What is krak Oak and Harvard Knocks listeners. I am a Dampa Valley coming
out of the first time in a full week because we had dual cancelations while
you're with guests last week, so you only had one pot. We apologize,
but you'll have two this week and I'll try and squeeze in a third
one at some point in the coming week so that the average days for everybody.
I'm here without Adam Prommel, who also had to cancel last minute at
this point because he was extremely sick on Monday. I'm recording this in the
very wee hours of Tuesday morning. We hope he's feeling better. We do
not begrudge him for not being able to be here either, because we were
going to record on Sunday for Monday, but I am absolutely drowning in work
and obligations at the moment, so I needed to kick the can for that
one. We push on anyway, though. We'll have our next pot for
you on Friday. This is our Tuesday mailbag. Have a ton of great
questions from the discord to get to as well as some Twitter questions. First
and foremost, though, need to remind you to pretty pretty pretty please with
Sugar on top. Rate, review and subscribe to this podcast wherever you consume
your podcast, downloading you every episode, throw us some ratings and reviews on
Spotify and iTunes. We had a couple of down votes in recent weeks telling
us to stick to sports, so help us juice those numbers up. That
helps a ton and the other single biggest thing that you can do to really
help us out is retweet our promos on Twitter or just tell people who you
know like Hoops, Slash, the NBA about this podcast and encourage them to
check it out or recommend your favorite episode. Also, be sure to follow
us on Twitter at Hardwoo Knox. We were on YouTube YouTube dot Com search
Hardwooknox we will come up. Please subscribe to us there and also follow us
on Instagram at Hardwood Underscore Knox. All our personal socials are in the podcast
description as well. Lastly, remember to join the Discord That is also just
something we're looking to build out in the coming months weeks. There's been a
lot of chatre and they're already we do have roles for each team. Some
of them have already been given out, but they are the executive vice president
of Discord operations, so you can claim that for a team. If we
don't have it already, we might hand out multiples anyway. But come join
the discord. The link is in the podcast description. We have a bunch
of great conversations there. We're gonna be running some fun stuff. We already
have live game camp fires, and I think I'll start doing something where I
commit to sitting down to a game and I'll be there and we can all
talk. You can ask me questions that won't turn into a podcast or even
a chat, just we'll be there, we'll wrap, it'll be loads of
fun. That's all I got. So let's dive into this mailbag. We'll
begin with our discord questions, since those people took the extra step to come
chat with us. Darkwing Duck asked, what's the closest distance between the number
one and eight seed in a conference's history? So I went back to nineteen
eighty four here, just because that's when the NBA sort of not sort of,
they did switch to the eight teams per conference playoff format. I believe
is when that happened. And I also believe the impetus for this question is
we look at the East right now in the eighth place Nets or nine games
back of the first place Heat, and that's a fair that's fairly anomalous.
You look at last year, there was a big difference in that in the
Eastern Conference, we've seen a lot bigger like there have been instances. I
mean, look at this year in the West. The Clippers are eighteen games
back of the first place Suns in the West as the eighth place team,
and so you look sort of at the East and even with the ten place
Hawks being only eleven games out of first and really, you know, kind
of diverting from this question, there are also only six games in the lost
comback of the fourth place Cavaliers. There's a lot of tightly contested races going
on here. But so I went through I found three of the seasons that
stood out the most to me. I did bounce the ninety eight ninety nine
campaign from consideration. I didn't need because it was lockout truncated. I didn't
need to bounce the two eleven twenty twelve Crusade off the record because they didn't
qualify. There was only a six game difference in the Eastern Conference of the
Western Conference. I can't remember since I closed it out between the eighth and
the first set, but again that was across a fifty game season, so
that didn't feel worth including two thousand nine, two ten is the winner here.
Technically, the eighth seeded Oklahoma City Thunder were fifty and thirty two and
seven games back of the first place Los Angeles Lakers. The Spurs and the
Blazers were also tied with win losses to the Colahoma City Thunder, so those
three teams six, seven, and eight were all seven games back. That's
a wildly close margin when you're going that deep into the to the Western Conference.
There was also the two eighteen twenty nineteen season, more recently, the
eighth place Los Angeles Clippers and also the seventh place Spurs since they were both
forty eight and thirty four, they were nine games back of the first place
Warriors there, and then the two thousand and two two thousand three season we
were in the Eastern Conference. This time the Bucks were in seventh place and
the Magic were in eighth place. Both at forty two and forty they were
only eight games back of the then first place Detroit Pistons. So two thousand
nine twenty ten that is the closest one on record where there was only a
seven game discrepancy from the eighth to the first seed, and it's it's wild
when you contextualize it this way. It's still the same distance, but the
Lakers winning fifty seven games as the one seed and then the Thunder winning fifty
games is the eighth seed. That is just so darn close. And then
of course there's that huge drop off because the Thunder in eighth place were in
eight games better than the ninth place Houston Rockets. So that was a fun
question. I guess it'd be interesting to see whether the East could kind of
come close to beating that. The Rappers are in seventh place and there are
seven games back of the first place Miami Heat the Nets, as I already
mentioned, their nine games back. It's possible that they could close that gap,
just because if Kevin Durant comes back soon, if Kyrie Iring's eventually able
to play in every game, do we know when Ben Simmons is going to
play, just what they look like, I wouldn't put it past this season
becoming sort of the new Touchsdowe for you know, a small gap, but
the smallest gap between the one and the eighth seed, and even if the
records don't kind of show it, you just based off knowing what the Nets
could look like at full strength, you could probably make the leap and say
this is one of the most tightly contested Eastern Conference playoff races in history.
Either way, though, even just going by that raw games back in the
standing sol this has a chance to really beat that two thousand nine, two
ten marks. This can even be a situation technically where we're looking at it
like it was ninety eight ninety nine, when there's only six games separating the
eight seed from the one seed. I don't know if we'll get to that
point, but it's making for one hell of a close to the season,
and it's just, you know, I'm more fascinated. I'm fascinating with every
aspect of the Eastern Conference race just because there's no seed that's just locked down
at this point. You also just have the tenth place Atlanta Hawks being you
know, six losses behind the fourth place Cleveland Cavaliers, and there are just
caveats abounding everywhere. The Bucks are in fifth, are they actually going to
stay there? And they have the same record as the Calves. When does
Brook Lopez play. What does some of their new editions look like? But
Cleveland is dealing with a banged up Cares Labert and Darius Garland, not to
mention Colin Sexton's out for the season. The bullstofts some injuries in Caruso and
Lonzo ball Zach Levine is playing through a knee injury. The Heat are great
and they're finally like sort of, they're the healthiest they've been all season.
