What's up, y'all is Drewski and I've teamed up with Mountain Dew to produce
a hilarious new basketball podcast called The d Zone with Drewski. Learn the backstories
of your favorite balls and celebrities like Jamal Murray. Did you have like a
favorite team? Was it the Raptors at the time or no, was the
Raptors even started on the top? Come on, broell you like I'm Vivity,
Taylor Rogues, Asian Wilson, and many more. You won't want to
miss this. Listen to The Dzone with Drewski on Apple Podcast, Spotify,
and wherever you listen to podcasts. Hello everyone, and welcome to the latest
episode of Hardwood Knox. This is Adam from Will here with my fantastic co
host Dan Favalle, and we're gonna be talking some NBA rookies today. I
think, as expected, this twenty twenty draft class was a little bit devoid
of star power at the top, with a few exceptions, but the depth
of talent has lived up to the building where there are just so many low
level starters high level role players that it was actually tough to come up with
the All rookie teams which was our task today. So just like the NBA
does, we're trying to pick out five first team All Rookies and five second
team All Rookies. Positions are not relevant here since they are not relevant on
the official ballot either. And it was a tough process. Was it as
tough for you as it was for me? Dan? Yes? It was.
It was incredibly difficult. I just I don't even know like how to
approach some of these second team names because it felt like my honorable mentioned list.
I had to really work hard to not have it be double digits.
Yeah. I was trying to narrow down before we were recording, and we
went through our teams with each other. But I had seven people that I
couldn't even forget about honorable mentions, but I couldn't like delineate between them on
the second team. I just wanted I couldn't figure out the math wouldn't work
out. Five spots and seven players. I just couldn't make it work.
I don't know why square peg round hole. Yeah, do you want to
start with and here's a quick question, do you think any of this has
the potential to change before the season ends. I'm reticent to always do awards.
I want to wait like until the season's over, but then no one
cares about them at that point. Really, and I'm wondering if this is
one of those things that you could see. We know who's going to win
MVP, for instance, in the one spot, so the only thing you
debate there is two through five on the actual ballots. Yeah, I mean,
I think it definitely can change, just because the threshold between so many
of these players is so minimal that like a hot streak from Aaron E.
Smith, right, is coming on really strong for the Boston Celtics towards the
end of the season, another week of ridiculously scorching shooting and positive contributions,
and yeah, he might work his way under the second team. I think
the only thing that is a lock here is three names on the first team,
and even beyond that, there's a lot of potential inclusions for the fourth
and fifth spots on the first team, much less the five on the second
team. It's tough, and because the gaps between all these these natural tiers
that should form are so minimal. Yeah, I think there's absolutely potential for
this to change fairly significantly. Why don't you take us off with the three
locks. Yeah, I mean it has to be LaMelo Ball, Tyrese Haliburton,
and Anthony Edwards, and not necessarily in that order, but those are
the three obvious Rookie of the Year contenders. I think LaMelo Ball would have
won the award kind of going away if he hadn't had the fractured wrist that
kept him out for a while, even though he has managed to return before
the end of the season, albeit clutching at his wrist in a scary way
sometimes. Now that he's back on the court, Anthony Edwards has come on
so strong after the All Star Break and really even a little bit before the
All Star break, where he's no longer just putting up points because that's his
role and he's not doing so efficiently. He's taking the right shots, he's
showing better shot making skills, he's showing more willingness to get his teammates involved,
his defensive presence has improved. He's done absolutely everything that you could want
to assert himself as. Yeah, this guy is one hundred percent, unquestionably
a franchise cornerstone for the Minnesota Timberwolves. And then there's Tyrese Haliburton, who
might not have the star power of those other two names, but he's just
been steadily productive without any holes in his game, filling whatever role the Sacramento
Kings ask of him from start to finish, and steadiness is the name of
the game there and it has paid off. I don't think Haliburton is much
of a threat to win Rookie of the Year just because he hasn't gotten the
same attention as those other two, but he without question deserves to be in
that top tier of unquestionable locks for this first team spot. I couldn't even
add anything there. The only thing I might say, or I will say,
I'm not convinced that in my Rookie of the Year ballet, Haliburton's not
going to be my runner up. I still might place him above Anthony Edwards.
Looking at end to end impact. He was good this year and he's
injured and out for the season, which tolly sucks. He was good this
year on both ends of the floor, which is incredibly tough to do as
a respecially Kings team that doesn't play defense. Correct. Sometimes they played defense,
but very rarely, and at the beginning of the season they were just
getting torched because they were switching everything just for no reason they would switch.
Still, I do think people will gravitate more towards Edwards because he's a flash
year score and a higher volume score, which I think matters. But I
also think that people undersell how much flair there is to Halliburton's game. There's
more craft there when he's on the ball. But I don't have anything else
to add with the with the other three. I think it's funny our last
two names on the first team really differed originally, but I think we ended
up having the same right, I went back, I flipp plopped, we
went back. Okay, yeah, so my first inclusion there who well,
I mean again, these positions within the all rookie teams are not ranked,
you know, they're all just first teamers or second teamers are not on them.
But for all intents and purposes, I wanted to put this together in
the order that I had them included. So my fourth name was Jayshawn Tate,
who was undrafted in twenty eighteen, played overseas, overcame a lot of
hurdles to get to the point that he was in the NBA. Would highly
highly recommend reading mir and Fader's piece on him for the ringer, it'll just
add so much context to what he's been through to get to this point.
But he's been such a consistent energy presence for a really bad Houston Rockets team
that has undergone a lot of turmoil. I think it's kind of gravy that
he's averaging eleven point two points per game and shooting fifty point six percent from
the field. He's not much of a three point shooter, but twos though
for him. Yeah, he's an efficient finisher around the rim for sure,
but the intensity that he brings on the defensive end is contagious. It hasn't
necessarily led to success on that end, but as an individual, he has
looked the part of a perimeter stopper, of a wing defender, a guy
who can fill a number of different roles and show malleability on that end of
the floor without ever letting that that level of intensity waiver. He impacts passing
lanes. He's a pesky point of attack defenders. There are just so many
positives to his game on that end of the floor that all stem from this
just indefatigable motor that he has. That again, all the offensive contributions are
just kind of gravy there, and I think it's it doesn't typically happen where
an undrafted rookie from years ago makes an All Rookie team. But I think
he's at least a lock for the second team, and I really do think
that he should be strongly considered for one of those first team spots. I
agree with everything you said. I did not have him on my first team.
I had him on my second team, and I think the reason why
is I would like to see him more variance from him on offensive, have
just any sort of jumper. And then I don't want to say his defense
is overrated because he is. He is feisty as hell. He is not
hell yeah, he is not defending consistently the best players on the other team,
though. There is just you can look at data and I think he's
like fifth on the team. In guarding the number one option. There is
the noise of okay, well, you saw John Wall there a lot because
he plays point guard, but they were more wanting to use Sterling Brown in
those positions for some of the time. Also Daniel House Junior before he was
injured, David Nawaba as well. And I think that because he's a rookie.
What he's doing defensively is incredible. But I put so the person I
put I think instead of him basically is for Kundo Compozzo, and Kudo Compazo
is a hell of a defender too. And first of all, I didn't
know much about him coming in. I think if you remember when we were
talking about the Nuggets heading into the regular season, I didn't understand the Composo
signing because I thought they needed more events that he was gonna bring. I
didn't think his size was gonna hold up even though everyone had said he's a
high energy player there. And also they had Monte Morris, the best backup
point guard in the league probably and now him a Composito were both those guys.
But Vacuumpozzo has far and away succeeded exceeded my expectations and want its defensively
because there's there's ball pressure there. He is so disruptive. We've seen even
more from him lately, which I think helps his case for the first team.
