Speaker 1: But is up Fellowshiko's I am Dan Valley coming at
you as always with my CERTI five fantab you as
co host, mister Grant Hughes. Is that time of year
we're just gonna talk. We're gonna break down some of
the latest twenty twenty five NBA trained Dead Biden removes
as well as some news just to play catch up
on some stuff that we've recently missed or deemed noteworthy.
Bigger announcement though, before we get started, Grant and I
kept our pre podcast vamping till like twenty minutes today,
which is I would say about a third of what
we've been going lately. Do you feel more energetic to
now do the actual podcast that you've just cut down
exponentially cut down how much that we were talking and
critically thinking before we hopped on.
Speaker 2: Don't you assume that that forty minutes we didn't take up,
we'll just get re inserted into the actual recorded portion
of our conversation. I feel like that hour is gonna
get eaten up one way or the other.
Speaker 1: What tangents can these rumors that we used catch We'll see.
Speaker 2: We'll see how punchy it gets.
Speaker 1: How how quickly, will this be dated? There is also
the other question here, yeah.
Speaker 2: You're born, well, I feel like I don't think it's
gonna be too dated, Like there's we're gonna talk about
Jimmy Butler at some point, which I may have just
ruined anyway, so.
Speaker 1: You might even be if you're listening to this on audio,
you will probably hear about Jimmy Butler at the end.
If you're watching on YouTube, go check out our separate
video on Jimmy Butler. Then I'm probably just gonna put
out immediately because yeah, he is actually fun and it well,
I'll save it for them. But what have you made?
Just very quickly before we just kind of dig into it,
have you made anything? Do you find like this year's
rumor mill is happening, but do you find it repetitive
and stale more so than other years. I just feel
like we have this conversation we were doing our trade
deadline big board, and are why aren't these players on
the market. It just feels like we're recycling the same,
like three to five names.
Speaker 2: I think that's it's definitely true that that's what's happening
right now. Now. I can't you know, like I can't
remember last week, So it's hard for me to to
say like, oh, it's different than last year or the
year before, because to me, it always kind of feels
like that we we're waiting for, you know, we have
a handful of names, and then we're waiting for maybe
some late editions or some developments that like increase the
pool of players we're talking about this time of year.
So I don't know, do you think it's I get
the way you're asking the question. It does seem like
you think this is different than years past in terms
of like just scarcity of people to talk about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I don't know why I feel that way,
because you're right to an extent that it is always
like last year it was Og and Pascal Siakham and
that was basically kind of it. So it's on the
same trajectory. And we've had now in a couple of seasons.
Last year we got Siakam and Og were traded like
pretty well before the deadline, and then this year we
had the Shrewder trade, we had the DFS trade, and
now we have the Jimmy Butler trade request and there's
the stuff going on with dearon Fox. So maybe it
should technically be more expansive, but I don't think. I
guess what's interested or disappointed me the most is I
don't think we've had a like surprise seller or buyer
sort of emerge or even a plurality of it to
where Okay, you could say the Kings, maybe they're going
to be a surprise seller, but we don't think that,
even as they sit in twelfth in the West. And
not that that's a bummer, but it just makes for
a repetitive discussion, I think a lot of the time,
which is why parsing through the Room or Milt was like, Okay,
with the stuff we're going to cover, maybe we've heard
some of it before, we were trying to focus on
things that were a little bit more novel.
Speaker 2: Well, why do you think that is? Why do you
think you have that feeling this year is a parody
or is there any of the other stuff that we've
thrown out about, like what's different under the new CBA.
Speaker 1: If I believed it was parody, I would favor it
because I love the idea of and I think there's
a ton of parody right now. I really do think
whether you believe that the new Collective Bargaining Agreement has
accelerated the neutering of the transaction market. Or if you
just think that teams are still taking some time to
kind of figure out what they're gonna do, it's one
or the other. But I really do think that that's
the biggest offshoot right now. And it's even the amount
of people that we talk to, like smart people who
cover this for a living and are way more nuanced
about the CBA and stuff. The degree to which they're
still trying to figure things out almost terrifies me a
little bit. Yeah, because it's just everyone's now making mistakes,
which is I don't understand. It was convoluted to begin with,
in the sense of, well, if you're a team that
has a certain amount of salary, you're gonna have to
factor in this player's bonus coming in, so he's definitely
accounting for more money than outgoing. And they've made it
even more convoluted. And there are a lot of smart
people working in the league, and maybe they'll figure it
out and maybe we'll get fireworks by the trade deadline,
but like these big time trades, I almost feel like
they're done in the red. Like Jimmy Butler probably gets moved,
But like the A d Aaron Fox type situation, I
just find it very hardly something like that gets remedied
mid Like remember when Anthony Davis requested a trade in
the middle of the season that eventually didn't get moved.
But I just I'm wondering it feels like that's what
we're dealing with. But do you think that I'm just
kind of sensationalizing the currency of it all?
Speaker 2: No, I mean, I think there's definitely something happening, but
you got to weigh it against We're still a month
out from the deadline, and even in years where the
deadline has been insane, there's been that like January and
you know, the first few days of February just right
up to the deadline always feel like, well, is anything
gonna happen? And then you know, we've had years where
in the two hours around the deadline it's just chaos
where everything's happening, and all the talk about like, well,
seems like it's gonna be quiet or there's only a
couple teams that are it Just so that's like always
on the table, I think, but I do, so that's
what you're weighing against the feeling that I kind of
share that really, like, other than I guess Butler and Fox,
the guys we've been talking about and everybody's been talking
about in terms of trade candidates and teams that might
make trades are like exactly the same as they were
in August or whatever, you know what I mean, Like
when we were doing a bunch of preseason centered thinking,
you would have pegged the Nets as a team that's
gonna trade guys, right, and like that's just been true
the whole time, and like, well, the Bulls are going
to try to move Lavine, Like he's been a guy
we've talked about for months, and there's just not that
many new additions other than the prominent ones we've we've highlighted,
so like that is a real thing. I think maybe
the differences it's it's been the same names since before
the season started, and that's not always the case. It
seems like the names we fixate on in other like
pre deadline years, some of them or more of them
emerge like during the year when oh this team went
sideways and they got to rebuild. Like it's just been
the same stuff since the summer, And maybe that's part
of like why it feels.
Speaker 1: That way with the exception of Fox again Butler Butler
at Butler look at Yeah, like I don't know, one
year left, so maybe it'll still be chaotic, But these
the chaos was a little bit more predictable I think
with kind of each passing years. Maybe what is it?
Also the thing we didn't mention and like how much
do injuries have to do with this? Like is Philly
less likely to be aggressive this year? The same with Orlando.
I think you could even make the case Memphis like
kind of just the way they went about the door
Afhony Smith negotiations, just kind of like they've been banged up. Yeah,
they're super deep, and they didn't know about the John
Moran injury necessarily at the time, but there's probably just
the layer of skepticism among teams like that. Where's well,
let's I mean even ok, see, they're not a team
that I necessarily should think would make a trade, but
they just have this all star send on the bench
and there's only played a handful of games this year.
Why would you make any of these major moves when
you're either one worried about your team staying healthy or
you're still trying to get really critical information about your
team as currently constructed.
Speaker 2: That's definitely part of it too, because you look the teams. Yeah,
I think that's a good thing to point out. I
don't know. It's always like a combination of factors. And again,
we may get to the first week of February and
things really start to pop off, and then the deadline
is shockingly active. We'll see. But I think you're right,
And now that we've talked about it, I do think
you're right that there does feel like there's something different
this time. It's just like it can't be a coincidence.
We got a new CBA, like everybody's still trying to
figure out, like how to a fault.
Speaker 1: That's what everybody says, is that too much?
Speaker 2: Pretty much?
Speaker 1: We begin I was about to say as always, but
that's just not true. We begin with Cam Johnson updates.
I'll take this one. Cam Johnson's market is heating up.
Grant per ESPN's Brian Windhorst. Execs around the league apparently
expect Brooklyn will get more than one first if they
move him. I don't know if that means two first
or if they think that they want to take back
bad money or if they'll get a prospect. There were rumblings,
though this is per Michael Scoto Scatto of Hoops Hype
at the GVUE showcase, that OKC is interested in Cam Johnson,
not necessarily a new team linked to him, but like
having the Thunder formally linked to him, that is a
little bit new. They never let anything weak, though, so
you got to take that with a doss skepticism. The
Kings love more than them later, but they've been consistently interested,
per Sam Amic of The Athletic, and the Lakers have
also readed interest, but they are currently prioritizing Jonas valid
Scheunas because obviously and Johnson for just some notes on him.