Where the Nets look like when they're healthier. Can the Raptors sort of they're
dealing with some stuff with OG and FTV right now. But are they too
top heavy or are they a team that could fall off? But I do
look at these top eight teams specifically, and I don't think you can assume
that one is really good to plunge and you really have to go deeper.
Probably you have to look at the Raptors or the Nets. Just because the
Celtics are in sixth and they're five and a half games back but first place,
and so I know, like I'm throwing a bunch of numbers here,
but the Raptors and Nets are the two furthest teams at seven and nine games
respectively, off the first place pace, and there's like a real chance that
both those teams, if they're healthy enough, are going to be good enough
get wins from enough good teams they can bridge the gap to where they are
only five or six games back of first I haven't looked at the schedule,
so I don't know if the wind distribution can technically work out that way.
But the East is a bloodbath right now. You can argue that the two
most serious title contenders lie in West, with Phoenix and Golden State. As
much as they're slumping, I think some people would make the leap and say
Memphis might belong in that discussion. They're only one game back of second place
in the West by the way entering March. That's fucking absurd. But this
just underscores sort of how hot and heavy the East has been. Even if
you like the top of the West better, there's just there's more parody in
the East right now, and the Grizzlies are a perfect case in point.
There's seven games back of the Suns, who are in first place, and
that speaks more to the Suns, but that's part of the top heaviness.
And meanwhile, we're talking about a Raptors team in seventh place is only seven
games back of the first place heat, so this race has a chance to
go down when you're looking at one through right again, specifically has a chance
to go down as the closest during the sixteen team playoff format. I'm going
to be very intrigued to see how it unfolds. Jake g asked, what
are your reactions on the embiid and hard and pairing after one game? Should
the rest of the league just give up? Now there have been two games
since this question was asked, Again, the podcast need to be delayed.
He also adds, based on a bead saying that was probably the most wide
open I've ever been in my career. I'd be nervous if I had to
play them in a seven game series. I mean less I'm a Hornets than
you just a lead point god Mason plumbly and sweep the series. Yeah.
So you know, I've been impressed with how easy it seems like Embid and
Hardener fitting together. And I've not looked at purposely, and I did not
look at any on off numbers or get into the nitty gritty data. I
just watched every action from the two games and involving those two. You can
run high screen and rolls to death with them, and I think that that's
going to be devastating. There's going to clearly be maybe an adjustment with how
hard it needs to pass to someone who's not a lob catcher. There was
one instance, I think it was the was it the Knicks game, where
he just threw a pass that you know Ebiad's not gonna finish it to catch
it and come back down, but he scored anyway. I also think it's
going to help that having the pick and pop weapon at the five with Mbiad.
I don't Harden didn't look uncomfortable throwing him passes, and I think it
forces the defense is to think more just because no Joel Embiid is not this
traditional Roman threat, but because he has so many ball skills and can stop
on a dime and shoot, there are more things that they have to plan
against even if you're not worried about him finishing lobs, and I think we
saw that to an extent. I don't really want to use the Knicks game
as an example because they're fucking clueless. They've just some of the watching them
trying to defend Harden Ebid picking rolls with Julius Randall and Mitchell Robinson the court
at the same time was actually painful. My eyes are still sort of bleeding
from it. But you look at sort of the Timberwolves game, and there
were a couple spots where Harden was able to probably deliver the ball a little
bit earlier to Embid than he would with other bigs, because you can trust,
again, he's either going to pause and shoot or he can put the
ball on the floor. That's not something that Clink Capella or Dwight Howard,
at least the Dwight Howard in Houston was ever going to do. And I
don't want to say spares hardened energy, but if he's able to deliver the
ball earlier, it doesn't even have to get going downhill before he's throwing some
of these passes to Embiid. It makes his job a lot easier than it's
ever been. I think that this is more of an organic pairing than people
were crediting. And Bee's already done a good job of sort of tethering himself
to Harden when Harden's bringing the ball up, and so perhaps you're not seeing
moving forward as many from scratch touches from Embid when he's on the court with
Harden, That's ultimately fine. The workload that Ebid had to carry for most
of this year was arguably too heavy anyway. He was the fulcrum of both
the offense and the defense for Philly. You're still gonna have minutes where you
only have one of them on the court to begin with, so he's still
going to get those types of touches. I like the way that this pairing
has looked though so far, and I think matist Table might be the teammate
in Philly that benefits the most from this, just the way defenses have been
losing him when he's hanging around the dunker spot or if he can cut to
the basket. Tyrese Maxie will probably benefit as well with some leakouts in transition.
You could say the same for Tyble, and I've been kind of impressed.
I would need to check like the average possession time numbers on this.
I've been impressed with a number of leakouts at least that Philly has tried,
or that they don't seem that they're bogging down too much in the open floor.
After missus they're not looking to blitz it, but like, this isn't
something that's coming to a slow grinding pause. I will say that the free
throw parade is real, and it might be at times unwatchable. It's going
to be incredibly effective though. And so when you look at sort of the
landscape of the Eastern Conference, I don't know where you should put Philly in
the pecking order of title contenders. There are just there's so many things that
matter here, really two games at this recording into the hard and embiid era
together, So I don't want to make any just profound conclusions. They're there,
though, and I would put them ahead of the nets in the title
hart hierarchy. I don't know that I trust the Bulls and the playoffs just
yet. I need to see it. And there are people done great breakdowns
of the Bulls, what the Martin Rosen has done, what their defense can
be like at full strength. I would assume most been huge from them.
Zach Lavine is just his offense is so scalable when he's on. I just
there's something about them. It just makes me wonder whether their offense is dynamic
enough to whether the storm of the playoffs maybe Vujevich is sort of you know,
connective pastor for them goes a long way, and he's quietly played a
lot better over the past on a month and a half or whatever it's been.
But I would put the Sixers ahead of them. I'd still take the
Bucks over Philly. I take I take Philly over the Nets Miami. I'd
probably take over Philly at this point. Those are the two teams though that
I'm I'm only guaranteed to take over Philly right now. If you're looking at
Toronto, Boston, Cleveland, Chicago, those are all up in the air.
So and Brooklyn I'm just ready depends out of the title contemporary. We
can use the ifs and ifs and ifs, if this happens, if Kevin
Duran's healthy, if Kyrie Irving's playing every game, if and when Ben Simmons
plays at some point. There's too many ifs here. There's just too many
uncertains, and they have to start not they're not going to tank, but
they don't have they don't control their own pick this year. But you do
have to start thinking, Okay, this is more of a two twenty two,
two twenty three team. If that because what happens with Kyrie Irving's free
agency because he has a player option. Overall, though I really do like
would Embed and Harden seem like they're going to become and I do think that
the whole Ken Harden, except that this is in bids team and it's sort
of just a lateral move from his status in Brooklyn where that was already going
to be Kevin Durant's team, or people comparing it to Kevin Durant arriving in
Golden State and finding that he was never going to be as popular as Steph
Curry. I don't think Harden was under the illusion that this was ever going
to be his team. I actually fully believe. I don't care what people
say because there might have still been problems and awkwardness behind the scenes. Maybe
James Harden Kyrie Irving just never vibe, including from last season. I could.