Because Jamal Murray's injured, Monte Morris has been injured as well, Will
Barton has been injured too, and so that they've really leaned a lot on
him lately and he is up to the task. I think he want more
from him on offense, but he has his three point percentage up to thirty
six point three percent, very close to the league average. H You know,
you can't really look at him and say, well, what is he
gonna do if if he gets inside the arc? He's not like this.
He's finishing okay around the rim, but you know he's not going to get
there a ton. He can run an offense, though he is an exceptional
pa asser, and some of the passes he throws and you just don't see
it nothing. He's not throwing a ton of passes, but you don't see
it in his assist numbers. But like the fact that this team has Nicolea
Yokich and Fakuno Capozzo in the same rotation, we just we probably haven't appreciated
enough because they're both yo kitch more so. But that's like the duo.
Name a duo in the NBA that can throw collectively more ridiculous passes and I
just don't. And so I had him there. It was because he exceeded
my expectations pretty much everywhere as a shooting started to normalize on offense, even
kind of looking at the steadying hand he's brought in Monte Morris's absence, but
a lot of it was the defense for me, and I think he quietly
you don't expect this from him because of how deep the Nuggets are overall,
and they're trying to win. That's the other thing. They're still a title
contender. They're in that top five Western Conference conversation. He is eleventh in
all rookie minutes. That's for when you play for a contender. That's not
nothing to me. I struggled with where to put him. I did have
Composo on my second team. I didn't really consider the idea of moving him
up to the first team though, just because I think that he's largely benefited
from the situation in parts, like even in the last dozen games, since
he's moved into the starting lineup on a more permanent basis, the shot has
fallen off a little bit. And I think it's been pretty clear that Denver
is thriving because of Yokich has continued excellence, and because Michael Porter Jr.
Has been the one taking on an even larger offensive role. And yeah,
Compozzo has been the steadying presence, He's been a brilliant passer, he's continued
to be a pesky defender who makes a legitimate impact on that end. But
I can't help but have this feeling that it's still a bit more situational than
the success of the other guys I have on my first team. Not hating
on the selection by any means. He's had a really really strong first season
and proved that there's more to his game than we initially thought when he did
join a Nuggets team that didn't seem to make much sense for him. Fair
enough, does sound like you're shooting on him though, even though it said
you weren't. But yeah, maybe a little bit. My last inclusion on
the first team, which was a really tough one, was Emmanuel Quickly consistency
not necessarily there, the ability to get to the foul line not necessarily there,
but the hot shot making, the floater game, the presence that he
brings on the offensive end, and the ability to give the Knicks that secondary
ball handler that they've lacked in a lot of situations. Now, we've we
talked in previous episodes and on other shows that we've appeared on about whether it's
going to be him or like Alec Burks who's tasked with stepping up in the
playoffs and that kind of role. I still think it could be quickly as
long as he's on fire, which he has been for enough portions of this
season that I wanted to give him some love here. Yeah, he actually
ended up going on my second team. I don't feel too confident about it.
Maybe I more so wanted to reward Isaiah Stewart, who I rounded out
my first team with, for the work that he's done. He's been better
on defense than people have credited. We've noted the impact room numbers with him
on and off the court for Detroit. He gives you something on offense,
They've they've explored his three point range. He's someone that is not going to
be super explosive to the basketball using him as a roller, but he's gonna
navigate the floor really well when he's coming off screens. We've seen, you
know, there was a few games that we had this wicked chase down block
because well, he's not the fastest player, like he's going to get up
and down the floor, and when it came to I would looked at,
you know, Emmanuel quickly for Kuno composit Isaiah Stewart. That was like the
decision for me. It was tough. I ended up favoring the players who
had logged more minutes. And there's a chance I think you could argue that
quickly his minutes are slightly more impactful if really wanted to, because he's gonna
have the ball in his hands more and he's hitting those super deep threes.
But Isaiah Stewart just sort of the the IQ and the understatedness with which he's
playing. I feel like he's been more consistent this year too. That might
have to do with how the dr Pistons use him. We've seen quickly not
really fall out of the rotation, but his playing time is varied, especially
post Rose trade. And it was more so because it felt like the Knicks
wanted to play him more with Derek Rose. They weren't limiting his minutes because
of Derek Rose. It was when Rose was injured so quickly made my second
team, but I ended up going with Isaiah Stewart in that final spot for
first team. Isaiah Stewart was my second inclusion on the second team. I
actually don't know that I have him first on his own team. Among rookies,
just because moving on to the second team, I guess Sadique Bay needs
a lot of credit for the three and D presence that he's brought to this
Detroit team and the stability that he's provided. Despite Detroit playing roughly seventy six
players during the twenty twenty twenty one season. Now he is still shooting thirty
eight point one percent on six point three attempts per game. Only thirty five
qualified players in the NBA this year are clearing six and thirty eight, respectively,
and they're all established good shooters. I think it's already abundantly clear just
how much of an impact he can have on as a floor spacer on this
low level team. But also when this team is ready to be more competitive,
that role is going to translate. I'm not entirely sure that Stuart's game
will translate as well when the team is ready to compete, because he's such
an energy, high effort guy, and he does so many good things,
but you know, fouling can be an issue at times. He's definitely not
going to create many offensive looks for himself. He's trying to space the floor.
It hasn't really been that successful he doesn't get to the foul line a
lot as a big and I'm giving these negatives just to justify why he's not
on my first team. But obviously he's still been a remarkably impactful rookie at
a tough at a position that's pretty tough to immediately thrive at. So deep
Bay was on my second team. And in addition to everything you say,
one of the things that we've noticed this season two is there's more ball skills
there offensively where it's he's going to compete. Defensively, he can knock down
threes. He's over thirty eight percent this season. He's not been the most
efficient player when they're running the ball through his hands. There's more to his
game there to plumb, though, and I think that absolutely matters. Sugar
Ray, Leonard, Roberto Duran, Marvelous, Marvin Hagler, and Thomas Hearns
legends whose four way rivalry define one of the greatest errors in boxing history,
relive their decade of dominance in the new Showtime Sports documentary The Kings, a
four parts series premiering Sunday, June sixth, only on Showtime. Nobody builds
five G like Verizon builds five G because we're the engineers who built the most
reliable network in America. And the more you do with five G, the
more building it right matters, the more your network matters, The more Verizon
engineers going the extra mile matters. It's us pushing us. It's Verizon versus
Verizon. Five G built right from America's most reliable network, most reliable based
on rankings Promoved Metrics second half twenty Uster reported three mobile networks results may vary,
but what is not an endorsement. So to recap my first team,
and then I'll name who's on my second team that we've already talked about.
LaMelo Ball, Tyrese Haliburt, and Anthony Edwards, Fecundo Composo and Isaiah Stewart
were on my first team and the players that we've talked about already that are
on my second team Emmanuel Quickly, Jay Shawn t and Sadique Bay. And
I had LaMelo Ball, Anthony Edwards, Tyrese Halibert, and Jay Shawn Tate
and Emmanuel Quickly on my first team, and we have now talked about Sadique
Bay, Isaiah Stewart and Fecundo Capozzo off of my second team. You want
me to get started with the final two second team spots, Yeah, I
have, and I feel like he started to fly under the radar. I
have Patrick Williams on my second team. He has been a joy to watch
because there's the Bulls have really tried to vary how they're using him. One
of the things that's been a constant, and you could see it. Now
they're going to really make him work defensively by putting him on these really toughest
signments, and they probably want to know whether he can handle it long term.
I think he's done an excellent job of holding up relative to who he
is this season when he's going up against you know, effectively twos, threes
and fours. He switched on to a bunch of point guards. He hasn't
really guarded centers that much. But I think long term he might be able
to do that. I would say based off his body of work this year,
he can capably defend four positions, which is nothing to sneeze at.
I like the idea too that I think he has more ball skills to plumb.
