly negative net rating and like two hundred possessions this year, which is basically nothing. Last year there were plus one point eight, Like not great for your theoretical best five guys. So it's kind of like you kind of have a theory of how this is gonna work. Now, Barnes could get a lot better and that changes things, But I still think they're in a good position because you can go either way. Like you said, I think this is a totally half big thing. But clearly half court shot creation is the problem. Maybe in half court efficiency for the year by yeah, terrible and really not all that different from last year when I think there were bottom three, bottom five It's like this is a known thing. This roster's strengths and weakness is are very very known. It's this is not a surprise half baked Trey Young, like you need some half course shock creation. Does that go sour in Atlanta? Like, I don't know what it takes to do that personally, So that's going one way. The other way is you see, maybe if you can get picks for van Fleet and Trent, like make it a pick centric package because building around O. G. Barnes and siakam super flexible. You can you need a point garden a center right like, we can do that. We've still got the wings. We just don't need to go all in. Can you get the Lakers picks for one or both? Like can you take on Westbrook? There's you could go way down, you could go way up, you could take on money, you could shed money. They have a lot of options. But I think we agree that like right now, I don't. I don't know like how many more like revelations or levels up this current core has so you can you can you can play it safe. You could pivot from van Fleet alone from you and just sort of you know, I don't think what I what I think you don't want to do is just go into next year with you know, hoping Van Fleet and Trent or not knowing what van Fleet and Trent are gonna do with their player options and sort of expecting like the same thing and banking on while Barnes needs to get way better or we don't really have a path forward. I think you get one of those years. But then if the if the two years on either side of that look pretty much identical, like I just it's a third year is not going to cut it. So go way down, go way up. But but don't don't just run it back with this same group. Keep those three guys. Everybody else can is like on the table, would you do if it's just salary, because you're not getting no Janetobe for this. If you're Denver, would you take on Michael Porter Junior if his his just salary, you're giving up salary the non van Fleet siakam Og category. Yeah, probably because I think he might address it's it's kind of an upside thing. Maybe forget already who we said was that Utah's in the upside game. It's risky, but it is like it is something that would address in theory, some of your spacing doesn't address your shock creation. You still need somebody to break the defense to get into the paint, and Beasley's sort of like the middle ground might be the way to go there, but I don't know. Get out of Utah, That's the thing. I just with a roster like this, you could talk yourself into like almost anybody fitting because you your core is three guys that can just be anywhere from like two to five and can play both ends of the floor. So I think they have a ton of options. I just I just don't want to see the same thing again because I still really like it all, all three of those guys. I like van Fleet too, but I just don't know that he's the right guy for what this offense needs. I had and I can't remember who it was. I think it might have been Ian in Discord proposed if the Raptors tore it down, would they be open to building something around Siakam for Simons and a bunch of stuff, And Simon's brings a lot of what they need at the expense of Siakam. If it is still there, you're presumably if you're moving to Siako, you might bred van Fleet at that point too. That would be an interesting court to build around, except that Simons does not fit the mold of like the player prototype that they're going for. He is exactly I would say if there was a way to get him where it was, you were going the pick like ogn and Obi and picks for Anthony Simmons. I think a lot of people might believe that Ognoby's a better overall player, but I think you could argue Simons might be the better overall fit. OG might win Defensive Player of the Year though, So I'm not and I don't mean to sound the panic alarm on Toronto there. I think they're fourteenth in offense and tenth and defense. They're under five hundred. They have a better point differential than that. Maybe there's other levels to this. Otto Porter Junior's injury hasn't helped them much, But like, the half court issue is a thing. Like I was told last year by a lot of Raptors fans, not all that it wasn't a thing. It's a thing, and you either need to address it or if you're not going to when you're sort of just waiting, then yeah, I would probably look at Van Fleet and Trent Trade specifically, and look, Van Fleet has been like not great this year. Overall, guards do not have a history of age well and he is. He is one of those and I love I love him. I thought I've caped for him to be an All Star more than once. But you know, does he still decline his player option of twenty two point eight million for next year? If if we just started, they probably probably right? Yeah, I think that it's not that I think both of them, but Trent too. All right, so we have from retro Braden. I'm sure you've probably already been asked the question, and this is based on seeing the team and how much it feels like Anthony Edwards team. Do you think the Timberwolves should trade Cat? And if so, what are some spots you think would fit him best? Teams that would or could realistically trade for him. I will say I watched I've watched a lot of the Timberwolves since the Cat injury. I don't really even understand who they are. Like, it's been nice to see Rudy Gobert has been doing more on offense and Kyle Anderson has been really good. Anthony Edwards, who's coming along, D'Angel Russell has had a great stretch. They just got trucked by the Portland Trailblazers, and I'm not saying Cat would have fixed their defense, but things can still get clumpy for them on the offensive end. And I don't think that this is an issue of just Karl Anthony Towns. It could be an issue of It's a confluence of so many things. Some of the decisions that like christ finsh is not calling a time out in the Blazers game, it felt like there's been a lot of moments where he could have done better job doing that this season. I'm not trying to be like, oh, call timeouts better that I'll fix everything. The fact that this team hasn't had a ton of run