He is two years and forty three point five million
dollars left on his deal after this one. And he
also did in Thursday night's game turn his ankle. At
the end of it he was on crutches, but per
Brian Lewis of the New York Post, x rays came
back negative and so I would still circle him as
a name to watch.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and if anything, I think the injury just like
we probably won't see him before the deadline. If it's
you know, if it's like a two to four week
ankle sprain, which maybe it's not even that bad. It's
hard to tell with the information we have, but that's
one where it's like the Nets should just not play
him for several reasons, like not the least which being
they will lose more if they don't play him. But uh, yeah,
I don't know of those three teams, the Thunder, the Kings,
and the Lakers, do you like or love the fit
on any of them? For Cam Johnson, which is weird
because he's the theory of him is he's like, oh,
he's a value add no matter what I think.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's he's a universal fit. So you don't hate
the idea, but I don't know that it. Let's use
Sacramento as an example. He's not gonna be the acquisition
that just turns around their season. And if you're looking
at their season through a lens of a singular acquisition,
I mean then you're thinking more of a nuclear trade,
and so that I just don't if I'm the King,
because of right now, you can't trade this year's first
round picks. You're trading a conditional twenty twenty seven first
round pick, and then what because that's not the only
like in the Trey Lyles and Kevin Hurder, that's not
gonna get it done. There's gonna have to be other
stuff included. But he does fit on all these teams.
I mean, are you a little I would almost rule
the Laker they acquire Dorian Phinney Smith, and it feels
like they might have expanded that deal at the time
if they were going to get Cam Johnson as well,
and if the Nets want more than one first round
pick the Lakers, I mean, you're not giving up both
of your distant first round picks to get Cam Johnson.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And so that leaves the Thunder, which is like, yeah,
you would love to have a dead eye, high volume
catch and shoot guy on that team, and they just
can easily have the best offer if they want to.
I don't know if you, well, what do you think
about the thunderfit? To me, that's like, of the options,
that's pretty clearly the best. But even then it's like,
I mean, do they think I don't know that they
feel like they need to do that or anything close
to it.
Speaker 1: I don't think they should feel like they need to
do that, But I think, look, the framework there is
Usman Jang and then Aaron Wiggins or Isaiah Joe and
those two are trade eligible on January fifteenth. If you're
the Thunder, are you doing Aaron Wiggins and Usman Jang
for Cam Johnson?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I do. If it costs me to
additionally two firsts. Probably not.
Speaker 1: If you're attaching more than one first to that, it
has to be a hard No. I might be way
too high on Aaron Wiggins to be cool. I think
we've established that on this podcast. But I don't know.
I it's just so tough because Okay, so if you're
getting Cam Johnson, do you assume that they're viewing him
as someone who would be, if not a go to member,
a candidate to close with them.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's the thing is that's such a high
bar to clear. We've talked about that. I would view
him more as like he can just occupy the Aaron
Wiggins slot. Very different players, but like give him thirty
percent more minutes than you were giving Wiggins or something
like that. So I guess the answer is no, I
don't think he just suddenly is a closer because I
but you could, though, if you believe you've got sufficient
defense from your other positions, which probably you do the
value of him around Shay driving, like clearing some even
more space for him. That's I mean, there could be
some real returns there. So I don't think you definitely
close with him, but at least you know, we're at
the point with the Thunder where they're so good. It's
just talking about like, well, what if he just gives
them an option they didn't have before that they use
in like game four of a playoff series to swing
it like that that could be worth it to a
team like them. And by the way, like I balked at, oh,
if it's two first, I don't think I do it.
If there's any team that can just throw an extra
first in there and not miss it, it's obviously them, right,
So like first for them is different than one for
a lot of teams.
Speaker 1: So if it was two of you, let's just say
V two worse first that they own, which is probably
their own probably, And then like what though, because if
you're giving it, the thing with them is, I know
not all their players are playing enough, but they're still
good players. And then I run into it. So if
you're getting Cam Johnson for usman Jang plus a rotation player?
Are you just playing Cam? Like, let's use Aaron Wiggins
as the example. That's twenty minutes a game that you
could find. Where are the rest coming from k Aj
Mitchell or Kenrich Williams, Yeah, or maybe less of Isaiah
Joe At that point, it just and then it's well,
then do newter the value of you know, an Isaiah
Joe specifically. It's just it's weird because they're so good,
and I do think they probably could use what Cam
Johnson does, but I'm it's it's weird because I'm not
advocating against them acquiring someone who needs to be a
part of their closing lineup, but I almost feel like,
if they're gonna do something that requires more than first
round equity, I guess what I'm getting a is nothing
in terms of player salary that they're including I view
as throwaway. Maybe Usman Jang at this point, sure, but
you're not gonna you don't view Lou Door or Aaron
Wiggins or Isaiah Joe is throwaway salary, right Like those
deals for Joe and Wiggins specifically are really good.
Speaker 2: They are. I think I think everything's sort of different
though that like the evaluation process for the Thunder feels
different because you, yeah, like Wiggins and Joe would be
like heavy minute rotation players for twenty six other teams
probably like twenty seven maybe, and so it's like, yeah,
that that's the value of those guys to other teams.
Their value to the Thunder just isn't the same because
they're not at that level. So like it's I almost
think you have to view values in a trade hypothetical
trade like this like relatively, because like I said, Johnson
might be someone that oh, Dort's gone cold in this
playoff series. And by the way, I'm only gonna talk
about the Thunder in playoff series terms because like we
just the regular season is done as far as they're concerned,
Like we've seen enough, so.
Speaker 1: There's not maybe Dallas in a seven game series and
we did see it last year. To be fair, I
just I look at the West right now, and what
team has convinced you that they can touch Okay see
with a ten foot po.
Speaker 2: No, that's absolutely right. So that's why we have to
talk about him in these terms. And it's like, I
don't think Joe or Wiggins are guys that against the
best like they could they could swing a playoff series
if if I don't know, I'm trying to think of
past examples where like Joe has two games where he's
like seven of nine from three or something, he like
Terrence Man's against the Jazz just has like one of
those games and you win the series. For that reason,
I don't think that's gonna happen at the higher levels
of the postseason, whereas Johnson might just be consistently good
enough at giving you spacing that he does like have
a meaningful impact. Or I think he's just more likely
to have a meaningful impact on a playoff series. Probably,
And so for the Thunder, that's like the answer to
the should we trade him for him or not? Question?
If if it's like, yeah, he might swing game four
in the second round, like then you should do it, probably,
you know what I mean. Like that's reductive, But I
feel like their analysis just has to be pretty different
than a lot of other teams.
Speaker 1: Is there any other team of ones that aren't mentioned?
I know the Warriors, there's been reports that they were
at least they've looked at him. But are there any
kind of off the beaten track teams that you think
should be a in on Cam Johnson.
Speaker 2: I think you just got to look for teams that
need shooting, and so that would leave you with the
Houstons and Orlando's and whatevers. Even though like positionally that's
not that neither of those teams are like, oh, we
need a combo forward, like we're set in both of
those locate. I'm trying to think, like Minnesota needs more spacing.
We'll talk about some of that shortly. It's got to
be a good team. It's got to be a team
with playoff aspirations. I think because you're not Cam Johnson's
on the nets right now, they don't view him as
a building block. So any other bad team that he
went to that would be the same case.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, Denver would be interesting, but them just getting
there is it's probably gonna cost. You're giving up a
distant conditional first round pick and then probably have to
give up Julian Strather as well, and the machinations behind
that are so complex.
Speaker 2: I mean, slotting him into the MPG role and just
reducing the cost of that role has some appeal because
you're getting eighty five ninety percent of MPG and Cam
Johnson at like what half the cost basically.
Speaker 1: So then if you're Denver, you're doing part of the
value of giving up a young kid and a distant first.
But if you're the Nets, is that like if your view,
I mean, if you're the Nets, I actually probably would
do that deal if you can figure out the math, right,
that feels rich. But you're not doing what'd you do
for MPJ and the pick alone? You're not doing it
for MPJ alone, right.
Speaker 2: I don't think so. I think you're gonna need a
pick because MPJ does make a lot of money, and
they do have free agency aspirations. It seems like or
maybe they don't care if they don't care about being
the only team with forty million bucks to spend, like
which given the free agents that are available, I get it,
But yeah, I think there'd be appeal there.
Speaker 1: I do have a question about the Nets through this lens,
so I'll get to that a second. What about Memphis?
Did you mention them?
Speaker 2: No? I think that's another one. Just more spacing, more
shooting would be nice.
Speaker 1: If you're Brooklyn, though, you know, I don't think you, like,
is there an urgency to move him? You're you're officially
bad enough now, right, So you don't need to look
at this and say, well, we need to get even
worse because he's probably not gonna ruin your tank next season.
And I would argue, with two years left on his deal,
you're not gonna get exponentially more for him right now
with let's say two and a half seasons less as
opposed to two or one and a half seasons than
you would. And I almost wonder, what if you are
bad enough next season, but you see the outlines of
a good team and you have all this cat flexibility,
and you know you're gonna be welcoming into high lottery picks.