He's not necessarily getting that chance as much in Chicago, and you're not
always going to see it in the you know, in his efficiency numbers there,
but he's hitting, you know, thirty eight point three percent from three
fifty one point one percent on his twos. This is someone who I think
is going to end up being a decidedly valuable two white player, and he
may never broach stardom. He's in that Tyrese Haliburton camp, although I'd have
Haliburton significantly ahead of him and more likely to become an All Star, where
he just does so many things that are solid. I don't know if he's
going to stand out in any one area and be elite. But the Bulls
got their hands on taking him at number four. A lot of people thought
was a reach, and there are players behind him that maybe they regret passing
on. Chief among them would be Tyrese Haliburton. There are so many teams
that pass on Haliburton too, and I think Williams has sort of justified that
top five draft stock. Yeah, I have him on my second team as
well for all of the reasons that you mentioned. I'm similarly not quite sure
what to make of his ceiling. But the floor is higher than I thought
it would be, which is a testament to the work he's already put in.
This guy came into the NBA as the youngest nca prospect in the NBA
draft. He was very much this multible ball of clay, and the Bulls
are already successfully molding him. It's pretty clear that he's going to have a
positive impact on both ends of the floor. How positive not quite sure yet.
I'm not sure the Bulls know yet. But the fact that the floor
is already this high, I think, given the weird the strengths of this
draft class were supposed to lie, it definitely justifies using the number four pick
on him. You know, ideally you're trying to find a star that high
up in any draft selection process, but we kind of knew going in that
this was a class that was devoid of much star power and had a lot
of potential good contributors who could play positive basketball for a long time. And
the fact that they found a guy who unquestionably looks like he will fill that
ladder role but still has enough untapped upside in basically every area imaginable that he
could still fill that star designation down the road, I think that's a huge
success for the Balls. Sweet we were in lockstep in one of these players
on second team. I think we differed because I believe I remember who you
put the round out, but I ended up this spot for me came down
between Desmond Baine and the player I ultimately went with, which was Jaden McDaniels.
I don't know why I feel like I'm favoring defense so much about this
process, but we seldom talk about how valuable rookies are defensively, and this
well, Jason Chait was not a part of this draft class, but Jade
McDaniels as the player I actually went with, defends all five positions. Basically
for the Minnesota Timbs, He's guarded every position on at least ten percent of
his possessions. He spent the least amount of time on center. That's notable,
shooting a pretty efficient clip on threes, hitting over fifty percent of his
twos. I don't know. This is one of those players where I say,
oh, I'm surprised at how much ball skills Sadiq Bay has or Patrick
Williams. I don't necessarily see the same with Jade McDaniels. There might be
potential for him to do some straight line stuff, but still looking at with
the value he's going to bring you defensively, hitting thirty seven percent of his
threes. The ultimate compliment I would call him. He's going It feels like
he's going to be that type of player. Is he the answer at the
four long term for Minnesota? If you're looking at their best five players,
I'm not going to give a decided yes, because we have to see what
other options are going to be available to them. It could be their draft
pick this year if it lands on the top three, it could be a
trade that they make. It probably won't come in free agency because they don't
have cap space. I think he's in the mix. This is just their
core Anthi Edwards, Jade McDaniels, Karnthy Towns, Deangel Russell, and Thelik
Beasley. That's what I look at it as right now, and so the
fact that he's played his way into that a tier of importance for Minnesota is
a huge deal. I was really close to including McDaniels, but I did
ultimately go with Desmond Bane. The three point shooting alone has just been so
valuable for this Grizzlies team. Joe Ingles, Michael Porter, Junior, Joe
Harris, Kevin Durant, Seth Curry, Reggie Jackson, Marcus Morris, Senior
Boggdon Bogdanovitch, Bryn Forbes, and Desmond Bine. Those are the only ten
qualified players in the NBA right now taking at least four threes a game and
hitting forty three percent of them. That is an elite club, and it
looks sustainable one percent. Looks like he could be a yearly fixture in that
group. I think so many times you see how steep the learning curve can
be for rookies entering the NBA. It's tough to figure out how exactly to
rotate on defense. It's tough to figure out exactly how you're going to maximize
the relatively meager opportunities that you get on the offensive end, and it's hard
to accept those limitations. But he has very much been one of those rare
veteran rookies where it just immediately looks like he knows exactly what he wants to
do. He understands his role completely, and he's able to maximize his abilities
within that role. I'm not sure there's anything that Desmond Bane is particularly bad
at for this Memphis Grizzlies team, which is why he's been seventh and minutes
played for them on a very competitive team with a lot of depth and a
lot of underrated pieces, and he's one of them. His three d abilities
are immaculate, but beyond that, he's able to fill these other secondary and
subsidiary roles efficiently, without complaint and in a way that maximizes the success of
his team on a nightly basis. Do you want to run through before you
list off onnable mentions? Let's recap who your two teams were For people that
just joined the room, I can do that. I had LaMelo Ball,
Anthony Edwards, Tyrese Haliburt and Jayshawn Tate and Emmanuel Quickly on my first team
at Sadiq Bay, Isaiah Stewart, Desmond Baine, Patrick Williams and Fecundo Composo
on my second team. My first team ballot is Lamello Ball, Tyrese Haliburton,
Anthony Edwards, Fecundo Composo and Isaiah Stewart. My second team is Emmanuel
Quickly, Patrick Williams, Jashawn Jade McDaniels and Sadiq Bay. And now to
run through the many, many, many honorable mentions real fast. The toughest
omission for me was Isaac Accoro. He's been a disaster on offense for the
vast majority of this first season in the NBA. His defensive presence is already
there, It's already really strong, and it makes a difference, and it's
going to make a difference for a long time. And it was enough that
I really tried hard to find a spot for him and just couldn't quite do
it. Other guys I considered were Xavier Tillman Senior, James Wiseman, Cole
Anthony, Jaden McDaniels, Denni Via, Peyton Pritchard, Devin Vassell, Tyrese
Maxie, and schumanok Key. And I think you can make cases for basically
any of them, because the gap between basically anyone on our second teams and
anyone in that list of honorable mentions is fairly minimal, right, And the
only honorable mentions I'll add would be I had Desmond Bayane as an honorable mention
instead of actually making it. And a player who and I agree with you
on Isaac Waccorro. He's shown that he can run some pick and roll and
finish off straight line drives, just not consistently enough. And there are still
there are plenty of question marks about his range. The other big one I
wanted to mention is if he had played more, which he couldn't because of
the how the depth in Denver. But RJ. Hampton has been borderline fantastic
in Orlando. He's going to be really good, and so if he had
a larger sample size under his belt, he might have ended up being a
shoe in for one of these top you know three top or excuse me,
top two all rookie teams. And the the other one I was going to
mention is and I can't remember if he was a rookie or not. Maybe
he wasn't because this his second year on a two way contract before it was
converted. I'll look really quickly, Oh it wasn't. All right. I'm
not even going to mention his name because it's a stupid part of my part.
But those are the only two honorable mentions I would anti year long list
of them. I think the only other one I have to mention. You
know, there's a guy averaging twenty eight point two points four point seven assists
and only one point six turnovers per thirty six minutes, shooting seventy two point
seven percent from the field and fifty percent from three Those are Hall of Fame
numbers if he's able to maintain those, And that's Grant Riller. And you
know, you could say he's only done that in twenty three minutes, and
I don't give a shit. He's been so good in those twenty three minutes
that I have to mention him here the player I actually wanted to mention because
Grant Willer is in a different conversation. It's the MVP conversation Tayl Malodon of
the Oklahoma City Thunder. He can be a little wild, but I think
he's actually going to be. It can be hard to discern who are their
keepers outside of Shay and lou Dort. At this point, I think he's
gonna end up being one of them. I can see that for sure.