I could buy into that if Kyrie Irving plays this year, is available
to play every single game, we're probably not talking about James Harden becoming a
mount content and so he remains the one to me his up ended Brooklyn season
more than than anyone else. This next question comes from Bondam thirty four.
What was the worst trade you couldn't remember that didn't involve a star. I
was thinking the King's six Ers captain in twenty fifteen. I believe might be
mine, But I don't know if there's some forgetting I've racked my brain for
these. That one is, of course a good one that Kings had in
twenty fifteen. I'm just clearing all this cap space and signing big names,
and they ended up with Rondo was like the highlight of that summer for them.
That certainly has to be a candidate. I think you can go back
to the twenty thirteen I think it was, yeah, a trade for Bonniani
where the Knicks give up a first round pick. It ends up becoming Yaka
Purtle, who was a pretty damn good basketball player. But that was just
sort of a signal that New York didn't really know how to handle the success
of the twenty twelve twenty thirteen season prior where it was, Hey, let's
put a ton of spacing around mellow and veterans who allow him to sort of
just go about his business. They optimize his offensive skill set, don't ask
him to do too much defensively or even as a leader and the Knicks just
I don't really know what they were thinking in that one sneaky candidate, and
I don't know if this is recency bias creeping in. We might look back
upon the Celtics essentially trading the pick that became Desmond Baine just to skirt the
luxury tax to get off Enis Canner, Enis Freedom, whatever the fuck he's
calling himself these days. That might go down is just one of the worst
non star trades ever. It'll be even worse if Desmond Bain grows in to
a star, and so there's so many caveats there because other teams passed on
him. The number thirty pick isn't necessarily supposed to turn into anything then,
But that just the optics of that just looks so terrible because in the theory,
that was also a type of player that Boston needed at the time and
could clearly still need now he's a lot like just looking at his ball skills,
like that was someone who could have definitely helped the earlier version of this
team, even before they traded for Derek White. That just might be when
we look at and go, holy crap, it was just Desmond Baine the
pick that became doesn't mean was traded as part of a salary though, But
those are the two that really sprang to mind for me. That might be
my Knicks bias creeping in, but the Barnani deal was just awful. And
what makes this exercise tough is I think when you're looking at it through the
non star lens, those are the trade that you might just remember the least
because they're normally inconsequential, even if they do have some longer term consequences.
And then even just the for the Kings specifically, that's a great candidate that
trade. But when you're moving deals like four cap space is it in?
You know, how much do you penalize teams for doing that? Like how
bad does it look if you don't sign stars because of how much of a
crapshoot for agency could be. I do lean toward that. It's still knowing
the back channels of the NBA teams have a lot of information, and so
if you're the Kings and making that decision without having knowledge that you're getting the
players you were targeting first and foremost, then yeah, that just looks terrible
in the moment. And then of course even years later down the line,
and just to I mean, the scale of draft equity they gave up to
was just absolutely blasphemous. So it's certainly candidate, but it's interesting too to
think about those those types of trades you begrudge. When the Knicks acquired Tracy
McGrady gave up assets because they were trying to make the run at Lebron James
in twenty and ten, and this was not prime team Mac. It was,
you know, like Hobbel team Mac, who I think did win his
first game at the Garden. I actually attended it, I believe, But
like that even the Knicks again when they did it with Christaps porzingis because they
thought Kyrie Irving and Kevin Durant were coming, only to see them go over
to Brooklyn. That's a man that franchise has tried way too many times to
get other teams as players, only to fall through. And I know that
they're always tangentially mentioned as like preferred destinations. When was the last time that
players actively wanted to go to the Knicks even when they were agitating their way
out? Mellow wasn't the last one, because I'm pretty sure CP three really
wanted to go to New York, but they chose the path of amnestein Chauncey
Billups, signing Tyson Chandler and then therefore just limiting their flexibility to go after
CP three while having stat on the books as well with Chandler and Melow.
But it just it hasn't happened in forever, and the team still operates like
they're that type of destination. And if Zion's really unhappy New Orleans and they
think they've positioned themselves because they have r J and they could have the whole
Duke reunion with Cam Reddish, that is a detour that we don't a rabbit
hole. We don't need to go down right now. And I tweeted this
out the other night in the wee hours of the night, just like when
I'm recording this, I'm getting ready to say some pretty recklessly optimistic things about
a Pelicans team that has Zion in it. Very Look, look, Willie
Green has done a good job sort of coaxing defense out of this team and
especially limiting opponents in transition. Ever since the Pelicans dropped to was a six
and eighteen whatever it was like the low point of their season, and CJ
mccoumus had some really high moments for them. Their offense is going to be
taf thermonuclear as fuck, as we say around here. Once it can be
that already. But if Zion plays this season, or if they just have
them for next year, and this is largely the same cast that's in place,
good luck stopping them. I am. If you give me a Pelicans
team at full strength, I'm ready to say some stuff, is all I
could hint that Hoop Informatics had two questions and he said favorite and least favorite
player to watch. So favorite if we're looking at stars, I really do
enjoy Steph Jannis, Devin Booker, probably just a job of course, Like
are the most entertaining high names for me? When you look at higher profile
least favorite players to watch, I do not enjoy watching. And also Westbrook
anymore, Like that's because that's become sort of a chore for me when you're
looking at sort of less heralded guys. If we're trying to, you know,
do the basketball nerd flex and I'm honestly not trying to go like too
far awful link here. I really enjoy watching o Shaber set in Indiana.
He's one of those guys that makes you want to watch what happens away from
the ball and the work he puts into it. I'll also say he's a
rookie, so I don't want to necessarily throw him into this already. I
would assume he has been a joy to watch this year because he plays with
this like frenetic energy yet is still under control. So that's incredible. I
don't know if there's like a least favorite like player to watch that's sort of
a not like on that at scale, because I guess I can't generate or
muster strong feelings about those players. Westbrook might be my least enjoyable NBA player
to watch this season there though, And there's also the there can be times
where it's when we're looking at higher profile guys like, yeah, it absolutely
is difficult to watch James Harden for stretches if he's you know, pounding the
ball too much, and the free throw parades in Philly that are bound to
come, how does that slow down sort of the pace of the game.
So there's certainly that to consider. I'm really trying to think of if there's
like a you know, I don't really feel like dumping on a non star,
not that I want to dump on a star anyway, but just like
someone who's on a lower scale that I really don't enjoy watching. I used
to not enjoy watching Andre Drummond, but I feel like the past three or
four years he has like these guilty pleasure moments that I'm definitely all about.