He is someone who, yes he's older, but he could
streamline the offensive process for everybody because what he's best
at not as much as a motion shooter or some
other guys, but he's best at spacing the floor.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's probably right about the urgency, Like, yeah,
he's not, especially if he's gonna miss however much time
with his ankle. And then like he's very much a
dependent I don't mean that in a super negative way,
but it's like he's not get in you three wins
that you otherwise wouldn't have gotten from because of the
lack of talent around him. But like, yeah, it would
be a very different conversation next year when when you're
trading for a year and a half of him versus
just like the rental. Now we're like three years down
the timeline. So I think that's right. And it may
just be the case where teams clear their books a
little better or like just have a better sense of
how to maneuver in this CBA, and by next year
your options are just way wider for like where you
could send him and then the offers maybe get better
than that. But if you could get if you can
get to first for him right now, I think I
think you should expect to not do better than that
as you move forward.
Speaker 1: Well, hold on, what about Pocom Dottier, Tyler Kohlick and
that Washington first that probably won't be a first round pick.
Speaker 2: I mean, if Tyler Kohlick had had thirty six points
in both of the games he played, yeah, that's legit.
It's pretty impressive double header for anybody that didn't that
doesn't up on the Tyler Coleck news. He thirty six
in a G League game and then played what twelve
minutes for the Knicks that night.
Speaker 1: He doesn't get a Z one segment. I apologize next sens,
I actually want to ask you this because I was
talking about it to myself following the Doring Phiney Smith trade.
Do you make anything of the Nets trade so far
have required them to take back zero long term money?
It was something I circled, like put a pin in
to watch to say, are they trying to be like
get aggressive or funky with their cap space over the summer?
And I think this player, Cam Johnson specifically would be
the good barometer for that, because if they wind up
moving him and it's for either a cheaper contract or
another expiring contract, I'm gonna start looking at them and
be like, all right, what is happening this summer that
you didn't take back any long term money?
Speaker 2: Yeah. I think that's something to keep an eye on
for sure. I think that the Shrewder, certainly the Shrewder
trade I think was made at least with some part
of it was motivated by we got to start losing
some games, and let's get rid of like the only
ball handler we have to our offensive initiator we have
that's not Cam Thomas, who was hurt anyway, and the
trade went down. I think that was part of it.
In DFS probably had some of that involved, because you
don't really why wouldn't you wait till the deadline on
any of those guys? So that the timing, I think
it has to do with trying to lose games and
maximize the value of that twenty five pick they got back.
But they're already among the precious They are already pegged
as the team that's got the most cap space, right
like forty million plus?
Speaker 1: What else did you try to do?
Speaker 2: I mean, if Sean Marks loves to have two max slots, we.
Speaker 1: Know that, Like they can get to seventy five now
because they're getting rid of Dorny Venispi's player option. If
they depending on where draft picks land, that they own.
It's like if they took back it's just something. I
don't expect them to be prioritizing cap space. But if
they don't take back real money in a Cam Johnson deal,
I'm gonna have there's gonna be that meme face like, hey,
what's going on here? Like, what's going on here?
Speaker 2: So they got the twenty six back too, right, so
this this should be a two year thing. Otherwise, what right?
Speaker 1: But do they do it as are they do they
just anticipate? Could they be trying to read the market
and say they're gonna be some teams who are gonna
give up some batshit wild stuff to get off of
bad contracts this summer I assumed we would get there
at some point. This summer felt a little quick, but
again depending on how Brooklyn acts at the trade that line,
it's just something I'm kind of monitoring.
Speaker 2: You've just sold me on that idea. That's that's the
smartest route, right, Let's be the dumping ground for a
year or two, like we'll take Zion like whatever you know.
Speaker 1: And don't jump the market like the Pistons did this
past summer where they like basically gave up something to
take on Tim Martoway Junior.
Speaker 2: Yeah, No, I think that's a great way to look
at it. We should move on. That's a lot of
nets talk, although they warranted it. We've gone on here
to the Chicago Bulls, mostly Zach Levine centered here. The
framework this is for Mike Scatto of Hoops Hype. The
framework of an MPJ and Zeke Nagi for Leavine Swap
is not gaining any traction. Can you believe it? Uh?
P Scato? The Bulls don't want Zeke Nagi's deal. Neither
do the Nuggets. Uh the Nuggets? Do you like when
I just editorialized on your notes? I love it all
this time on the Nuggets are worried about defense and
don't have the draft equity to send nag somewhere else.
So it's just kind of, you know, we don't want them,
you take them stuck type of situation. So are there
which if any team should actually be going after Levine?
Like where if you had to guess, is he gonna
wind up? And is there a stronger chance he doesn't
get moved? So that that's like that may be illustrative
of what you're talking about at the top of Like
there's just a general chilling, even among the names that
have been there all season, Like it's crazy to me
that there is a chance Levine doesn't move. And it'll
be for reasons beyond the Bulls being stupid about stuff
like this. It'll be because like the offers, like teams
are just afraid of the years and dollars, and it's
just it's not how it used to be. It feels like,
so I don't know how you want to jump into
either of those questions, but maybe just go with the
first ones, like if not Denver, since that seems to
not be going anywhere, who should be, Like on the
phone with Chicago for Levigne, I just.
Speaker 1: I want to know. I'm curious what the asking price
would be because depending on what it is, especially and
we're gonna talk about him in a minute following the
Jade and Ivy catastrophic leg injury. Like I like, I
liked Zack Lavine and Detroit before, I like him even
more now there I'm not giving if I'm Detroit though,
like the deal needs to get done. I'm not giving
up any of my own for although I mean their
first round pick, what is it protected for this year
going to Minnesota, Like that thing might convey right whereas
it's still lottery protected this but like they're.
Speaker 2: Not I can't remember, but but the the Pistons are
like a real team now like that you know they're
gonna hover around five hundred.
Speaker 1: I think top thirteen protected, so I mean I wouldn't
necessarily put but like next year's top eleven, that thing
might convey so but you can't trade that pick anyway,
So I'm not sure if I'm Detroit, I'm not trading
my own first round pick because now it's well, it
has to be in twenty twenty seven or later at
this moment conditionally, and I'm not. But if you can
figure it out with just money and give up, it's
probably too early to say in Asar Thompson or Ron
Holland and now like the j n Ivy of it
all is just. But if you can do it and
it's not costing you wholesale assets, if that's still the
asking price for Zach Lavine, I love him in Detroit.
I don't know how you feel about that.
Speaker 2: I know I do. I wouldn't have felt that way,
you know until maybe a month or six weeks ago,
when it became clear that the Pistons are gonna be
you know, the maybe a play in team, maybe not,
but like the the days of them being just like
a total like I'm never gonna believe in this team,
you know thing, because these guys are also like we're
a little bit past that. So and then he does
provide exactly what we all want have always wanted in
support players on Detroit, especially given like if you're gonna
keep Holland Thompson, all these guys like you better find
shooting and anybody you bring in. So yeah, I do
like him there. I mean then because other than them,
who are like kind of interesting, it's all the usual suspects.
It's like we just Orlando or just whoever you think.
Speaker 1: With Orlando, I don't even consider them because of how
much money he makes. But they feel like, is that
the team he would go to and it would force
you to kind of recalibrate their situation the most? Or
does the Franz, Bogner and Palo Bank care of it all? Still?
Speaker 2: No, I think I think he adds exactly like, he
adds a type of shooter and secondary creator that you
have to account for, and they just kind of be on.
Franz and Pollo are great, and then Suggs is like
trying to get into that role. Didn't he just get
hurt too? And maybe we'll talk about that everybody's getting hurt. Yeah, uh,
but I think he he brings something that they just
do not have, and and I think that's you know,
the cost is probably probably prohibitive considering how expensive this
roster is like shaping up to be with Franz sugs
and and Polo's deals. But yeah, I like him there.
I don't know where else. I like him much actually,
like the Warriors couldn't do it without uh, you know,
throwing in Wiggins and or Kaminga and some other stuff like.
But I think the fit there is good because Buddy
healed is terrible now it's just suddenly not useful as
a shooter. I don't know. Do you have anybody else
for Levine?
Speaker 1: No? That I guess that's what would you He's not
their player. I probably wouldn't mind him and might actively
advocate for him to go to San Antonio if you
were able to get off the Zach Collins deal as
part of that. And then you have Kelden Johnson and
it's what is it? I can't imagine it would cost
you a ton in player or pick equity.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I like him there, not as much as somebody
else will talk about. But yeah, I don't know what.
Speaker 1: About I mean there because there are they still Yeah,
they have rooms so they can aggregate now, right? Oh no,
are the timber will still over the second apron?
Speaker 2: Uh?
Speaker 1: I don't look that up very quickly, but oh yeah
they are. Look at that they're Wow, they're well into
the second apron. Why did I just ask that question?
But he'll be fun on there just to Karl Anthony
Town's trade, but exactly being going back, I can.
Speaker 2: Send it back. Yeah, what about just the odds like
that he's not moved that he finishes the season on
the Bulls one.
Speaker 1: I think I think it's more likely, not only because
the Bulls. I think when you look at their record,
at least like they've played better than we expected. But
now I'm wondering, how does the Jimmy Butler of it
all impact? There are different players, and you could get
Za out, but can you get Zach Lavine for cheaper?