The flashes are there. We are going to leave it there. Please join
us again next week four pm Easter Time, And if you've not checked out
the podcast, the Hardwood Knox Podcasts, go check us out. You can
find us wherever you're getting podcasts, or you'll find links on Twitter at Hardwood
Knox. Until then, or we do have a quick question from Maxwell Millington,
Who would be your Rookie of the Year? Give me your top three
options really quick, Adam. It's LaMelo Ball, Anthony Edwards, and Haliburton
in that order. I think, had Ball not returned, Edwards has done
enough in the second half of the season that I could see him pushing ahead
into that number one spot. But ultimately I don't view Rookie of the Year
as which rookie reached the highest level by the end of the season. If
that were the case, Edwards would be my pick right now. But because
it's supposed to be an award given to the most productive rookie season, I
have to include that first half of the really the first third of the season,
where Edwards was not there on defense, where his shot wasn't falling and
he was taking way too many hero jumpers that didn't make sense within the flow
of the offense. LaMelo Ball has consistently been a massively positive presence for the
Charlotte Hornets from start to finish, and that to me is enough where he's
my going away favorite and Edwards and Haliburton are closer together for second place.
Maxwell loves the Grant Roller shout out. By the way, Adam, you
have found. I appreciate that we're going to be best friends. Maxwell Mine
would are its basically the same Intelanello ball, then Terres Halibert and then Anthony
Edwards. You hit on my argument for Alibert by just saying, look,
he had the season in some I think Haliburton's been more impactful at both ends
of the floor, and he clearly doesn't have the same ceiling as Edwards.
I don't know if that I mean, well he might look is that I'm
not Yeah, I'm not ready to put a cap on his heeling. I
don't think he's as the same ceiling as a scorer, but you know what
he does everything else so well that if we're just looking at the Draymond Green
of guards, like the guy who's gonna be that impactful at both ends of
the floor and probably a terrible comparison, but because Draymond's an all time defender
and not the best great passer, not the best offensive player overall, think
what you mean is to say that he could be like Malcolm Brodden and you
know, be like a potential top twenty twenty five player first for a time.
Yeah exactly. Yeah, So you know, like picture like Kyle Anderson,
but hitting off the dribble jumpers type deal or not Kyle Anderson, Manugen
nobly, but a little bit more under control. That's what the under control
man, wugenoble. That is my ceiling for Tyres Haliburton somewhere Grant. He
has just got excited and has no idea why. Until next time, guys,
please join us again four pm Eastern Time every Sunday. We normally go
longer, but there's been issues with locker room sending the audio, so we're
going to record a second podcast after this. But you also might be hearing
this on the podcast should our audio actually come over. But we will leave
you a shout out too, and you know what this is. For you
Adam and for you Maxwell, leaving you with a shout out to the one
the only, future multi time MVP, perennial All NBA player and future inevitable,
undeniable, in arguable Hall of Famer Grant Ruler. We have now left
the locker room and are ready to begin part two of this podcast, which
is a mailbag. We're going to answer some of the best of the many
questions that we received on the NBA Math Twitter account. Cover a wide range
of topics here as always, But before we do that, I just have
to gloat a little bit because I won. I converted Dan to the Grant
Ruler bandwagon. He is now on board with him being a future Hall of
Famer multi time MVP, and there really aren't any reasonable questions about that.
Just look at what he's done and is wopping twenty three minutes of action.
Yeah, I mean, that's a huge sample size to go off, but
it is. It's twenty three more minutes of NBA basketball than you and I
have played combined. That's a lot, that's all. That's like all the
minutes it is, and like twenty three is a special number in basketball circles.
Anyway, I think that it's at this point it's reasonable to start the
Michael Jordan comparisons. Let's get into this mail bag. We had a bunch
of good questions. I will note we had a bunch of award questions.
I'm ignoring them because Adam and I are going to do an awards pod and
so we don't want to keep recycling the same content. And also we're taught
we're tired of talking about who's going to win MVP. Because it's just not
a debate anymore. If you ever have questions about two through five, that's
the interesting point to me right now. But we had other awards questions too,
I think about six man and about Defensive Player of the Year. We
might have even had a Most Improved Player one, but we're going to cover
those in a separate podcast. Let's start here with our usual dose of Nuggets
questions at why can't I see this ad? This is awkward? At doctor
ramblings, as why are the Nuggets perpetually overlooked? It took Yokich having an
historic year as a big man to be talked about, and some people say
he still isn't worthy of MVP and the Nugs aren't a legit championship contender.
I would like to chime in here. First, I don't think that this
is a thing. I don't know that the Nuggets have been perpetually overlooked,
and maybe we're basketball nerds and have not overlooked them. I would also say
that there are very few people who don't think he's the MVP right now,
and so we have to stop stop painting him as the MVP underdog or that
he's being slighted. Is he an underdog in the grand scheme of things,
drafted at number forty one and turning into an MVP within basically a half decade
sixty years. Yeah, for sure. But he's going to He's not going
to be consensus, He's not gonna be unanimous. He's going to be the
runaway MVP. So we need to stop, like stop this. The second
part of this question, I'm more interesting because I do think that the Nuggets
are overlooked as contenders, in large part because people didn't believe in Nicole Yokich
until maybe this season or last season, that he could be the best player
on the title contender. I think people warmed up to the idea that they
could do damage against anyone, particularly after the Aaron Gordon trade. Now,
I think the doubts spawn from mostly that they don't have Jamal Murray. And
while they have been good for the most part without him, while Michael Porter
Jr. Has for the most part since Murray's injury, been playing out of
his mind, you are going to miss that crunch time element that Jamal Murray
brings, the frum scratch shot making in addition to the playmaking, he played
tough defense in the bubble last year, Michael Porter Junior replaces only so much
of that. He has the shot making, but it's not the same yet.
He's not hitting those absurd off the dribble jumpers, and he's definitely not
setting up your offense. You might have players that could replace them by committee.
And I sat on our last podcast, I did a factor fiction saying
factor fiction, Denver has a better chance of coming out of the West than
Utah. And this is without Jamal Murray. I think it's a discussion.
I think it's a discussion. So maybe they are being overlooked in the championship
discussion. I would argue at this point that's mostly because of Jamal Murray's absence,
which, if anything, that's respect at a tip of the cat to
Jamal Murray and how much he means to this team. To me, it's
kind of like the concept of the one person who who stands up in a
crowded movie theater as unfathomable as that. Maybe these days and yells fire and
there are way more people who are quiet and accepting what's happening and watching their
movie in peace, that one person gets a lot of attention. So whether
it's with national analysts not wanting to pay attention to the Nuggets or someone like
the inaccurately named Nick Wright wanting to you know, shoot on his MVP chances.
You see what Jamal Murray tweeted, I did. Yeah, Nick wrong,
I feel so funny. Yeah, exactly, exactly. Yeah, it's
fun to pick on those outlandish takes and want to view that as an overall
lack of respect. But honestly, like, unless you're playing in LA or
Boston or New York, I think almost every fan base feels that way at
some point, especially when they're good. The other thing is, don't listen
to these people there, And I understand I'm not. I mean, if
you want to listen to him and use it as motivation, fine, yeah,
but there are better national there's better national coverage of the NBA than people
who are covering every single sport on a talk show. And Nick Wright has
to cover a wide breath of sports. So I'm not trying to insult the
work that he put in to get there. I won't do that about anyone.
I'm just not if you come to this podcast if you want more level
headed, in depth NBA coverage I'm gonna push back on that. I'm gonna
push back on that. I will. I will go after him a little
bit because of that follow follow up video where he says that the reason that
he doesn't want to talk about Nikola Yokich as the MVP is because Denver doesn't
get ratings. Like, come on, well, that's just an admission that
you're tailoring your opinions to getting people to view your show and to tune into
your show, and that there is a level of intellectual dishonesty in play there.