So you could, you could certainly throw him out. I wouldn't put him
in consideration for this, but he's certainly not one of my favorite players to
watch. I mean, yeah, I honestly don't know. That's maybe I
should have given that one more thought. I guess I just don't have like
strong feelings on players who aren't these marquee contributors I could. I could probably
do with that Malik Beasley, if that matters to anybody, or this season's
version of Malik Beasley. There are moments where Jordan Wara is painful to watch,
but I sort of enjoy the adventure behind it all for him, So
just going through those, I don't really want to. I'm not going to
name a nick and just say Julius Randall, but he's been he's been tough
to watch for a lot of this season. Yeah, I think That's the
closest you're gonna get out of me, is saying those types of players.
I think Garrett Temple has been a rough watch this season too. I haven't
caught the past. I caught the Lakers Pelicans game, and I don't think
he really played in that one, So they're sort of a breath of fresh
air. I did think about, No, that's that's not even a good
one. But yeah, that's the closest you're gonna come for me to sort
of dumping on players that maybe shouldn't be there. If anyone has their own
suggestions, feel free to get me on that one. Whoop Informatics also asked
or poses this scenario. Pretend Andrew Wiggins and Julius Randolds swap places. How
do we think of those two if Julius Randol was with the Warriors and Andrew
Wiggins was with the Knicks. That's an interesting question because of some of the
wing development we've seen under Tibbs in New York, so Wiggins's role might be
more complicated. But given what we've seen in you know, the minutes from
Quentin Grimes before his injury, and then of course RJ. Barrett, does
he sort of have a quasi breakout. If he's in New York and he
has really competed on defense, what would he have looked like if he was
on the Knicks last year. I tend to think that Julius Randolo would look
way better in Golden State than Wiggins would look in New York, just because
part of the part of the draw or part of Wiggins's effectiveness in Golden State
is the way his role has been streamlined at both ends of the floor.
When you've asked him to do too much, Yeah, there's been times where
he's delivered, but we've also seen of late when you are too dependent on
him, Like there are gonna be really rough stretches where he bails out before
the rim way too often. It doesn't give you any sort of pressure when
he's putting the ball on the floor. I don't know why his role would
be any easier in New York. They might actually need more, if you
know, would they insert him into like sort of some of the RJ.
Barrett touches because Julius Randall is such a high usage player for them, and
Derrick Rose has been injured. Kema Walker doesn't work out, Andrew Wiggins probably
ends up having to be a pretty high usage player in New York, and
I don't think that's his anything near his forte and the other thing. I
think his Golden State has created this defensive ecosystem around him, behind him,
in front of him, just like having all this sort of different talent to
where he's been allowed to succeed. I don't know that the Knicks, I
don't It's nothing I don't know. I don't think the Knicks have the same
level of comfort there, whereas with Julius Randall. Steph is so plug and
play. I think he can work alongside anyone. There could be some iffiness
with the Draymond Green Julius Randall fit, but again, Randall has at least
been willing to shoot threes even when they don't go down, and Green has
found ways to work with Kavan Looney offensively, so I can't imagine that would
be too much of a thorny fit. I guess because Julie's Gonna likes to
have the ball so much more than a Looney or even a Wiggins, that
could create some redundancy, But he also gives Golden State a ball handler for
minutes where step and Curry is off the court, and that could wind up
really helping the Warriors. I don't know how much of a defensive expenditure it
comes at, though we've already seen the Warriors start to struggle after treading water
without Raymond Green, and Randall's not going to help you there. The last
season version of Randall that was really just locked in, but this year where
he's just letting dudes get behind him left and right. Probably not. I
would say that we view Andrew Wiggins was never going to be an All Star
starter or never should have been an All Star starter, but I think we
would end up viewing him a lot more negatively if he was with the Knicks
and Randall. I don't know if he ever I doubt he ever has his
second team All NBA campaign with the Warriors, but he's probably a player that
we could look at and say, oh, we turned into this blue guy,
or it's working out for the Warriors. Even if I wouldn't predict that,
I think it's pretty safe to say that Randall on the Warriors would be
a much better player and or fit than a Wiggins on the Knicks. And
I don't think that that's like a ridiculous thing to point out Ian forty two,
ask Portland seems interested in training for Jeremy Grant in the offseason. People
in Portland seem to think he's awesome. Can you please explain what he does
or doesn't do that makes him worth twenty million dollars a year. Look,
what he does is he is someone that you can say, go guard the
other team's best player who's basically not a point guard, and he can do
it and hold up a lot. There's a ton of value in that.
There's the element of three and D to his game where even if he's a
below league average on threes, he's normally going to be right around the overall
league average. Maybe not necessarily on catch and shoot opportunities, but you can
count him to hit open catch and shoot threes. What's been really interesting in
Detroit for stretches is he clearly has more ball skills when you're looking at him
not just attacking an open space, but going at it in ISO and it's
not the most efficient play, it's not something you can lean on, but
it's an extra layer to his game that he didn't plum in Denver or Philly
or Okay see and knowing that it's there. I don't want him as my
number two, but if you get into a situation where he's your number three
or number four, he might be more dynamic than the average. I'll say
number the average, number three or number four. I think even number three
you can go down, because not every team's number three is Chris middle tenor
or Drew Holiday. Do I think he's worth the four year, one hundred
twelve million dollar extension that a team who acquires him will have to give up.
I'd probably skew towards know what the league is hot for guys that do
even the most complimentary version of what Jeremy Grant does, where he if he
doesn't soak up possessions on the offensive end and then defends his butt off and
is spacing the floor hitting stand still threes on the other side. So I
get the appeal, but this is a fair inquiry about Portland where I think
Joe Cronin deserves. I don't know if it's the benefit of the doubt,
but this team deserves time to see what they're going to do with its flexibility,
what direction they're taking in. Are they rebuilding around Dame? Is this
supposed to be a quick retool. I struggle to see the long term vision.
And maybe that's the idea is they believe that they can take so many
different forms, have so many different options. That's why they've set themselves up
this way. But if you're looking at going into next season with Dame,
this year's lottery pick Anthony Simons, do you resign Nirk? You've you've explored
like some of the other youngsters on your roster, Plus you could also maybe
have a for once healthier nos little you have Josh Hart saw a guy you've
You've seen good minutes from Greg Brown at points trend and Wofford has given you
some interesting minutes too. What does Kean Johnson turn into. I don't know
that that's a much better situation than the Blazers had. If it's a better
situation at all pre CJ and Norman Powell Trede. And it's not even just
about being slightly better. You want to have a clearly higher range of outcomes
once you're moving on, if you're trying for the instant turnaround, I don't
think that scenario really gives you that they could have other moves up their sleeve
though, of course, and so we have to see what they do with
this year's first round pick, assuming that they're going to keep it, which
I would predict that they do, even though they've you know, they've already
shut down Nerk. We know Dame is out and we're probably gonna get to
a mover that you show down Anfrey Simon's if they don't lose enough enough games.