And I honestly don't know what the value of either
of those guys is. But I'm wondering now if there's
been you could argue, well, DFS is off the board,
Shrewders off the board. If we don't think the Nets
are gonna trade Cam Johnson, like Zack Lavine arguably becomes
the biggest prize we don't expect, you know. But there's
also Ingram out there and the Zion of it all.
I wonder if I think we all agree that the
books probably waited too long to do this, but like
he's semi rebooted his value, and I kind of wonder
if the Bulls have still waited too long to make
a move here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's interesting because trading him now seems like his
value should be higher than it was, well, certainly than
it was a year ago or any time between now
and then. But like it's so the thing that bothers me,
or it gives me concerns is it could almost be
the right decision to not trade Levine at this before
this deadline, except because it's the Bulls and because they
have like they have made the wrong decision in basically
the same circumstances several years in a row. Like it
feels like you almost have to trade him, even if,
like we've just spent time talking about, there is like
some justification for not moving him because the offers just
aren't gonna be good enough and he's good now, and
like you might the team might want him more next
year when there's less time left on the deal. It
would just feel, really you could, if you're a Bulls fan,
you would There's no scenario where you feel great about
not trading Levine because of all the baggage, right.
Speaker 1: Would you do? You still we did like him previously
on the Lakers, but yeah, yeah, you still do. Even
part of the thought process was you have that Dangelo
Russell salary anchor, and so now it's what do you
need to attach to gave Vincent and Jared Vanderbilt and
Ruiy Hotchimore. And I think I would argue that those
are all three deals that are not viewed very highly
around the league ruly might be net neutral. Yeah, so like,
are you giving up an a distant first round pick
and all of that salary and you can include more
if you need you to get I probably would. I'm
not gonna lie like them, but I'm just I mean,
I've entered my like nostalgic for Lebron or I'm not
ready for him to leave, and I want to see
him play in meaningful games.
Speaker 2: Yeah that, and I think the whole idea like that,
this gets applied to the Warriors a lot with Steph
of just like you have to do it now because
the futures you know, who knows, with Lebron and ad like,
I think it's just very clear that the Lakers aren't
going to ever move those guys, and so that's your team,
that's your core, because you don't get a choice because
they're super expensive. You can't just be like, well, there'll
be our third and fourth options five years, like no.
So I think the liv and Lavine just really helps them.
I think, especially with if Austin Reeves really can just
be a point guard, which I kind of like, I
don't know, the results have been pretty good so far
to my eye. Then just having another ace shooter and
then you're still like a pretty big team. I don't
think you can keep RUI in this deal realistically, but yeah,
I like the fit there. I think that's a good fit.
Speaker 1: I think I'm out. I could see we were just
talking about what are they going to do with all
this cap space if the Bulls get to a point
where they're looking to get off the money and the
Nets are just sitting there knowing that zach Lvine is
not going to drive too much winning and it's well,
now we have zach Lavine moving forward, two top lottery
picks and still probably a bunch of flexibility. I'd be curious,
just depending on how much cap space they end up
with this summer, if they would if he's still there
and my final question, is Levine on a different on
a different team after the trade deadline? Yes or no?
Speaker 2: I think yes. It's just even though we've just said
why not, I feel like you've got it. They just
have to move him. They can't do this again.
Speaker 1: The Dallas Mavericks. Not so much trade rumors unless you
want to use injury talk to spur said trade rumors.
But Luka Dancic, as everyone should already know, will be
reevaluated at the end of January, after suffering a left
calf strain. However, PJ Washington suffered a right in east
brain in Wednesday's loss to the Rockets. I don't believe
we've seen like a concrete timeline for his return pending.
Dallas does have a minus two point nine net rating
with both of these guys off the court. They're in
the fifty nine percent island offense and thirty fourth percent
Island defense. However, their most used lineup without them, Kyrie Dinwiddie,
Grimes Nausey and Derek Lively, is a plus twenty four
point nine per one hundred and three of the top
four lineups without these guys are net positives. Do you
have any concerns about the Mavericks relative to just they've
been I mean, other teams have had worse injury luck.
Let me be clear, Like Luca has been banged up
this year, We've seen some other people miss timed. Do
you have any concerns about them?
Speaker 2: I think my only concern and this will dodge the
question a little bit. I guess the short answer of
like how they're gonna I'm not no, not in terms
of what's this mean for them, like will they be okay?
Or like does it matter if they lose? Like you
know sixty percent of the games that Luke is out, Like,
I don't think so. The only concern I have is
like calf injury, he's probably not running for a month
and then yeah, Like I think you made the good
point of maybe this gets him fresh for the playoffs
if he's worn down from over the summer and just
he tends to break down, so that might be a
blessing in disguis, But like, I do have concerns that
he's going to come back not be in any kind
of shape, and that brings injury risk back into the
equation right away. Because you're you're not in shape, there'll
be a long ramp up. So maybe if you're concerned
that they're not going to play well without him, even
though I think Kyrie has been so good that they'll
be fine or more than fine, the concern would be like, oh,
it's okay, he'll be back or reevaluated at the end
of January. Maybe he's back the first maybe he's back,
you know, by the trade deadline. But then he's gonna
have a ramp up and so like the Lucless stretch
is much longer than the timeline we're actually talking about.
But other other than like some you know, catastrophizing about
like well, just physically, I don't like how he's going
to look for the rest of the year in the playoffs.
I don't really nothing here seems like a red flag
to me. What about you?
Speaker 1: No, I'm not worried and I don't think it. I
have seen some people talk about how this might accelerate
their ambitions on the trademark at Christian Clark of The
Athletic reported that they're interested in ending an impact wing defender.
We kind of talked about that already, that that should
be their goals. Can you like, there's Klay Toms and
Naji Marshall and Quentin Grimes. Can you get like a
better blend of size, defense and shooting out of what
not necessarily a better player. I don't think that this
heightens Does that heighten this urgent? I guess it depends
on the prognosis for PJ. Washington, which we technically still
don't have. But the Mavericks are one of the things
we talked about before the season, and we were wondering
if it was going to work in the middle of
the season based away rotations were being one, but it's
panned out. One of their biggest strengths is their depth,
and so I think as long as Kyrie we know
he's back, as long as they're gonna be like if Kyrie,
like if another major injury happens to a Derek Lively
or Kyrie, I'm not wishing that upon anything, then maybe
we could talk. But I can't bring myself to sound
any sort of alarm bell here. I think that they
are still even with this trajectory. If you want to
be a little bit worried about can you hit all
the necessary notes? Sure, they're still to me like the
clear second best team maybe with between them and Memphis
in the West.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they feel like they they're good. We've kind of
been on the kick of like they're just good enough.
Like they they they have as good as any a
shot as anybody at beating the thunder, which, like you said,
they've already done that. It's a little different this year,
but still yeah, I don't I don't feel like there's
a lot of urgency there. Your best player being hurts
not good that that can reconsize it, but aggregate it.
Speaker 1: Grant Hughes of Bleacher Report says losing your best player
is not a good thing.
Speaker 2: It's bad. Onto the Pistons. Bummer Jay and Ivy left
Wednesday's game on a stretcher. It was turned out to
be a broken fibula, just like bad luck. I know, people,
I don't know. I didn't see this specifically, but anytime
a guy's legs get you know, dived into it's I
think Cole Anthony just slipped. I think even in the
reporting it was it wasn't like a it wasn't a
Matthew del Vodova, Like you know, I'm trying to think
who it's really just him that gets gets nailed for
that kind of Grayson Allen, it wasn't like any of
the uh like really reckless dives. So put that aside.
So for Ivy's portion of it, this is from Lucas
Safer as a I'm sure I'm not saying that last
name right. Uh?
Speaker 1: That actually sad? That seemed pretty like are you too, homies?
It seemed pretty smooth as you were.
Speaker 2: Said confidently, which is what you should do. And you're
not sure? Uh did you get this on Twitter? One
of the one of the Twitter injury doctors.
Speaker 1: It skeatd it?
Speaker 2: Yeah, got it?
Speaker 1: Uh?
Speaker 2: So Luckily says a broken fabela is much less severe
than a broken tibia or shin bone. Fabela is mostly
non weight bearing structure that primarily is for muscle attachment.
Ivy will still miss significant time. The jury could have
been much worse. You see this in football a lot too,
where it's like it's better that it's a broken bone
than like a bunch of ligament damage and stuff. Like
I thought it was his knee for when when I
saw the replay of it, So like, I don't know
if you can call that glass half full. He's we
don't know how much time he's gonna miss. It may
be a lot of the season or all of it potentially,
but in.
Speaker 1: Some way shocked if we saw him again before next year.
Speaker 2: I guess the broken bone thing though, just does seem
guys bounce back from that stuff. I mean, Paul George
is a great example.
Speaker 1: I don't know, younger than Paul George was at the time,
for sure, right.