That to me, that's inexcusable, even if it's your job to get
people to watch your show, at least admit as such on the main platform
instead of a side video that you're putting out while driving your car. That
really pissed me off. That was the second part of my argument was these
people are playing characters. This is not I do not You're not gonna convince
me that Skip Bayless believes everything that he has said over the years, did
over Nick Right, did over Steven A. Smith. There, if there's
a level of ignorance where they're saying things they believe that are just wrong,
I think it's probably maybe they don't care to do the work. But I
would more be inclined that they were covering such a wide breath of things.
The more nuanced stuff you're not going to get from them. You don't go
there for that. And the other thing is they are trying to get ratings.
That's the name of the game. Now. You have to look at
all the engagement fucking going on in social media, look at what brand accounts
have turned into. They don't promote their own content anymore. They're not promoting
writers work. We're not even having these video clips for the most part,
unless you're a TV show like it's the who name your top five players of
all time? Would you rather have, you know, a six nine Stephen
Curry or whatever, like six three Lebron James type things. That's just the
Curry, by the way, I'm actually with you, But that's just the
name of a game now. So I I understand these people have jobs to
do, and a lot of them have worked hard to get in those positions.
And I'm not going to be able to go on and blather and talk
bullshit in front of a camera without you know, sweating bullets or stuttering all
over the place because I'd be too nerverse. There's plenty of talent there.
I cannot get myself worked up about a national sports reporter or talk show host.
And I say national sports because it's every sport. Not knowing the nuances
of my favorite sport or favorite team in a specific sport, or saying something
inflammatory because they're trying to get engagement, and what you're doing when you're quote
tweeting those takes, when you're responding to them, that's exactly what they want.
At least that's what the TV show producers want as a one hundred percent
what they want. I think, circling back to the original question about the
Nuggets, to me, the answer is that it's an overall media landscape issue
and not anything to do with the Nuggets in particular. Correct, And I
don't think it's it's not that's a great point. Because the Jazz are not
getting enough attention for having the best record in the NBA. The Suns probably
aren't either, and I think the Suns are getting more attention, or at
least relative to what they are. At the same time, people are quick
to dismiss them because it's the Suns, or they talk about oh CP three
belongs to the MVP discussion because they sucked before him, and it completely ignores
the bubble the Stris Devin Booker has made, Mkal Bridges has made, and
also the other talent that they added. Just having Jay Crowder there has been
good. Tory Craig has been absolutely monstrous for them turning to Dario chars at
the five towards the I think it was a halfway point of last year,
maybe towards the latter part of last ye or whatever. Like, there are
other things they did, but I do think you pointed out unless they are
the Lakers, the Knicks, maybe the Celtics, the Bulls, the Nets.
You want to throw those flagship market teams in there, that's also a
symptom here. So it's not probably any team with like a big three too.
Like I think the Clippers get enough attention granted LA, but brother in
LA. Yeah, so or unless you have that, Yeah, Nicole Yokis
isn't the draw that Stephen Curry is. So the Warriors are gonna get playing
of attention too, That's not that's not the award we're talking about. I
don't think it's specific to the Nuggets. I do think they're probably being undervalued.
I will give Nuggets fans this there. I still they're being undervalued in
the championship discussion even without Murray. I don't know which team i'd put them
in front of, but of those five teams in the West, I don't
think they're fifth anymore after watching them, right, But yeah, I mean
to your overall point, like it is really hard for those people to cover
national sports in general. It's hard enough to cover one league on a national
perspective. So you know, if you happen to find a podcast that you
think does a decent job of covering every team, like maybe give them a
rating and our five star rating in a review or something, Yeah, that's
a good idea, do you think so? Yeah, I think that's something
people should do. Yeah, and if look, if they're a hard one
Knox podcast, you should do it twice. That would be my recommendation.
And we're not even saying us. By the way, there are a ton
of like really good national NBA coverage go to that, like there's I'm not
gonna I'm gonna leave somebody out. I'm not gonna name anybody. We need
to make a running list and on a dock and share it and keep adding
to it. Anyway, let's move on to the next question. Thank you
for the question, Doctor Ramblings. This one comes from Kim at Kim,
Joe Biel or Joe Bill. Where do the grizz go from here? And
is this a season? Is this season of success for Memphis? They will
likely end it after losing the playing game, just like last season. Where
are the steps forward? I think the step forward is just kind of internal
growth. Mean, every single player playing significant minutes for this team right now
is under contract next year. There really isn't room to go out and get
a big external free agent addition. I don't think many of these pieces you're
gonna be shopping and blockbuster deals. But if you look up and down this
roster, there is so much talent just waiting to be plumbed. You know,
John Morant, while he is not a top five point guard like he
said he was, he has potential to get there. Jaren Jackson Jr.
You know, he wasn't available for most of this year, and I think
it's pretty obvious how much two way potential he has. Kyle Anderson, Dylan
Brooks's defense, Jonas Valentiunis, Brandon Clark, Desmond Vane, Xavier Teman,
sor like. There are enough pieces here for this to be a legitimate contender
if John Morant and Jaren Jackson Junior in particular continue to make the strides we
expect we expect them to make given the level of success they've already reached and
their relative age and inexperience levels in the NBA. So I think it's kind
of a good situation to be in where you can legitimately look at this roster
and be like, let's just run it back and we're just naturally going to
get better. Would it be great to make external editions or find another star
in the draft, shirt, of course, But given the current pieces,
I think this season is a success even if they're eliminated in the play in
game, because you're continuing to foster the growth from those pieces. And as
soon as Jackson was knocked out of the lineup for most of the year,
the expectations had to be diminished a little bit. And the fact the Grizzlies
were so competitive from start to finish and managed to get positive contributions from close
your eyes and point at the roster and there. It is like that's a
success in and of itself. I agree with everything you said. The season
is an unmitigated success to me, and your last point is most shalient to
me. Losing John Morant and still being this good, not having Jaren Jackson
Junior from most of the year still being this good, and Jarres Jackson Junior
hasn't been awesome since he came back. I actually think his best stretch of
the season was like his first two games or whatever it was. I also
don't John Morant hasn't made any sort of leap. He's good, He's still
just as good as he was last year. But this is not we're not
talking about he's made the Zion size leap here in year two or the Michael
Porter junior size leap here in year two. Not saying he's worth than Michael
Porter Junior overall. I will say the path Thorne is they still need to
get another wing. Desmond Baine looks like he's gonna be good for them in
both ends of the floor. Kyle Anderson has always been that cozy two way
player, and the fact that he's hit his threes at a higher clip this
year had actually taken them more often is huge. They need that other long
term wing and it's not Justice Winslow. Well, it's to me, it's
I know he hasn't played that much this year again, but under thirteen percent
from three the fit with John Morant. They've put him in John Morant going
up against a lot of bench heavy units this year and it's worked out.
That is not enough for me to be like, oh, there's still hope
there. Winslow can still do a lot on defense, but if you want
to put him in the starting five or in closing lineups when the game's on
the line, there's going to be an awkward offensive fit there. He needs
to hit those threes, do better work off the ball, or you need
John Morant, who shot a pretty good clip on threes, especially since April
first. He's not used to stroking these spot up jumpers in higher volumes.
You need one of them play off the other. I don't know how you
get that wing. Is it through the draft? You have made it harder
now by being good and probably being out of a lottery or being in the
very back end of it. You're not a free agent destination. However,
there's gonna be a time and it's like this season, I don't know.