So I this is this is a really fair question if I'm Portland,
like Jeremy Grant is not the answer to maximizing whatever they're trying to do in
the post CJ, post Norm Powell era. I think if you want a
number two on your team for Dame to contend, I would argue they have
to be better than Simons and Jeremy Grant, Like those those two are your
third and fourth best players. Now you're really working with something, and Josh
Hart's like your fifth best player or Nerk is you know, there's it's cool
that if you keep Nerk around and he's playing the way he was before his
injury, you there might be blurry lines between a Grant, Simons and Nerk
on who's your second, third, and fourth best player on any given night.
So there's value in that sort of depth, but I think you need
a higher end number two then CJ. McCollum or an Anthony Simons or Jeremy
Grant. And if you were going to, oh this nuclear route and you're
keeping Damian Lillard, which you know he has not said anything, and I'm
just going to default towards He'll stay in Portland until or Portland will keep him
until he says he doesn't want to be there anymore, which he is yet
to do. I would not be inspired if Jeremy Grant ends up being the
most marquee newcomer from this entire operation, Jeremy Grant plus this year's lottery pick.
And I think that's fair to say. So that's a great question.
Ian lukea. J thirty seven. Do you think the Calves success is sustainable
this year or they do for a regression similar to the Knicks from last season.
Yeah, that's something that's interesting to think about. What I think is
different about the Calves is they're having this success while also missing their leading scorer
from last season and Colin Sexton, who Zach Low has said this might just
be the most disrespected twenty four points per game score in NBA history, just
because it came on pretty good efficiency, and people are so dismissive of him
and thought the Calves not everyone but thought the Calves should trade him while he
was injured and rather than even think about bringing back in free agency. Maybe
you're not crazy, maybe you're not in love with the carus leavert fit beyond
this season. But Darius Garland younger than Julius Randall and has already made like
the All Star rise. Evan Mobley is a transcendent defender already, and you
watch him on offense, there's like, I don't know if he can necessarily
isn't think the game that quickly yet, but there's like a fluidity and also
a complexity to some of the things he does with the ball in his hands,
especially when he's around the basket. And as a passer. You have
Jared Allen, who even if you think that Pascal Siakam should have been named
to the East All Star Team over him, this is someone who's a defensive
difference maker has improved on offense. I think that's what separates the Cows from
the Knicks more than anything. This doesn't feel like as big of a flash
in the pan because you have a lot of players who can grow from these
career high points, Whereas when you look at Julius Randall, there was almost
nowhere for him to go but down from that second team all MBA appearance and
getting such a high impact season from Derrick Rose maybe not an anomaly, but
his availability post trade last year probably was. And we're seeing that now when
you used to have yet another procedure while he was still trying to work his
way back from his latest injury. So I don't think they're the next version
of the Knicks. I do think some people fear they've rushed the process a
little bit by giving up this year's first and that Houston second round er to
get Caro Silbert. I don't mind that as much because there's a chance that
Lavert really ends up working out. Now you've given yourself a bunch of different
options with contexton if he's too expensive, you can let him walk, if
there's a lot of interest in him, maybe you look at sign in trades,
or also maybe just knowing how good your defense has been this year and
how much you've struggled to generate offense at points in the half court, and
knowing that you don't have a ton of just knocked down shooters around your primary
ballhander, the Darius Garland, or just period having Colin Sexton who showed that
he can hit threes in addition to Darius Garland. Like that still works with
Carol Silvert. I don't know if you'd ever play those three together, but
it does sort of. It deepens your offense, and so I don't think
that's the best spot to be in. And you also just have more intriguing
trade assets at this point that you would actually give up than the Knicks do,
because are you married to Isaac okorro Our team is going to be able
to talk themselves into Larry Mark in his contract. Kevin Love is in the
sixth man of the year discussion right now, but he'll be on nixspiring contract
next season. Is their stuff you can attach to him, or a contract
you can take back that other teams might not necessarily want. They have more
avenue is worth exploring. But beyond that, I just think when you look
at the core of their roster, none of them, even though they might
be operating at career peaks in a Jared Allen, a Darius Garland than this
is of course Evan Mobley's debut NBA season. That's not going to be their
actual apexes. I mean maybe it could be, but they're young enough to
where you can envision them getting a lot better. And with the Knicks last
year it was okay, maybe I can grow a little bit, but you're
gonna need to trust him and give him a different role and give him a
long rope, which the Knicks have generally not done. This season. You
could have been visioned Obe Topping being better, which he has been, but
his role is not grown. You can visioned r J. Barrett being better
at moments he has looked up, looked great, and you know, going
back and watching that forty six point performance he had last week. If I
were the Knicks, that's the direction how it goes, I would strip it
down. Yeah, keep someone like the youth to Quentin Grimes, the manual
quickly, the Obie Topping, and just start to rebuild around r. J.
Barrett because you're not going anywhere with this court. It's stagnant. And
they read, They clearly read, just like so much of us, including
this podcast. We did talk ourselves in the Julius Round extension. We thought
the Knicks were more for real than not. We'll own up to that.
Those people who thought that some more stronger than us, some maybe a little
bit weaker than us, we're all fucking wrong about it. I don't think
the Calves are going to follow that similar trajectory, and just knowing how gut
gutsy they've been on defense, their help to play right now, and the
fact they're still contending for a top four spot in the East when it's as
competitive as it is, when they're dealing with as many key absences as they've
had to deal with, specifically no Colin Sexton for most of this year,
losing Rubio at one point, let's not forget about that, and now Darius
Garlands banged up and as is Caius Lavert. Maybe they're not the fourth best
team the East this year, but progress isn't linear. And we said that
about the Knicks leading into the season. They could have had a worse record,
they could have finished eighth, tenth in the East, but there could
have been real progress because of development from the youngsters, or maybe something you
noticed about their identity identity sustaining on defense, or Julius Randall's defensive improvement holding
where Mitchell Robinson taking a step forward where he's more of a consistent presence.
But they've just regressed from last year, and it's shown that the product the
team that they were fielding was a nomalous whereas with these calves. Just to
reiterate it, I think it's clear that there's time for them to marinate and
get even better from this, even if it's not happening right away. Jt
Alexander asked, do you think it's time for the NBA to adopt an elim
ending on a full time basis to all games? We've seen it improve the
past two All Star Games, and the Lakers Clippers game from Friday night took
twenty minutes to finish the last thirty seconds, which really killed the momentum.