Speaker 2: I think so, but not by a ton because this
that was like what twenty fourteen. Maybe when Paul George
did it that a while ago I think might have been.
I think it whatever it was he was in as
early to mid twenties, I think so. But yeah, huge
bummer Ivy had you know, was a guy we talked
about as one of the most improved players this year
just having the best season was shooting the ball, best
season's career shooting the ball. Great bumber for the Pistons.
Like that's just all there is to it.
Speaker 1: You were spot on about the Paul George time on
August twenty fourteen is when he suffered that with a
team USA. Yeah, I mean, he's young enough, so hopefully
he'll bounce back. I and I've been all over the
place with his fit and whether they should have him
around long term. But it was cool to kind of
you saw at least the pathway to him working long term,
which is something he struggled to do in the past
two years.
Speaker 2: So or just being a good NBA guard like that
was I think. I think, like, Okay, he's gonna stick,
he's gonna have a career, and he's probably gonna be
a starter, you know, for a good chunk of it.
And that was not that was not a given like
a year ago.
Speaker 1: We move on, no natural segue to that. But Golden
State Warriors trade targets. Will Grant care about this at all?
Is the real question? Stephen Curry, though, did call the
team just very average after they lost to the Calves.
But per Mike Scotto of Hoopside, the team is still
trying to capitalize on his window because they are liars
targets that they're reportedly moditoring Grant, Jimmy Butler, brandon Ingram Nikolovucevich,
Kyle Kuzimcam Johnson, Zachlavine. No new names there. Their top
target is seemingly Butler. Is that the right call? Do
any of these names do it for you? What is like?
Speaker 2: What?
Speaker 1: And do you believe that the Dubs are still trying
to capitalize on on Stefan Curry's window.
Speaker 2: I think they are, but not at the cost of recklessness, because,
like you know, I'm I'm just gonna him and haw
I think so, Like I guess, the of the names
we have here, Butler is the guy that you could
argue makes the most sense because he does a lot
of what they need as a as a main offensive engine.
The fact that he said he's opting out means you
are renting him, and who knows how he's gonna hold
up physically. Who knows if Stephan Draymond hold up physically.
So you're really gambling on this season on Butler making
you good enough to do whatever it is you need
to do relative to Steph Curry's like window, right, And
I'm not convinced that Butler gets them where they need
to be to justify losing Wiggins and or Kaminga. And
you see trades that involve two first, like a twenty
five and a twenty seven, first Wiggins Kaminga, and then
whatever the rest of the salary needs to be. The
Warriors have a bunch of guys that they don't need
to prioritize to throw in there. I just I don't
think Butler is good enough to justify a couple months
rental and then you you probably lose him or worse,
have to pay him one hundred and twenty million for
two more years. So and I just don't get Now,
if it's Kawhi Leonard, which just not on the table,
if it's Kevin Durant just not on the table, then
then you have my attention because I think those guys
are both better than Jimmy And if you're just shooting
for like trying to catch lightning in a bottle for
the rest of the season, and then I'll both also
have longer, you know, more control. Like that's the level
of move I think it has to be, because I
just think the Warriors are good enough to wear a
Jimmy Butler or Zach Levine or any of these other
names do the thing that you and a lot of
people want them to do, which is like just go
all in for Steph, Like I just don't. I don't
think that gets them there because I don't think Steph
and Draymond and the rest of those guys are good
enough anymore.
Speaker 1: I think that's fair. And I also think with the
way that Jimmy Butler has been playing. You would have
to hope that he's sort of withholding on defense specifically
because when we talked about because I think we just
talked about the Dubs and Jimmy Butler previously, and one
of the biggest hang ups for me, I'm never gonna
be in on COMINGO, Like people just they marry that
guy's trajectory after like two or three games on like
any other player, and you're never gonna be as.
Speaker 2: In on him as I am, like three days out
of every week four I'm ready to just like shoot
him into space.
Speaker 1: But the idea of having to give up Andrew Wiggins,
it's like, and it should in theory, it shouldn't be.
But Jimmy Butler's thirty five, and if you don't think
he is he what he was on defense, there's just
no way to get him without including Draymond or Andrew
Wiggins in there, And so it feels like almost a
non starter. Is there like any you mentioned, Is there
any of them? Like does it Cam Johnson or if
you could just get brandon Ingram for some type of stuff,
Like if you could get to a brandon Ingram trade
without including Wiggins or Draymond and you probably could financially speaking,
Is that, like, is that the type of rental or
just non nuclear move that you would like.
Speaker 2: That's much closer to something I think you could justify.
I think then you're still on the in the position
of like we need to we probably need to be
the team that pays Ingram right, and like it's it's
possible that that market might not actually it might not
be as difficult as it seems to come out on
top of that market and still be short of the
like max level money he wants because unless he goes
to Brooklyn or whatever, like you're you know, I think
you can you could make that work. I just yeah,
I so yes. I think that gets you a lot
closer to something I think would make sense from the
organization's perspective, and that the people that like ownership seems
to be making a lot of you know, which is
that's what ownership should do, is be in charge, like
that's you bought the team, you get to do this.
It really feels like they're just they are like the
fans that anytime Kaminga has a good quarter, it's like,
we can't trade this guy, like he's he's our future.
Speaker 1: Call him a future superstar.
Speaker 2: Draymond can't stop talking about it. It's like we all
see it. We see the flashes you got to talk
about when he misses five rotations in a row, like
all this other stuff. Draymond is the best hype man
for cominga you could possibly ask for.
Speaker 1: What is your And we've talked in circles about this
on repeated occasion, so you're just more so, this is
what they have and maybe they could catch some sort
of lightning in a bottle with it. Or if you
could make a trade that doesn't cost you a first
round pick or maybe a first round pick beyond this
year to slightly upgrade the rotation, that's the better route
to go, or even just waiting for I mean, it's
weird that we're not talking about it, and there's like
murmurings that the vibes in Phoenix are probably just absolutely terrible,
Like why isn't Kevin Brown trade Balk right now?
Speaker 2: Like that I wrote something preseason of just like that's
the guy that and it makes all the sense in
the world because especially this is my favorite angle of
it is that Durant was never happy because he didn't
like the feeling that people viewed him as like bandwagon
hopping or coming into a team that's already set, like
this time he would be saving the team, like it
would be him coming in to like be the hero,
and he would be loved for that if things went
really well. So that has a lot of like narrative
appeal to me and maybe to him. I don't know
who knows what he actually cares about.
Speaker 1: Can I ask it unscheduled question though about the Phoenix Suttons?
Speaker 2: Please do?
Speaker 1: At what point if it's and we mentioned which I
haven't seen or heard mentioned a lot like if you
could turn Ryan Done into just a first round pick
from somebody, the idea of getting Bradley be able to
wave his no trade clause for two first round picks.
At what point, though, do you look at your team
and say, we're outside of the play in right now,
Yes they're close, but we're almost midway through the season
and you're outside of the play and that's just anecdotally
not where you're supposed to be. And it doesn't feel
like there's an easy pathway to title contention, even if
it's not a decision they actively make at like, is
there a chance that Kevin Durant asked for out or
that there's a Kevin Durant trade mid season. We all
said it wouldn't happen mid season. The last time he
got moved to No, that's an off season thing, and
then he got moved anyway. Now he was applying pressure there.
But if you're Phoenix and he's talking about like I
don't really know if I'm going to sign an extension
this summer like you all seem to think I'm going to,
and he has the one year left on his contract,
is that a storyline that's not like almost a Jimmy
Butler to PHOENI rumors have kind of masked the fact
that should this team be like wondering what's gonna happen
with Kevin Durant.
Speaker 2: I think they should trade him now, I think, And
you could have made the case to me. I think
I did make the case that there was a lot
of logic to it before the season started, because like
how many different reasons. One, if Kevin Durant is on
the market, he's by far the best. I think he's
the most appealing trade candidate out there right, Like you're
gonna take him over Butler and over Ingram and over Levine,
Like you're getting more for him than any of those
guys one and two.
Speaker 1: Some teams the market for them would him even though
he's older and the salary's substantial. Could you see a
team not saying they would, but like couldn't you just
see the Spurs and like, yeah, we'll go after him.
You can't really say that about Jimmy Butler or Zacht Leavine.
Speaker 2: With that, I think that's right. And I think like
your if your Phoenix, you're you're looking at the landscape
and saying like not only like forget being on the
same level as as Oka, see Dallas, Memphis, whatever, We're
like not even at the top of the Lakers Warriors,
like you know, aging, not not contending heap, Like we're
somewhere towards the bottom of that group, and like the
path to getting higher in that you know class is
just like is what you know? I don't see there's
no way. So like Phoenix clearly has and like if
you have mortgaged your future to the extent the Suns have,
it has to be for a contender, and you're not
a contender, So like pull the ripcord now and maybe
make the back half of this decade not one of
the worst we've ever seen a team have, so like
you can always rely on well, if it really goes sideways,
we'll trade Devin Booker and we'll get somebody half of
somebody's decades worth of draft picks coming back. But you
could get close to that for Durant now, and you
can rebuild around Booker if you want to. Like, I
don't know, I think the time to move Durant has
been like I don't know that they should have acquired
him in the first place, actually, but like, given what
it costs, so yeah, I think you move him now
if you can. You have the best guy on the market.