I don't think they're gonna use the full breadth of their taps. They're gonna
maybe get to I think they're gonna end up operating. Isn't over the cap
team. But the year before John Morant hits that MAX money so his extension
eligibilityear, which would be next summer, they should be slay to have cap
space. And no, you're not going to get a star because it's Memphis,
but maybe that's how you know. You sign someone who can squeeze into
that combo three four spot that you don't really have right now, or you
do it via trade. Like their future draft picks are valuable, they have
a lot of now just their contracts. They're not huge and interesting players that
you can flip and I don't I don't think they're the team that's gonna roll
the dice if a Bradley Biel becomes available, even though he would be a
fantastic fit on this team. Just get imagine giving a Dylan Brooks's minis to
Bradley Biel. This team is a minor upgrade. Yeah. So, and
the final thing I'll say is is there another level of Jarren Jackson Junior that
we haven't said yet. Is he gonna end up holding up defensively at the
five? Is he going to his offense will be fine, but will he
do more off the dribble than just bombing away these super deep three? So
there are multiple path that's there. I think the most critical part of moving
forward for them is they gotta get a mainstay wing. I do think there
is the potential for them to be a sneaky free agency player for said wing,
just because if you look at what they have on the books, the
dead money owed to Gorty Jang and Dion Waiters is coming off after this season.
They have a team option for thirteen million dollars for Justice Winslow. If
you decline that option because you don't think that he can be a contributor given
all the injuries that he suffered, all of a sudden, you're looking at
like twenty million in cap space, and that could be enough to land that,
you know, not star level wing, but that solid starter who you
could need to complete this puzzle around the young guys. I don't know if
this is I thought about that too. I would probably lean towards picking up
the team options. I think I would too, just because thirteen million is
whatever, and if worst case scenario, like maybe there's a trade that you
can make in that expiring contract helps. I also don't think this is the
year to bank on signing anyone in free agency. And then when you look
at the wings after Kauai, who is the best wing that's slated to be
a free agent. That's a great question and I don't have an answer to.
I don't know if, and I don't know he would actually be a
good fit here unless you want someone with more ball skills. I don't know
if you want to call him wing, but it'd be Duncan Robinson. I
think it's the second best wing on the market after Kawai. There would be
a fun fit, for sure, it'd be an awesome fit. I think
that's why Desmond Bain has gotten so many minutes of a rookie's because they need
that shooting, and he's obviously he's deserved the minutes he's gotten. This was
an interesting question. It came from at Josh Josh kap Kaplan. But there's
a one in it. Yeah, a friend of mine, Josh Kaplan.
Oh, that's it. I like the clever way he spelt his name too,
and the question was really good, Who's your I don't want to answer,
feel free to answer this question who's your most improved player? But he
asked should all Stars be disqualified from the most improved player discussion? I think
the most improved player this year has to be Julius Randall. The leap that
he's made is just seismic, and we've talked about him enough that I don't
really feel like we need to back that up too much, just because we're
talking about a guy who went from outside the All Star conversation to a player
who might show up on the back end of some MVP ballots, and justifiably
so for Nix's team that is finally moving out of those long term doldrums.
And I think that also kind of answers the second part of Josh's question here.
I do think that All Star and All Star caliber players should be eligible.
And we've talked about this before where not every leap is the same.
Now, if you if you're improving from let's say that you can reasonably grade
a player on a one to ten scale, and jumping from a one to
a five is the same as jumping from a five to a nine in terms
of the distance between the rungs on the ladder. But that ladder jump is
a lot harder to make because it's tougher to go from good to great or
from great to historic than it is to go from bad to good. So
no, I don't think that all stars should be deemed ineligible or discounted or
anything like that personally, like I thought that Jannis should have deserved more most
improved Player love last or two years ago when he made the jump from All
NBA to MVP, because the leap that he made was still just monumental.
Yeah, I'm absolutely with you there, and I would agree that it's harder
to make if you're especially if you're an entrenched All Star. There's also a
difference where having your first All Star appearance and making a leap to there is
you know, that's part of your most improved player case. Oh, he
made his first All Star appearance, But if you're an All NBA level player,
an All Star player already and you've gotten that much better. And I
think Johanneston to Cubo is a perfect example. The was it? What was
it? What Steph year? Was it? Where it was the twenty sixteen
season. Yeah, so I was. I just that was the low hanging
fruit one. I wanted to make sure I was right though, So I
absolutely don't think they should be disqualified. I don't know that they're ever going
to be the standard. I always think that this award is going to be
aimed at trying to spot that next superstar. And that fits with Paul George
winning it. Jan Is winning it when he did. It's not all these
players, you know going on one in and that's you know, all star
level player, but never to the heights of Jannis or or Steph. And
I don't know where Julius Randall is going to end and all this, I
would say he is my pick. Had Jeremy Grant played more, I think
the expansion of his skill set was probably wider than what Randall was doing.
I guess with Randall with defense, but I do think he would have been
in. I also would say if he didn't start dealing with Planter Prasietist in
his right foot, Shais Alexander would have been up there for me too,
because this is he just took on the role of the entire offensive engine.
Just like that. He's been secondary first first two years all that he was
the Mary. So I do think someone had the opportunity to beat Julius Randall,
and that actually might have stepped on the toes of this question from at
Joe gets busy, congrats on the sex, Joe. What player improved more
than Julius Randall this year? I'll wait and silence fills the room. I
think a case. I think Shay had a case. I don't sorry,
look love Shay think he got a lot better. But Julius Randall's leap was
just so big. What was the leap? What made it bigger than Shay's
everything? I mean as nebulous an answer as that may be, Like,
we're talking about a guy who had a very exploitable weakness. You knew that
even if he was this wrecking ball who could get to the basket at will
and finish, you knew that he was going to go left every time.
You knew that he couldn't pass out of those drives. And now we're talking
about a guy who can get his own offense from all over the floor while
improving as a playmaker, who's able to make those I think it was Zach
Low who said the eleventh hour passes just out of these impossible situations, and
beyond that, he has made those offensive leaps while also becoming a defensive stalwart.
There is no portion of his game that didn't improve, and unlike Shay
Gili Alexander, he's doing it on a team that is in contention. That's
the other part of this is that Auxander supporting cast and then sure, sure,
absolutely, but I think that the improvement that Shay has undergone is and
I don't want to discredit at all, So I hope it doesn't come across
that way. But it's easier to come by when Chris Paul leaves. You
still have a relationship with Chris Paul's you're still learning from Afar, but all
of a sudden, you have unfettered access to doing whatever you want on the
offensive end on a team that is playing for absolutely nothing and not succeeding.
Well, it's succeeding and doing absolutely nothing, but that's about all it's succeeding
at. I mean, if you look at the NBA Math rolling team ratings
right now, the Thunder currently have the lowest score of any team since the
Process era Philadelphia seventy six ers. This hasn't been a good team, and
you compare that to a Knicks team that has ascended into that Eastern Conference contention
tier where it is not just a playoff lock, but the Knicks could very
well win one, maybe even two rounds if a lot goes right in that
second round. And for Randall to improve so monumentally on that team, that,
to me, it is an unassailable case. I'm just wondering if he
made the Schekula Shoan Sanders leap feels more wholesale than Julius Randall where it's I
think the biggest thing that Julius Randell added is he's hitting these step back jumpers,
step back jumpers from the baseline. There's the passing is better, but
it's been you know, he's gotten better at throwing last second passes. He
had some triple doubles even during the Lakers days and stuff. It's been there.
I get that. So the defensive one might be his most impressive improvement
to date, being as a team defender, because he and he's always had
moments of one on one he is he is the most improved player. And
had Shay lasted the entire year or what he was doing, I don't know
who I would have picked, but Shay's role was arguably more difficult to me
because of the lack of talent around him. And so he's in a developmental
year, what's supposed to be a developmental year, And I don't know how
you weigh at where it's, oh, Julie Randall's age twenty seventh season and
he's doing this and players aren't supposed to make that leap, or it's Shay
still in the conventional developmental window. But now he just doesn't have a ton
of help around him. And it was look, that was before they said
Al Horford go home. George Hill wasn't playing, he was injured. Trevor
Reason never reported to that team he is And we have another Shay questions,
So I feel like I'm gonna spoil an answer to that, so I'll just
wait. But he he had no help, just offensively. It was him.