Do you think it is ever likely to happen? It wouldn't improve the ending
of games. I don't want to cop out here and say I don't know,
but I honestly don't know. We can know the NBA is going to
think about it if the elim ending becomes the standard ending across an entire G
league season, and maybe they measure how that works out for anyone who's not
familiar with it. The way it's going to work is at least as when
you're using it for the basketball tournament. Specifically, it calls for the game
clock to be shut off at the first dead ball with under four minutes in
the fourth quarter, and a target score will then be established to finish the
game by adding eight points to the leading team's score. The thought process here
is, yeah, maybe the game is still not close, but every game
theoretically then concludes with a game winner. What also happens is when it is
close, it does change the way when the clocks turned off, how you
defend, because you could get to a point where where one you're not fouling
to ensure that time stops. But there's also going to points where you can't
foul because that could put someone at the line to just end the game if
they're going to hit the target score on one of those two free throws.
And so I think there is some validity to that thinking. I am curious
as to how it could impact just certain records that the NBA might be married
to, or how you measure trunch time. I guess it would just be
from when the target score is added. I'd be curious with the Players Association
thinks about this. I don't really know that we've heard from them on the
subject. I haven't read anything. At least my gut says that it won't
happen anytime soon sweepingly, but we'll know if they decide to use it across
a G League season. There's a there's a real chance then that it's going
to come to the NBA students, since they do use the G League for
a ton of experimental purposes and normally when it's at I don't want to say
that, you know, let's not the deal zone if Brian Winvers might call
it, but that's sort of been their guinea pig operation. I honestly don't
know how I feel about it, though I wish I could tell you that
I felt strongly one way or the other. The end of that Late Cuse
Clippers game was brutal. I was watching it. My god, it just
wouldn't end. So I totally understand that. But you're also going to have
to that might be that one Specifically, it's more about can we change the
instant replay rules. There's got to be a way to speed that up.
Those won't necessarily go away unless they also change those rules. As part of
the elim ending. I do think it should be on the table, just
because it's been interchanged for the All Star Game. And again, even if
these games aren't close, there's something fun about contest ending on a on a
made shot. Do you get to a point though, where it doesn't matter
if they're blowouts because teams are just gonna stop trying and they'll let parades to
the to like a layup line go through. I honestly don't know, but
I do think it's it's valid enough to think to think about JT. I
just don't know if it would make it better. I think if the NBA
doesn't want to go that route, there definitely needs to be changes to instant
replay, and there needs to be changes to that regardless of whether the NBA
adopts the elim ending across all games, you know, the regular season,
specifically, Jay Dobbs of the Pacers, Pistons, Magic and Rockets. Who
has the best chance of winning a playoff series in the next three years?
Holy shit, this is a great question. Adam would definitely pick the Magic
because he's just somehow in luge love with their mishmash of non stars. There
I think you could argue I'm going to say that, I'm gonna say the
Pacers just because they have Miles Turner and Malcolm Brogden still there, and if
you decide to keep them, go forward with Tyrese Haliburton, who is really
good. You have Christa war Day, you bring back t. J.
Warren if he's healthy, plus this year's pick, which could be like top
five, top seven, whatever, I'm gonna say them. I think after
that there'd be a case for the Pistons, just because there's a chance that
they end up having as soon as next season the best player among these four
teams in Kid cutting him. I really think that he's that good. I
might pick the Magic next then, or even consider them over the Pistons just
by virtue of them being in the Eastern Conference. If Jonathan Isaac is healthy
next year, they did just get marked l folks back. What if Jalen
Suggs hits friends Wagner looks spectacular, so they could be in the discussion for
number two. I'm gonna say the Pacers. They can clearly trade their way
out of this, But as of right now, entering March first, twenty
twenty two, I would expect the Pacers to win a playoff series before the
Pistons, Magic or Rockets, the ladder of whom just has a tough go
of it in the West and they don't necessarily have the tent pole prospect.
We know that the Pacers have it in Tyrese Haliburton plus really good above replacement
level players, fringe All Stars and Malcolm Brogden and Miles Turner plus the topic
this year. I guess the Magic they're a hodgepodge as well. And you
know, if you're going to say, oh, well, they have Jalen
Suggs, Yeah, but the Rockets have Jalen Green and who was playing pretty
well leading into the All Star break. So it's just the West is so
tough, and I think the Magic are a little bit deeper where you're looking
at their immediate optionality of the outcomes may not be as high long term.
I think that really just depend on what you think the ceiling of Sugs is
or what you think Isaac can turn into on offense. Maybe I'm just miss
mistaking Like friends Wagner's peak is this someone who could be a lot better than
even he's shown so far. Houston feels like it has more flyers with Changoon,
Christian Wood, Jalen Green, even it was mont Gruba still sort of
an unknown, and then all those picks moving forward for themselves. But the
Magic it also feels some urgency. Maybe before the Rockets took out and get
some window talent. I might just a fault to the Pistons at the second
best because I'm that in love with Kake Cunningham and they're gonna have another top
pick to add there. Though they could wind up trading Jeremy Grant this season,
I still think the Rockets are going to be fourth for me, if
only by virtue of them playing in the Western Conference. This will be our
Oh that is our last discord questions, So now we can move on to
the Twitter questions. Had had a bunch of good ones here. First one
comes from NBA stat nerd which rookie has the highest PR on a team currently
in the playoffs or playing spot I set if you want to look at just
not having any qualifiers, you have basically Jaden Springer in Philly twenty six point
seven PR. But I wanted people who had played like semi actual minutes,
so I set the benchmark at rookies this season who qualified for the or played
at least five hundred minutes excuse me, swored them by pr Umar Your seven
came up. He's at eighteen point four, alpertn Shane goudas two at sixteen
point three, followed by Scottie Barnes at fifteen point nine, and Evan Mobley
at fifteen point seven. Jonathan Cominga is five at fourteen point seven, and
Franz Wagner is right behind him at fourteen point seven as well. I decided
to also look at the value over replacement player of rookies who have played at
least five hundred minutes again this season. Or did I haven't qualified for the
minutes per game leaderboard. Yeah, since they don't five minimum five hundred minutes.