You take charge of the trade deadline if you put
him out there.
Speaker 1: But where do you go from because your first call,
I think, and we're about to talk about them, is
to Houston and say, hey, you want to give us
those two first round picks back that you own out
right of ours basically, and they were gonna say no,
I would assume. And then what do you do Though
you trade Kevin Durant, you get another team's draft you
don't have yours. Is the move then to call Houston
back and say how many of our first can we
get for Devin Booker?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I do think the way Brooklyn has
operated has has made and like the I don't know
to you like Atlanta, the position Atlanta's in is tied
to this too. Of like, if you can't get your
own first back, there's it's real rough to just go
through a bunch of losing seasons because you're not getting
the ultimate payoff. But sometimes you're just in the spot
you're in and you can't do that, and you got
to do the second best thing, which is get somebody
else's picks or add some flexibility, do all the other
stuff that falls short of you know, option one, which
is retake control of your bad seasons by getting your
picks back. So I mean, also, if you called Houston
and said, do you want Kevin Durant, I think I
think they would react pretty different. They would for him.
They would reevaluate there we don't want to make a
trade stance much more thoroughly than they would if it
were anybody else that's like actually on the market.
Speaker 1: Ultimately, though, doesn't this feel like it would have to
be a Kevin Durant mandate again, rather like Phoenix is
not gonna actively make this decision on its own, and
I'm just maybe James Jones in a vacuum might There's
no way team owner Matt Ishbia is going to like,
I can't envision the team being the ones to initiate
kind of how pat Riley flipped the pressure back up,
like you want out formally asked for it and then
this is gonna be on you. It doesn't matter. They
might have newd his trade value in the process, but whatever.
And I'm not saying Phoenix is playing this dare game
with Kevin Durant, but I can't. And you very rarely
see like look at Portland and Dame like that they
kind of wait. It's I don't know. I'm in favor
of franchises, especially when it comes to the older guys,
not you know, you can talk about are you getting
rid of youngsters or giving up on them too early,
But when it's Kevin Durant and you know what he is,
but where your franchise is headed, it's sort of like
teams need to be more proactive in that type of situation.
I just don't think Phoenix would move Kevin Durant without
Kevin Durant kind of forcing their hand.
Speaker 2: And that's stupid because it is coming. Like that is
how Kevin Durant's tenures with teams end is he asks,
he like gets up unhappy and he wants to move,
and sometimes he makes multiple formal trade requests before it's
so like you need to as the sun's be eyes
open here and like, if this is how good you
are for another year, like what do you of course
that's what's gonna happen, Like he's gonna that's you should
you should assume a Durant trade request is coming. And
he wouldn't be wrong because this team isn't going anywhere
and he's at the end of his career. So like
you should proactively address that. I just I agree with you.
I think you have to act as if it's coming
and get out ahead of it.
Speaker 1: And this does feel like one of those situations where
you and I talk a lot about when it gets
to the Iron Fox, it's that's probably a decision I
might wait on until the offseason. You don't do that
with Kevin Durant because forget about the time left on
the contract, because I just don't view these I don't
view unless you're getting Jimmy Butler for pennies on the dollar.
I don't think anyone's acquiring Jimmy Butler with the intention
of him being a rental like you have. We know
how this works. Behind the scenes. You have an idea
of whether these guys are going to stay. It's more
so just I mean, Kevin Durant is thirty, was he
thirty five, this age thirty six season, whatever it is.
You don't like, you're not guaranteed this version of Kevin
Rant all the time. So he's playing like this now.
And I think teams either in the heat of the
moment or just really trying to capitalize on this window specifically,
you might lose some of those squads if you wait
until the offseason or you wait for Kevin Durant to
force your hand over the offseason.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think any team that's looking at Butler and
saying like he might be the piece, right, We'll take
on all the risks that come with him would look
at Durant and say he's just better, Like, even if
the risks are similar, well, he's just good. The ceiling
he gives us is just higher than Butler. I don't
know if that's necessarily true. Probably is, but I feel like
that's how.
Speaker 1: Agree with thinking, Well, if you're looking at it, I mean,
their contracts technically run the same length. This is that
Jimmy Butler keeps saying he's gonna opt out. Yeah, I
think Kevin Durant at like, I think Kevin Rant clearly
elevate your seally more than Jimmy Butler at this point. Yeah,
So that's ah subplot to monitor. Maybe that look, we
didn't think necessarily a second trade request was gonna come.
What did he get traded two seasons ago? Now? And
it came? Another subplot to monitor? Speaking of you mentioned
this team already.
Speaker 2: Mister Hughes, Yes, we have the Houston Rockets here is
according to Mark Stein, the Rockets have no desire to
make a midseason consolidation trade. That's because they don't know
Kevin Durant available, no guarantee that they'll be interested in
Daron Fox even in the off season. Is that real?
Is that posturing? Is that just what you say because
you're trying to preserve the vibes you have with this
team and you don't want to have half the roster
thinking we might be you know, short timers here. That's
like a real consideration we don't always talk about Jalen
Green is easier to move over the offseason. He counts
as twelve and a half million and outgoing salary for
the Rockets, but twenty nine point four and incoming money
for other teams. That's basically a poison pill situation. So, Dan,
are you because the Rockets have been pretty consistent on
this front, do you buy the like we're good posture
that they're taking And is there someone that could change that?
Is there some is there a player that should change that?
Is that player Fox for them? Like? Where are you
on this?
Speaker 1: So there's always a player that could change that. I
don't know if the Aaron Fox is it for me?
Just because I guess if you're trading Reed Shepherd as
part of that deal, then sure, So that might be
a name. And Kevin Durant, that's really a fascinating one
because he's just They've part of that steying report was
they're really emphasized in getting someone who's on the timeline
with the rest of their players. I buy this insofar
as I really do believe that they view Jalen Green's
contract value predominantly as this is matching money in that
eventual big trade, and that it's easier to even though
a team might say, we don't necessarily want this deal.
So that's part of the value that you're getting out
of this trade is us taking it on. I think
it'll be exponentially harder to move Jalen Green as a
standalone contract than as part of this mega blockbuster where
you're fined including picks or other prospects because you're getting
back darn Fox or Kevin Rant. I really don't think
that they're gonna do anything seismic in the middle of
the year though, and I honestly we talked about this already,
so everyone go check out that segment. I think that's
the right call for them because I tend to agree
like me saying that's what I believe they're thinking about
Jalen Green. That's actually how I feel about Jalen Green.
He just needs to be the outgoing money in that trade,
and it's easier to do that over the summer or beyond.
Speaker 2: I think a couple of things like Fox, that's one
where it's like I do I would think about that
if I were Houston. But again, unless and you probably
will be aware of if there's team X is out
there with an offer, they're gonna get Fox, Like if
it's the Spurs, probably, Like then you might want to
come over the top because you can't assume you're gonna
do better than him going forward in terms of trade
options you which you might, but I mean Fox is
an all NBA guard. That isn't That's the other thing, like, oh,
they want someone that's in the timeline of their of
their core players, So you need someone on a rookie
scale contract like year old that's going to be a superstar.
Speaker 1: That's about to graduate.
Speaker 2: From that discussion, ye, right, but it's like good luck fellas,
Like those guys don't get traded if they're actually any good.
But so Fox being what I forget how old Fox is?
I want to say, like twenty seven, Like that's close enough.
I'm good there.
Speaker 1: But I feel if you're Houston because you did mention
Kevin Durant, are you more likely to make the trade
ford Aaron Fox or Kevin Durant if they're assuming they're
both available, Mmm, I think just Aaron Fox that Kevin
Durant is still available for the Warriors.
Speaker 2: Onto me, I think like Fox is just the Fox
would be the one I would I would probably go
for even though I've already said I think Durant raises
your ceiling a little higher. But given what seems like
a pretty low risk tolerance, Houston is showing in terms
of trades like Fox is safer. I think younger you're
you don't have to worry about a lot of the
you know Durant stuff of like is he gonna be happy?
How hard is going to be keep him happy? I
feel like Fox is a safer play if you're just
trying to win this season. I don't know. Is Durant
just still a better player than Fox. I think that's
a that's a reasonable argument if you price in like
availability and stuff like that. But I think most people
would still say, yes, Durant, if he's healthy, is better
than Fox and might be the kind of guy that
can be the offense under himself, and that makes this
defense hold. I don't know I would think about it
for both of them. Fox is just the safer move.
Speaker 1: I would say, do you think that Fox so in
a vacuum even if Devin I guess it really doesn't
matter because the salaries are so close. But how much
do you think that contracts for a team like Houston
where they're not like they're not considered a mega nation anymore.
But players like that market free agency is dead anyway,
How worried if it's Kevin Durant, you're kind of just baking.