He was creating everything for himself and for others. And I do think
there's a chance that I would have voted him first, and I do think
there's a chance that he improved more, however you want to frame it,
then Julius Randall did this season, So personally, I don't really look at
ages or experience level or anything. When I'm talking about the most improved player,
it's solely just like value added this season, level reached this season versus
the same things in the previous year, which is why I tend to be
more okay than a lot of people with including rookie our second year players in
that conversation. Even though there's definitely a camp that wants to immediately discredit sophomores,
and validly so because they're expected to improve more coming off of that first
season, I just don't view it that way. So the age and the
experience level, to me at least, is usually pretty irrelevant. I think
that flip flop though the age and experience level doesn't matter me. I was
just wondering, if you've viewed Julius Randles is more impressive because it's less predictable
in the sense that oh, players his age don't improve. I go back
and forth on whether there's sophomore it's more just about the team that the improvement
happened on. I think that's fair. Let's get to so we have two
TPA questions here. The first one comes from Curig is bad? Does TPA
adjust four minutes played. Ie, is it a measure of how many points
Julius Randall, Hey, there's your guy adds per minute played or total value
added increasing with minutes played. Yeah, I mean kind of sort of.
In The full explanation is in the gloss roy on the NBA math website.
But TPA is looking at box plus minus vpm from Basketball Reference and adjusting for
possessions played, which is slightly different than minutes, but it does still take
volume into account. Theory being a player, it's looking at value added relative
to a league average player as best we can, and you know, as
we've said in multiple episodes, it's by no means a perfect metric, and
context in the eye tests are still important here, but the basic theory is
that a player who is twice as good and plays half as many minutes as
the player who is not twice as good is adding about the same amount of
value. I want to give a special love to this question from att John
J kp One. I hope I am butcher. The pronunciation of the app
there too badly took screenshots of the TPA definition, so I don't know if
you if you saw this question, and I guess it was a threefold question.
But the first part of it was, since there's an ongoing MVP discussion
and the most the most used chart is with TPA, I went to check
out TPAs calculated, and I wonder if I understand this correctly. So if
a player plays more minutes, he will get the same points as a player
who plays less, but it is two times more effective if he plays half
as many minutes. Yeah, I mean, that's that's the same example I
was just trying to give. The second part of this was, is yokis
so high because of minutes played and because the passes or assists of center are
considered of more value than those of guards. Yes, because he's played more
minutes. I believe that as of recording, the only player who has played
more minutes in the NBA is Julius Randall. Might be lately off there,
just because I haven't looked at that table on a little bit. But no,
the positional designations don't matter. We just include those for easy sorting purposes
and easy reference. But you know, especially if we're only delineating between five
positions, that's tough to do in today's fluid NBA positional schemes. So no,
he's so high because he's had a historically good season, and also because
the metric tends to favor players who produced both assists and rebounds due to some
interaction effects, and his number is probably a little bit inflated. But he's
also running away with first place in TPA, So it's hard to say,
like if you deflated it, what would happen? But I think he would
still be in first place this year. Colson answer is the third and final
part of your question, where it was if this is not the reason you'll
kid just so high, which it wasn't while you were explaining why is he
so high? And you just explained that Adam, So thank you for the
question, John J. Kp One, and hopefully Adam provided the answer that
you were looking for. At G Park zero one asked has any second year
player made as big of a leap this season as Michael Porter Jr. I
think a lot of nuggets questions. I think that you can throw probably RJ.
Barrett into that conversation. I think that you can include Zion Williamson.
Yeah, include Zion. I think you can. You can, And I
don't know how much dis counts because he's been injured for most of the year,
but DeAndre Hunter was certainly on pace to be in that discussion. Yeah,
if he had stayed even remotely healthy. Keldon Johnson maybe probably not,
but there's definitely been some improvement there. But I think I think you're looking
at yeah, potentially. I mean, he didn't even play as a rookie
like he's improved a ton. No, I think it's I think it's Zion
R. J. Barrett and Michael or as the standouts who have made pretty
substantial leaps this season. I'm going to go ahead and throw use all those
names. And also, he played twenty games. We're gonna give it to
DeAndre Hunter. That's more this season, So all right, shout out to
him. Next question comes from at Brandon At Brandon Abert, this is only
ten gently related to the Nuggets, and I actually thought it was a fascinating
question. Would it be better to build a team around Shade Gil, Just
Alexander or Michael Porter Jr. When players are at a similar level, which
I do think that SGA and MPJ are. I tend to default to the
guys who have the most important roles, and as good as Michael Porter Junior
is and as important as his shot making ability has been, especially now that
he's shown so much more ability to generate his own looks and not just serve
as this incredibly tall, incredibly accurate spot up weapon. Gil Just Alexander initiates
possessions and he involved his teammates and he creates his own shot on a more
regular basis, and just by virtue of roles, I would want to build
around the guard, right, and the two things that I'll look at just
to differentiate, I essentially have the same answer as you, but looking at
just the disparity and how they're getting their shots. Eighty seven point one percent
of Shay Giljis Alexander's baskets are going when unassisted this year, his made baskets
among every player to appear in at least fifteen games, that's four hundred and
fifty seven players. He ranks first in that metric, so no one has
had more of their made baskets go unassisted than him. And whereas you look
at Michael Porter Jr. About twenty percent of his baskets have gone on assisted
this year because he plays alongside Jamal Murray, Nicolo Kitch, even Amante Morris
Vacruno Compazzo will Barton those guys and that number has not ticked up a ton
since Murray's injury and Morris's injury. Barton's injury, it's around, it's still,
you know, it's around like twenty two, twenty three percent when I
checked a couple of days ago. Can he get to the level where he
is hitting more baskets that were self created? I absolutely believe so. Will
he ever be someone though, who's also initiating the offense in that and if
you are asking him to do that, does his efficiency hold? And right
now, I think Shay Gili Alexander has shown that he can hold this difficult
role while still holding his efficiency. The only other players who are averaging over
twenty points and five assists per game while matching Shay's efficiency on two's fifty four
point seven percent and three's forty one point eight percent, Steph k D and
Yokich's seems like good company. It's okay company sucks, which is why he's
not gonna win MVP, right you know we can't. He has no possibility
of ever ascending past a lot of like the previous twenty five MVP winners.
This next question comes from zach at Zack Snyder. I found it interesting because
I've been asked some variation of this question on other podcasts and radio shows this
year, and I'm actually a little bit surprised by it. How far is
too far when it comes to tanking? And are any teams doing too much
this year? I will say this question differs and is actually more interesting to
me than the version that I've mostly gotten, which is are too many teams
tanking? And must the NBA be concerned about it? Because I would argue
this is a separate question from that a little bit in the sense that there
are still like twenty three teams actively competing for something right now, and normally
we would have a third in the league or more having thrown in the towel
by now. Yeah, I have tended to fall more on the pro tanking
side of the spectrum here. I wish that it wasn't incentivized. But so
long as it is, like you're not breaking the rules, as long as
you're not like shutting down healthy young players and hindering their developments, like okay,
like you're not always competing to win, that's generally something the front office
is doing. If you have a coaching staff. That's actively sabotaging your ability
to win a game. If you have players who are turning down last second
shots because they'd rather lose than win, that's when you have a real problem.
But that's not what we see. It's generally front offices making smaller scale
moves or not putting together the most competitive roster possible because they're incentivized to do
so, and if they're willing to accept that, it could potentially create a
losing culture that needs to be shifted when the talented pieces are in place.
If they're willing to accept that, it might lead to diminished local TV ratings
and a paucity of nationally televised games. So be it. They know what
the price is and they're clearly willing to do it because the draft, as
archaic and institution as it may be, is set up to incentivize being bad.