together to begin with, because Towns miss part of training camp and preseason when he got sick. Not having that familiarity, and you're also kind of trying to fit four players on offense who sort of fancy themselves like different levels of hubs in Rudy D'Angel Russell and Anthy Edwards and Karl Anthony Towns. Dane Moore made a great point on his podcast, We've seen this team kind of struggle with the iteration of towns, and now we were getting to see the information on the chapter without towns. The next chapter is how does this now come together once he comes back? And how does they figure out a way to assimilate towns and do oh, we're getting X from Kyle Anderson. This is working and Di Loo has found himself and Anthy Edwards has really found the pep back and his step on both ends of the floor. How does towns fit into that? And so it's after that, after he returns and after they continue to struggle, that's when you have to start asking the more wholesale questions as for which teams could theoretically get in the running from I think you would definitely see the Knicks being there. I would want, okay see, but they wouldn't so that that wouldn't be a team. I've wondered if the Warriors would get involved, like throwing all their picks and their young players in there, and whether that would even be enough at this point Charlotte's two encumbered with picks, but that would be a type of move that they like. Their protections on the pick that they owe makes it really difficult, and they don't have a lot of like who's really interested in PJ Washington leading into restricted free agency? So like that is a team that I considered. I thought about, I don't think that Phoenix would view Towns is an upgrade over eight and at this point, and we could quibble about that, but defensively it's not even close. Would the Blazers get involved, like dangling Shade and Sharp, that could be something to look at. And I also thought about and I don't know how, like the two teams I thought about that, I don't know how like were this is Memphis and if you're not trading Baine Triple j R. John Rant, like that would be the stipulation or Toronto just like they're never ending search for a big and if you can play him and Siakam together and what does that cost you? Though, like you're giving up You're probably not gonna want to go up Scotty Barnes, but you're really getting out of that deal without giving up o Gianna Nobi. And that's the trouble with trading Towns is that if you're in the Timberwolves position, Rudy Gobert, like this isn't I guess Anthon Edwards is young enough to where you could trade both Towns and Gobert and kind of start over and hope that you recruit enough of your draft stock. But then all of a sudden, so you're a net even let's say your net even in picks, none of them are your own. So it's like you're you're at the behest of all these other teams. So you need to get impact value back for whoever you're trading, and so like, you know, if Jeremy Grants involved from Portland with Shaden and Sharp, like, yeah, maybe you could talk yourself into that, if they're picks built around it. With Toronto the package that I just outlined, the Knicks can certainly send you guys who are capable of playing right now. I just don't know that a car. I think Town's trade or his absence at all, really address as much of anything for this team, And so I would I'm against. I still think Karl Anthony Towns is a spectacular star. Yeah, I would. I would echo pretty much everything you said. You got all my teams too. I think I think Toronto was one because it's like there was a time where, you know, we think of certain guys like Trey Young is one of these guys where except for this year, but for a long time, you know, Steph even or or I'm trying to think, who else, Luca where. If you have this guy, your offense is top ten? Is its supposed to be? Good? Towns was kind of one of those guys where he was just such an impactful offensive force that you could just figure out how to score when he was on the floor. Just he was that good, that good of a shooter, that dominant, So Toronto, we got to score in the half court. We also, like could use a center that can do something, you know, dynamic with the ball. That's something I think, But I'm just like, you gotta wait, you just don't know enough. And really the other thing I thought this was a feature of or one of the ways to defend the Gobert trade, which is, well, if this goes all to shit, you still got Anthony Edwards and so your next X number of years are still going to be okay, right, because you can build around him. It's sort of a two timeline thing, I guess, But it was like a like a there was an out you know if if if everything goes terrible, you have to trade Gobert for pennies on the dollar, or you keep him this whole time and it doesn't work. You still got Edwards, you still have him under team control. You're never going to be that bad if he hits the level we think he's gonna get to. But now it's almost like, well, if you do trade towns for picks, say well, why is Gobert on a team? Now suddenly that's got all these picks stash it just Or if you trade towns, it's like, well you just traded another young ish guy and so now it just doesn't That's so that's all to circle back and say, we just don't know enough yet. We haven't had a long enough adjustment period. It's obviously been very difficult when everybody's been on the floor to sort of get this thing figured out. I think you got to give it at least this full year with everybody healthy, for as long as much of it as you can, and then even next year, like you got to go to the deadline next year. I think before you really get serious about it, talents trade. I'd be with you on that. How about you take us out of here, so everybody, thank you for listening. We encourage you, plead request that you humbly request that you continue to like, subscribe, follow us on socials. They're posted here on the video. Keep providing mail, bad questions. We love, We love doing these. We'll do some hotter knots again, I'm sure, but these are always great. And this is, you know, a podcast that we do because we like to do it, but we also like it because we can give listeners and viewers what they want, and that's a cool aspect of it. So five stars everything. Tell your friends please continue to listen, continue to provide good ideas, and we'll keep doing it. So before we go, we have some apologies to make to Jared Allen and some shout outs to Frank Ni Lakina, greatest human on earth. If you hit a three last night, which I saw with my own two eyes and in and one and yep, he's a great player. He's just needed an opportunity, so we'll take you out. Double shout out Frank Hillikan, you the best