The risk of you're not worried about him staying here
is will he still be good in his age thirty
seven ses? So like someone like Fox who only has
a year left on his deal, do you worry about
that if you're Houston at all? Or do you view
that as sort of inconsequential? Then how much does it
matter that? All right, Well, he's about to go from
Daron Fox next year, which will be the final year
of his deal, makes thirty seven point one, and then
all of a sudden, his max salary, assuming he doesn't
qualify for the supermax, will be fifty one million. And
so now that number is jumping up at a time
when you're paying some of these other younger guys, and
other young younger guys need to be paid. And now
I'm asking this, but I'm gonna give you a second.
Part of that is who are you acquiring that doesn't
like you're not acquiring someone on their front The LaMelo Ball,
I think would be the closest one you're not acquiring
someone on the quote unquote, as ESPN's Brian Windhorse calls it,
the fun Max mostly.
Speaker 2: So, I think Fox is exactly a type of situation
that you're you talked about before, where it's like, you know,
as he's coming on board, like what it will take
to keep him, and you're willing to do that. Otherwise
you probably just don't trade for him. I think that's that.
That's like that deal is done when the trade gets
agreed to. I feel like, so I'm not I won't
be worried about that. But yeah, Like so the type
of upgrade we're talking about for this team, if you're
not going to just go let's leave it alone, organic
growth and see what this roster turns into, anyone that
you're gonna add sort of has to be at that level,
at like a Fox level where you are paying fifty
million dollars for the guy. Because if you don't do
that and you just keep the powder dry and you
let this team develop like you might, I don't know,
maybe I'm in Thompson learns to shoot and suddenly he's
an All Star and you know, all that, there's there's
all these pathways forward for them, but if you're really
going to make that move, it's always going to be
someone that you're like not super comfortable with how much
they're making. That's just where the Rockets are.
Speaker 1: I feel like our next team on the knocket the Lakers.
Rumors for the Lakers, that's unheard of, kind of a
news dump here, but the Lakers are priority tizing a
backup center. According to Michael Scotto of Hoops ye Yonas
Valencunis Is they're willing to flip gave Vincent and a
second round pick for him. That's very big of them
to include a team a net negative deal in a
second round pick for Yonis Dalunjunis, Cam Johnson. They already
acquired Dorrinan Phinny Smith. They had talks with the Nets
about Cam Johnson, though, is he off the table now
that the Lakers have dfs? And then overall, I'm just
very curious, like what do we expect from the Lakers
tread deadline approach? Are they just trying to fuss it
because the reporting of we want to flip gave Vincent
in a second round pick for Yonas Valen chunis just
kind of screams we're fussing and fiddling. But are there
any names out there that would force them to rework
this strategy? I think everyone agrees that Jimmy Butler is
not it. And then yeah, there are names that we
could mention saying, Okay, Kevin Durant or dearon Fox, you
probably are not going to have the best offer in
any of those situations. It would take and I don't
know who would have of any player in the league,
but for the most part, like maybe he Zaclavine, Okay, sure,
but like Kevin Durant as an example, you would need
Kevin Durant to apply all sorts of leverage to get
Kevin Durant. And so, just what do you make of
how the Lakers will or should approach the trade deadline?
Speaker 2: I think, I mean, I don't have a lot to
add beyond what we've mentioned. Is like Lavigne makes sense.
I view them similarly to the Warriors, where even with
the urgency to win now, while your old players are
still very good, if not the best they've ever been,
that that's real. But I don't think the guy is
out there that they could realistically acquire that gets you
into the top tier of title contenders. So it's like,
as unsatisfying as it is, you don't just mortgage your
future for whoever happens to be the best available player,
because in this instance, like that guy's just not good
enough to get you where you want to be. So
I don't know. At least I'm being consistent with how
I'm dealing with the Lakers and Warriors, even though a
lot of my Warriors analysis is based on like what
kind of team do I want to watch for the
next five years? Bad? How bad do I want it
to look if they do this and it goes wrong?
But that's where I'm at, Like, the name needs to
be pretty big, and Levine is kind of the cutoff
for me, and I still think honestly, like pick wise,
I don't think I don't feel great if I'm the
Lakers giving up all the first I can for Zach Levine,
even if we both kind of agree like, yeah, that
guy makes makes sense.
Speaker 1: There, I would consider a first round pick, and even
that's tough because it has to be so far out.
Speaker 2: Yeah, how bad should they feel if they end up
giving two first or even one when they could have
just had them for matching salary. It seems like, you know,
less than a year ago, you.
Speaker 1: Feel they actually could have done that. They should feel
terrible about them, So, I mean, they should already feel
pretty terrible about the way that they've built this team
around Lebron and ad since the championship. But I think
I'm with you. I see more urgency on the Warriors, behalf,
because I think that they're still more complete than the Lakers,
and even though like the standings on any given day
is going to reflect otherwise. But I am with you
in the sense that I'm fine to see I think
even if they went and got vooch whereas can you
figure out a way you have two seconds as you
could trade I believe I think the Bulls would trade
foods for that. But like, is your matching salary? It'd
have to be Vanderbilt and Gabe Vincent? Like, is that
getting it done so you can get rid of one
of them in a second to get yonas Valncunas and
Washington looks at it from the perspective of well, Gay
Vince's contract is shorter than yoas found tunis is. But
then you you effectively what you did is you signed
Yonas Valniunas and are paying gay Vincent for a year
so that you could get a second round pick from
the Lakers. Just a weird order of events. H I
would do that deal with on the Lakers. But you're right,
I don't know what that like with Kevin Durant. If
he's like, I'm only going to go to the Lakers.
If you're the Lakers, do you pounce on that or
is that even You're more like I would be more
confident that Kevin Durant elevates the Golden State Warriors to
title contention, then I would be the Lakers at this point. Yeah,
they get trade for dorn Finny Smith and Austin Reeves
has been balling. So maybe that's an outdated take, But
I still think I don't know because you're probably giving
a Wigans for good. That's a tough one. Which team
is better off with Kevin Durant, the Lakers or the Warriors.
Speaker 2: Oh, I've been on the that's given to the Warrior.
I just just how how insane would that be? Wouldn't
that would be the story of the season, Like that
would be unbelievable. Yeah, I think like could even how
do the Lakers even get to Durant's money, like, are
they just they're.
Speaker 1: They're half ruey Vanderbilt gave it. And the other thing
too about the Warriors, there's their matching salary is far
more palatable than anyone the Lakers are sending out. They
sent out their most palatable matching salary, and that was
D'Angel Russell as an expire.
Speaker 2: Yep, that's true. Yeah, they burned that one on DFS
and that kind of might indicate that's about as good
as they're going to do realistically in the trade market
this year.
Speaker 1: By the way, the other thing too is there probably
should be more of a priority to preserve their long
term asset stash because they don't have as iffy as
I am on Jonathan Kminga. At least the Warriors can
kind of point to, okay, Kminga and pods and we
have more of our first round picks. The Lakers in
a situation where they have fewer of their outright first
round picks available and they don't have you don't point
to Austin Reis, isn't young number one? And then real
tip to NBA standards, and then too like Dalton connect
is not this bridge into the fuld.
Speaker 2: No, Yeah, he's a silly, nice supplementary piece, maybe a starter.
Like That's that's about it. Onto my Memphis Grizzlies. John
Morant that right shoulder which was operated on. He suffered
a Grade one AC joints brain in that shoulder. He's
considered weak to week. Don't love that. I'd like a
firmer timeline. Day to day is one thing. Week to
week is that's rough. Fortunately, Memphis is a plus seven
point nine, has a seven point plus seven point nine
net rating without Morant this year, that's twenty one hundred possessions,
which is also another problem that he's been off the
floor for that much of the year. Their offense is
in the seventy seven percentile, defense in the eighty first. So,
like the depth of this team and the style of
play just kind of is insulating them against you know,
they've had several players miss time. Unfortunately, some of that
depth is also about Santelle. Donald's got an ankle. Gg
Jackson still hasn't played, Marcus Smart got a finger injury.
Vince Wims Junior same as same as Jackson, missed a
ton of time. He's got an ankle, Brandon Clark's day
to day with the Cavs. Zach Edie is in the
concussion protocol. Jake Larrabi has got an ankle, so some
of this is gonna this depth.
Speaker 1: Is not injured.
Speaker 2: Could you have just made the list of guys that
are totally healthy, no problems. It's like Jared Jackson. I
assume he's probably got like a hangnail or something banged.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it doesn't.
Speaker 2: It hasn't mattered. Memphis is still looking like a top
four team in the West, and they've had crazy injury issues,
not to last year's extent, but basically nobody has ever
had them to that extent. They're not a team We've
talked a ton about just to keep it in context
of like trade deadline stuff, very much other than like
it could have done something for DFS. It sounds like,
but when I didn't love the price, Does do these
injuries specifically to Morant make you think they're more inclined
to make a deal? Are they good enough? I mean,
we could just sort of have any kind of Memphis
conversation you want to have here.