So Evan Mobley leads the pack here with one point three. Scottie Barnes
is two at one, Herbert Jones is third at point six, and so
those three they come from potential playoff teams. The Helicans are still in the
race out east, but Mobile and Barns are clearly you know, they're right
there in the thick of rotations for actual playoff teams. And then if you're
looking at it, though PR for playoff teams, it's it's you're at seven
comes in because he's actually played six hundred and eleven minutes for the Heat has
shown some stuff around the basket from the stuff that I have seen of him,
and they've also needed him more at points this season because of all the
injuries that they were dealing with. I don't expect him to be like someone
who's on the floor in the playoffs. Scottie Barnes though, would be the
next and Mobile they're right there. They rank third and fourth overall and rookie
PR of a minimum five hundred minutes played. But they're also both just coming
from bona fide playoff teams and really prominent parts of their rotation. And it's
pretty wild that Jonathan Cominga who is still under below average at fourteen point seven
with average considered fifteen and still pretty high for rookie, and he's playing now
regular role for a team and the Warriors that as of right now is I
still think the second most serious contender in the Western Conference. Next question comes
from Daniel Tye fall excuse me, Mitchell Harris. Daniel Types Fan Club is
next. Mitchell Harris asked to Westbrook's triple doubles actually help his teams or is
it that his team wins more when his teammates shoot better, which is when
he gets triple doubles. I always wonder this because it always seems assists is
the hardest part for him. So lifetime, Russell Westbrooks teams are one forty
two and fifty one. When he records a triple double, it's a seventy
three point six win percentage, which is super high. I think we've seen
the limitations of this though in recent years since leaving Oklahoma City, his teams
were thirty two and twenty three when he records a triple double, which is
a fifty eight point two winning percentage. You're still above five hundred there,
but it's noticeably lower. I don't necessarily know what value to ascribe to triple
doubles other than I don't necessarily know that there are a reflection of winning contributions.
They're more volume than they think. They're impressive volume, especially when you're
averaging over the course of an entire season. But I think when it comes
to Russell Westbrook, how is he getting those triple doubles? Are they coming
within the flow of an offense. No, they're coming because he dominates an
offense more often than not, Like, forget about the rebound chasing, but
the assists, Like, this is not someone who's going to just whip the
ball around and throw these touch passes after playing off the ball himself a ton,
Like he needs to dominate the action and try and collapse defenses and attack
the basket. And that changes the way that players around him need to play.
And if you insert him into ecosystems where there are other alpha ball handlers,
scores, offensive players, whatever, I think you're more likely to struggle
even if he is getting a triple double. And we've seen that in Houston,
we've seen it in Washington, and now we've seen it with the Lakers.
So when he is your lone star and is he a star if you
put him on a team where he is just the center of everything and you
have like actual competent role players around him, like, this isn't someone who
can lift up a fringe contender. I guess like he kind of did in
two thousand and sixty thousand, seventy post KD. This isn't a you know,
he couldn't have if you gave him the nugget supporting cast would be my
point. They're not gonna have the same type of season that they've had with
Nicole Yokich, sans Jamal Murray and Michael Porter Jr. But if you did
put him just around him with shooting in a five, who can set screens
like we saw with a Steven Adams doesn't necessarily need to space the floor.
I do think that team could be better than this current Lakers team. But
he is no longer good enough to want to dictate the terms of your roster
to that degree, and that's where it becomes difficult. And the context of
his triple doubles are just they came because he had a monopoly over the offense
specifically, and he is no longer good enough to do that, or even
if you think he is, there are going to be limitations to how good
your team can be if that's the route you're taking. And as of right
now, if you're asking me whether I think a Russell Westbrook cripple double is
a harbinger of whether his team is winning or losing, I just don't think
it's be indicative of anything other than what his role is on that team or
any given night was Lebron out and that's why he's taking control. But if
I was forced to choose now, I don't think that Russell Westbrook having a
triple double necessarily ensures that your team is a better chance of winning. It's
like Mitchell also said here, a lot of it could just come down to
his teammates hitting shots. It's also not on him if they if they miss
shots. I think it's really though Again, the context of his role on
the office is what matters more than anything, and when he can't be the
all everything, he is going to struggle. And I think we've reached the
point in his career where even if he is the all everything, you have
to still surround him with very high end plug in play talent for you to
even be a noticeably above average NBA roster. Daniel Tys Fan Club asked what
percentage Robert Williams has finishes around the ram or alley oops and putbacks. So
Robert Williams, as of this recording has finished, has taken two hundred and
fifty nine shot attempts of some form at the rim. He has made two
hundred and two of them. So shooting seventy eight percent there, So of
those two hundred and two mates, eighty three eighty six come off of alley
oops, so that ends up being forty two point six percent of all his
makes come as the finisher on an alley loop. And then sixty one of
his two hundred and two makes at the rim are on putbacks, so that
comes out the twenty three point six percent of his looks around the rim.
So that's you know, almost two thirds, maybe more than two about it's
more than two thirds of his offensive scoring or as rim attempts come or rim
makes come as alley ope finishes or or putbacks. So there you go.
Dan Ties Fan Club Alex asked, how does points per game relate to players
as usage rate so uses percentage. I don't want to go through the read
out the calculation of the way that it is calculated. It's just too complex
to read through on this. But it's accounting for field goal attempts, free
throw attempts, turnovers. It's supposed to be an estimate of the percentage of
team plays used by a player while he's on the floor, and when so
many team plays are going to end in a shottempt or free throw attempts specifically,
never mind the turnovers, and then there's the minute plate element. But
when it's those shot attempts, the more shots you take in fury, the
more points you're going to score, and so the higher your shot attempts,
the higher your usage rate is going to be. So there is that in
free throw attempts obviously too, So there is that corollary. And unless you're
just like one of the worst scores of all time, it doesn't have to
be this direct correlation between usage rate and how many points per game you're scoring.
But you're probably only taking shots finishing plays in the first place because you
are a valuable score. So if your points per game are higher, the
chances are that you are going to have a higher usage rate. There are,
of course, things that can factor in that. If you're not getting
to the foul line because you're exclusively just sort of a catch and shoot guy,
if you're someone who doesn't have a ton of prol of the offense,
so you're not even necessarily committing turnovers, you're just passing the ball to someone
else, which this you know, the most basic form of usage is not
accounting for assist that you go out yeah, in theory, you could have
a lower usage rate, and just there are guys that have averaged a ton
of points in the past that don't have these super high usage rates, especially
if they're you know, when you're looking at the Also the other thing,
when you're looking at the calculation for usage rate, like it's not making any
delineation between threes and two point attempts. You can take fewer shot attempts while
having a higher usage a lower usage rate if you're just taking a ton of
threes, and like, you know, think of like a Joe Harris last
year, he's averaging over fourteen points per game, and like his usage is
a hair over eighteen, which is just like not super duper high. So
there's that context there. But I would think generally there's going to be a
correlation between like the more you're scoring, the higher usage rate is going to
be because in theory, you're just finishing a higher percentage of your team's plays.
That was sort of a stumbling explanation, but that's really the gist of
it. This question comes from truth. He asked why do casuals hate stats?
Basketball fans? Mostly because stats are facts? Nerds? Nerd invented basketball.