If you're not really good, there is no reward for who are on
that mediocrity treadmill. The only thing I have an issue with if you're going
to tank to try and exploit the way that the lottery is still set up,
I'm actually more fine with it than ever because you're taking more of a
risk since there are flattened dodds and you have less of a chance of getting
that top pick. Now that being said, I have an issue with the
sending players home or not playing them when they are healthy. Al Horford's a
perfect example. I agree with that, and they're also it's a terrible look
for the MBA to me when they were putting pressure on the New Orleans Pelicans
to play Anthony Davis after he demanded a trade, and that really could have
fucked up their franchise because he gotten injured. Would that have impacted his trade
value? Maybe not. The Lakers wanted him so bad they're bidding against themselves
and gave up a ton. Anyway, it was worth it because we're talking
about Anthony Davis, so there's not really much risk of getting injured. You're
in hassle. But now because it's Al Horford and because it's the Thunder and
they're not this marquee National TV draw, he should be there. If they
didn't want him on the team, they should have figured out a way to
trade him and had that been getting rid of an asset in the process,
which they might have to do over the summer. So I've been issue with
that, if he had a legitimate injury, I don't have a problem slow
playing it with you know, shame. It might be a bad example because
I was actually reading a few days ago that the tear of his plan or
fascio was actually pretty serious. So that's a bad example. But if it's
you know, lou Dort hasn't been playing a ton and I don't know if
he's trying to play through pain, which is why he's still playing, or
if they're just you know, oh here and there, like the stuff like
that, and it's the Al Horford one is the extreme. I'm not really
a fan of that. I get it from a team's perspective of why you
do it, But then you know what, in the situation where the Pelicans
and Anthony Davis, they should have been allowed to have told him to go
home, So it has to be I get I'll say, I only have
a problem with it if it's not going to be equitable, if there's only
certain teams can do it, or only certain players can just be sent away,
like Al Horford is not Anthony Davis, so he doesn't have to play.
Don't make everyone have to play. Then if those are the rules,
is this an old man yelling at cloud moment, I feel like a very
little man. Take we can go with that a few it would make you
feel better about yourself. I'm willing to let you have that would make me
feel much worse about myself. Actually, okay, well, then definitely we'll
accept it. This next question comes from at Tucson, John what player had
the fewest starts and won the MVP that year? I had brought up the
list of MVP winners, and I don't know that this wasn't. I couldn't
sort by games started, but the fewest games that an MVP has played in
and won, I don't. We can't count nineteen ninety nine carmelone forty nine
games because I was a fifty game season. Nineteen seventy seven. Nineteen seventy
eight Bill Bill Walton played in fifty eight games and won the MVP. And
that's by after that, no one else has played under sixty and one.
And that's actually pretty incredible because Lebron James won it in twenty eleven twenty twelve.
We played in sixty two of the sixty six games, so Jannis won
in twenty plenty sixty three. But the season ended up being abbreviated, so
Bill Walton that that year, him playing fifty eight games is clearly the fewest
amount of starts because those are the games that he played in. I don't
know, you know, is there any MVP. I would have to go
looking at the list. None of them jump out to me. But there's
not an MVP that was coming off the bench at some point then all of
a sudden, wasn't I don't know that. I don't think any player of
that. I don't think so either would be in the MVP discussion to begin
with. And even that Bill Walton season was kind of weird because it was
almost like he was getting rewarded for what he'd done the previous season where he
was even better, he was healthier and he carried Portland to a championship,
and then kind of like he was really good during that nineteen seventy seven seventy
eight season. But it was definitely a bit of a reputation play. He
got outplayed by George Gervan, David Thompson, and Kareem Abdul Jabbar. That
should he should not have won MVP that season. If you want to make
the argument that he should have the previous year, sure, but I'm I
don't want to go there. In seventy eight, I want to ask if
should Carmelon would have won his ninety eight ninety nine MVP Award. No,
yeah, okay, I wanted to make sure we're in lockstep there. Carmelone
have been allowed to be legally playing basketball would probably be the better question at
that point. Let's get to our final question, which was like super specific
and I'm totally here for it. At Bryson seventy seven asked which player has
the most twenty seven point games in NBA history? I have a follow up
question I'd like to direct at Bryson, what did we miss that this was
a question? But if you so, if you could let us know,
because Adams I have no clue. Do you care to guess who is the
leader in all time twenty seven point games? Exactly twenty seven points, not
over twenty seven points. I mean, I feel like the safe guess is
the all time scoring leader Kareem abdul Jabbar, especially because unlike like Wilt Chamberlain
and Michael Jordan, he doesn't have quite as many of those ridiculous scoring outputs.
So I'll go with Kareem. It is Kareem. I'm convinced that you
cheated now or that you read my face when you were guessing beforehand. Kareem
has seventy five twenty seven point games. Lebron is in second with seventy two,
karmelone third with sixty five, Kobe Bryant in fourth with fifty five,
and he's tied with Dirk who also had fifty five. So those are the
top five and exactly twenty seven points played. I want to know why,
what is significant about that? Right? Here's my follow up because this might
be the answer, is which rookie has the most twenty seven point games in
NBA history? Which way? What was the question? Which rookie has the
most twenty seven point games in NBA history? We can actually filter that.
I believe I've already done it. You're not allowed to cheat. Now.
Which rookie has the most twenty seven point games? Oh? My god?
Is it Alan Iverson? It is not. Iverson had two had two twenty
seven point games. I'm guessing that Anthony Edwards might be the impetus here because
he's part of a twelve way tie for fourth place with five twenty seven point
games, trailing Alonso Morning who had six, Steve Francis who had six,
and Mitch Richmond at eight. That I never would have guessed that that's even
more of a specific question than than we actually got. The list of players
who have had five twenty seven point games as rookies is really interesting too,
because there are like a number of all time grades among that dozen. It's
Kareem, Steph Curry, Terry Dischinger, Anthony Edwards, Tyreek Evans, Ron
Harper, Michael Jordan, Pete Maravich, David Robinson, Ralph Sampson, Colin
Sexton, and Carl Anthony Towns. All right, do you think here's the
real question. Do you think Lebron is going to surpass Kareem in twenty seven
point games exactly? He's three games behind, so he need four more twenty
seven point exactly performances. I think I think he will. I can't say
I've thought about this question before. He just now, this was a great
mailbag. Again, We actually had we had a bunch probably about ten questions
on the awards that we just ignored this time because we were going to do
an awards pod. But thank you guys, for sticking with us through both
parts until next time. Well, if you have not given us a rating,
reviewed us on iTunes, please go do that. I don't care if
you use iTunes or not. Adam doesn't care either, None of us care.
Head over to iTunes, search Hardwood, Knox, throw us a five,
start rating, no matter what, and then you can write whatever the
hell you want and the reviews. Do we suck? Do you hate that
my nose looks like the guys from Despicable Means? I might have already used
that outro once for us. Do you hate that Adam has such inflammatory takes
that he should probably be on Fox talking about sports? Whatever you hate in
there, throw us to five. Start rating at all anyway, and definitely
subscribe and download every person wherever you get your podcasts, and feel free to
let us know if we are only coming out of your left ear. Because
I know that was a technical issue last week. I apologize for that.
I figured it out. It's actually Adam's fault when you really dig into it,
for getting vaccinated. Shame on you for being a responsible citizen. Until
next time, I'll leave you with a shout out to the one, the
only, the career all time leader in twenty seven points exactly games. Kareem
Abdul Jabbat, Sugar Ray, Leonard, Roberto Duran, Marvelous Marvin Hagler,
and Thomas Hearns, legends whose four way rivalry define one of the greatest errors
in boxing history, relive their decade of dominance in the new Showtime Sports documentary
The Kings, a four parts series premiering Sunday, June sixth, only on Showtime