When the haters of stats argue about their players, they don't hesitate to
use them nerd haters or casual highlights kids even if their favorite player coach or
using those stats. So I don't I don't like using the word casual as
like a denigration. There are casual basketball fans because it's not their favorite sport,
or they don't pay Super CLO's attention to the NBA and left the Super
Bowl or something, or maybe they only pay attention in the playoffs, maybe
they only follow one team, or maybe they're just not into the mini gritty.
So I don't want to promote, like not promote. I don't want
to like label someone a casual ass as an insult. And I don't even
know that all casuals hate stats as basketball like the basketball stats excuse me.
I really just think that there's been a poor job in many instances of communicating
what these stats mean and how to portray them. So we see the misuse
or neglected altogether. But there's a way to marry the eye tests and numbers,
and it's been done by many people for a really long time. There
can be it still feels like the stats world can be too gatekeeper or condescending
at one point, and some people do use them as balls. Some people
just misportray them entirely, especially when you're looking at kitchen sink metrics, or
if you just value points per game over everything else. But I don't really
think that if you're a casual fan you necessarily hate stats. If you're just
someone who is more invested in the eye test, you might not place as
much stock in stats. I don't know whether that's right or wrong. Neither
one to me is the end all be all. You need to tether them
together. It's a marriage of both cubone x x zs and we'll finish here.
Which MVP candidate has the worst supporting cast The answer, without going into
any detail, I think would just be Nicole Yokich. He's missing the two
two of the three best players on a team in Michael Porter Junior and Jamal
Murray. His second best player this season has been Aaron Gordon. Maybe it's
been Will Barton. At points, you can try and look at more scientific
ways of this. I did try to look at which MVP candidates had the
fewest number of teammates who qualified for the minutes per game leaderboard while also ranking
or checking in with an above average VORP, and that really wasn't too effective.
You could look at if you averaged out the value over replacement players of
their supporting casts among qualified players who qualified at the minutes for game, that
might be more more useful. But there's like a tie here basically where most
of these guys have six or seven or eight or nine teammates who have qualified
for the minutes per game lead aboard and have an above average VARp. Just
to try, and this is not the way I would do it, but
if you looked at the net ratings of teams when these stars are off the
court, Nicole Yokich is also going to win that the Nuggets are getting outscored
by twelve points per one hundred possessions when he's on the floor. There are
obviously other influencers here, like who are they playing without him? Are there
certain players that they're just tethering to Nicole Yokich's minutes almost exclusively who could really
help out in the times that he's off the court. Yes, that's absolutely
a possibility. But when he just comes up so much, even when you
look at net ratings, swing the Nuggets are I think twenty two point four
points better per one hundred possessions when Yokich is on the court. That is
the single highest net rating swing in the league. So that keeps coming up.
Steph actually happens to be number two when looking at higher volume players,
and I'm not even you don't even need to go by higher volume players specifically.
It's just among anyone who has logged at least two hundred and fifty minutes
this year, Nicole Yokich has the single highest net rating swing in the league.
And again that's not an end all be all necessarily, but it's twenty
two point five points is no joke. And then you have, like I
said, Steph checks in it number two at sixteen point seven. There's like
a huge gap there. When you're also just looking at the net ratings with
players off Steph's the Warriors are minus five point two. That's the second lowest
mark. Again, there's a huge gap there though, between the Curry and
Yokis minutes, and that's kind of impressive knowing that Draymond Green plays so or
played so many of his minutes with Steph. So the Warriors have I don't
want to say, hamstrung themselves during certain stretches there, but it's not they
haven't put there. There are other things I think they could have done better
to try and survive. The death minutes is when I'm getting at pre Clay
Thompson's return, pleach, pre Draymond green back injury. The Bulls are minus
five with the Rosen off the floor, and so that's the third highest mark
even Lebron like the Lakers, they're minus three point six per one hundred when
he's off the court. So Yo the Nuggets, the yokich Is. Even
the yokichless minutes for the Nuggets are even worse than that. That's not a
perfect comparison because you're getting into a point where you're comparing minutes from all these
different rosters where stars even on the court. I do think it's among the
foremost MVP candidates. I think you have to say it's it is Yokis though,
because Steph maybe comes pretty close. But you're discrediting a lot of what
Raymond did then the rest of the season. Even just looking at number two
options specifically this year, it would have to be by fault or the second
best player. Let's say I think it's still Yokis like Damario Rosen has,
Zach Lavine, Lebron is Ampty Davis even if he's not available. Like I
said after that, there's the huge drop off. Joel Embiide is interesting.
The Sixers are a minus three pro one hundred possessions when he's off the court,
and the second best teammate has been Tyrres Maxie this year instead of Ben
Simmons. Maxie was really good though, But if you wanted to make a
case for that, you can't anymore because James Harden's there. Let's not forget
Seth Curry was there too. Are either of those two players Maxe Curry?
Would you prefer them to Aaron Gordon or Will Barton? Maybe I wouldn't blame
you if you did. I wouldn't blame if you didn't. Janie. You
know, having Drew and Chris Middleton, the bucks are shallow, but those
two guys at the top, that's a luxury that not a lot of other
guys have. Chris Paul is Devin Booker and just a deep roster, and
hey, Devin Booker has Chris Paul. Even Chris Paul is currently injured and
the rest of the Sun's roster as well. I guess there could be a
case Luca, but the mass are actually winning the minutes three point seven points
per one hundred possessions when he's off the court this year. That actually shocked
me. It's not Jimmy Butler, it's not rudygo Berrodonovan Mitchell, It's definitely
not John Morant. I think it would have to be between Yokich, Curry,
and maybe Embed but like you kind of remove him now. If you
have a different answer, feel free to get at me. But I'm almost
positive that Yokich is the MVP candidate with the worst supporting cast, and I
think that's gonna give him a lot of MVP when it comes to the arguments.
I don't know that's not wrong, but I do think we need to
be careful not to necessarily discredit players who have a better supporting cast, are
healthier supporting cast. It's not their fault that they're not working with West.
So Yokich is doing is impressive. He would be my MVP pick if the
season ended today. But there are a lot of justifiable candidates. I think
at least four, maybe five, perhaps even six at this point, and
I'm not someone who is all participation trophy like here that just wants to hand
the MVP word to everybody. Thank you for sticking with me. If you've
made it this long, we will be back for another podcast this Friday if
you If you have made it this far, though, please remember to rate,
review and subscribe to us wherever you get your iTunes. Wherever you get
your podcasts, we asked you do head over iTunes and throw us five star
ratings and reviews. Written reviews in addition to those five star ratings help a
ton, even if you're not using iTunes. Follow us on YouTube YouTube dot
com hard Knox join our discord links into podcast description along with the YouTube channel
link. And until next time, I'll leave you all the shout out Build
one the Only Frank neil Te