Speaker 1: Are they going to win sixty games despite all the injuries?
That's the other conversation.
Speaker 2: That's part of it is like do you need to
do anything or just kind of weight it out.
Speaker 1: I will say, I don't think this does that. The
Ja Morant like that's the big one is yes, I
know what the numbers say, but like if you miss
Jah Morant for an extended period of time in the West, like,
that's that's not ideal.
Speaker 2: It's not ideal if your best players hurt hot, I
say one time.
Speaker 1: So I don't think this increases the urgency though, just
because the way they act. I don't think it's in
the depth they have in place and how well they
play this season. I think they have the luxury of
not being urgent, and they also need to approach this
I think now with and they probably already were with
a healthy amount of skepticism of does it matter because
is John Morant going to be healthy when we need him?
It's not on the same level of design on Williamson discussion.
I want to make that clear, but that has to
be in the back of your mind. So I don't
think this team would have been a candidate to make
anything mega. That being said, the fact that it doesn't
accelerate their urgency doesn't mean they shouldn't do any like
sit out the trade deadline, because I really do believe
that they're good enough to say and like you want
to consolidate your rotation a little bit and based off
like when you look at the like we've been talking
about wings for Memphis from the end of time. No,
Jalen Wells, he's gonna be heavily involved in the Rookie
of the Year discussion. I think we both had him
in our top three when we did our quarter season awards.
But like now, Vince Williams, who was undersized to begin with,
has missed a ton of time, Marcus Smart underside to
begin with as a wing, he's missed a ton of time,
and Gig Jacksons yet to play, as you mentioned this season,
like you gotta at least do something. I'm not. I
wasn't join our discord because you get to hear me
tell you how wrong you are all the time. But no,
I don't do that that much. I don't think a
lot of our discord member said they should have just
pulled off the DFS trade with what was rumored. I
think he could make a strong case for that, But
I'm also kind of like they were gonna give up
two in theory of their most important shooters on this
team too, and like spacing the floor. I know the
way their offense is run is unique and it's working,
but I want to see them get Like I think,
if you're looking at the wing spot and you ideally
want a two way wing, but I'm prioritizing like a
more dynamic offensive player at this point. If I'm Memphis,
then we want a three and D guy or someone
who's gonna skew all the way towards defense. And that's
kind of where like a Cam Johnson for them would
almost be perfect, like they might. They're never mentioned as
the team, not never. I feel like everyone's talking about
OKC or the Kings, maybe because they've been the King
specifically most aggressive. Memphis just might be the smartest Cam
Johnson team.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and more generally they're an obvious consolidation trade team
because I think, like we do, think they're gonna finish
with a really high seed. You're you can't play eleven
guys in the playoffs, like you just that's that isn't
what's gonna happen. So that's not to say, like, oh,
these these guys that are playing well right now, like
they they won't be this good in the postseason. It's
just like, realistically, you no team ever keeps the same
incredibly deep rotation in a playoff series. You just try
to hope you got the best eight or nine, maybe
eight sometimes seven if you get really deep into it,
and it's the next.
Speaker 1: Best three for how many how many guys as tips play, Yeah.
Speaker 2: Three, two and a half, Like it just you don't
get the same value out of those guys. So obviously, like, yeah,
Cam Johnson is gonna give you more than you know,
Brandon Clark, Lukennard, John conchar or whatever. Like That's not
that that's remotely on the table, but like I think
that's just the way they should think about. The other
thing is like it's probably isn't the time to mention it.
But like I think, if any this Grizzlies team built
around Ja Morant, who I think is going to have
a very short prime because of like the things he's
great at don't last, you like you might want to
incorporate a little more all in thinking than they have
so far. I'm not saying just go nuts, but like
joh Morant is only going to be this athletic for
so long and he's he's the injuries are piling up,
Like you it's just you can't. I don't think you're like,
let's let's bide our time till his age twenty nine
season when he really peaks, Like I don't. I mean,
he may still be great then A lot of things
he does well don't have to do with athleticism, but
most of the things that make him elite are physical
abilities that just don't last. So I don't know, just
just like something to like chew on if you're Memphis urgency,
you could justify high urgency and maybe a little short
term recklessness.
Speaker 1: I don't think this will make people feel about his
career arc but I mean, he is playing well now
relative to what we seen in years past. But like
Russell Westbrook's athleticism has endured quite a bit, wouldn't you
say pretty well?
Speaker 2: And I think you would say it's yeah to Devil's advocate,
like he is the caliber of athlete that Moran, like
was the caliber of athlete that Moran is, which is
to say, like maybe the best athlete in the league
just like run and jump ability. He's the exception though,
like it's just and and if you want to bring
in the injury stuff, Derrick Rose was not the same
after a lot of injuries. That's the other guy you'd
point to athletically.
Speaker 1: The other thing is John Morant. And I'm not insulting anyone.
He would make this clear my body shaming. John Morant
looks like a normal human being, right, He's still Westbrook
was violently chiseled at the peak of Russell Westbrook and
still kind of is. I don't know why I can't
say his name today Russell Westbrook. Uh so, yeah, but
I do support your point that like I do. It
was even the same thing with Zion and the Pelicans
that they had no margin for error and they active
like they did. So I still don't say I think
mam is good enough where they don't need it, and
it's it should be easier for Memphis. No, you don't
need a mega trade. You're not looking for a second
best player. At this point, you have two candidates as
the second best player on championship team, either Desmond Bane
or is it right now, Jared Jackson Junior. You can
probably argue is the best player on this team. But
when you factor an availability for this season I hope
they make a move just because I really do think
like this team is special, like the depth they have
in their ability to navigate injuries as special. But it
matters a little less when you get to the playoffs.
Speaker 2: Yep, what do we have now?
Speaker 1: I gave you some of the depressing ones you had,
Jay and Ivy and the John Morant stuff. I have
a little complicated one, so any Edwards. The Timberwolves lost
to the Cavs and the Celtics back to back. Eh, excuse me,
Thunder and the Celtics back to back. I would go
recommend looking at it. Dane Moore had the full kind
of interview of the day More NBA show, but Andthrey
Edwards said after the loss, on being forced to get
off the ball because the way teams are guarding him,
he said, quote, It's not how I want to play.
Of course, I'm only twenty three. I don't just want
to be passing the ball all night. But the way
they're guarding me, I think I have to that is.
There are a lot of things that you could say
about Anthony Edwards, about his flaws and the decisions he's made.
I love quotes like this. You I saw some people
killing him. You can't want athletes to be candid and
when they say something legitimate like this is not toxic,
this is not ridiculous, and you can't then pan them
for saying. So what do you make of this whole situation?
We've what team? I'm sorry, two questions for you? What
do you make of this? But first, have we been
on a like who's been a more violent rollercoaster this year?
The Timberwolves are the field? Like, like, what's the team?
We've had to go back and forth on the most.
Speaker 2: I mean, for me, it's probably the field, just because
I don't know what it is about the Wolves. I
always want to just include him in the like you
know who we got to keep talking about as contenders conversations.
Speaker 1: I talked about leaving out Denver, Phoenix and Minnesota and
the discussions we had about contenders, and you were the
strongest advocate of Minnesota.
Speaker 2: Looking at you and the no, you know, there's a
lot of reasons to say that's a stupid opinion to have.
I mean that because you said, like they just it
doesn't nothing's clicked. It just this hasn't you know. The
defense was awful and that got a little sorted out
over recent weeks, but you know, there's a lot of
reasons to doubt them. I want to ask you, though,
because I've only read this, did you saw the video
of him offering this quote? Is that right?
Speaker 1: Yeah?
Speaker 2: So is this another case where the difference between what
you get out of it viewing him speaking versus reading
it is is pretty significant, like in terms of tone
or like what you should take away from it.
Speaker 1: The tone was very conversational and he was I think
I want to say it was John Krasinski of the
Athletic who's going back and forth with him, and Dane
might have asked one of the questions too, like it
was no one forced him to go there, but there
was a back and forth where like this wasn't he
went on this long dat.
Speaker 2: Tribe unprompted, Okay, but it's it's like it's a lot
like the previous instance where I can't now I can't
even remember, but where he was like saying, we're you know,
talking about like we're not friends out there like we
you know, the what was it like we were being
also saying that kind of thing.
Speaker 1: Yeah. He also one time said he was shocked to
see Julius Randall play defense. Yeah, And if you watch
the exchange and Julius Rendal's standing right there like he
was being honest.
Speaker 2: But he's like though, right, like yeah, which you can
only do if your relationship is pretty good. Probably it's okay.
So my thought is like, show me the lie, Like
that's what he's saying, is right? Is correct? You watch
any Wolves game and for me, I'm I'm marvel at
like how well he's become, how good he's become at
making difficult threes and how many threes he's shooting. And
as I'm marveling at it, I'm like, this is wrong,
Like this, this sucks. This is a symptom of an
offense that is not playing the way that you would
want it to with a player like him. That that's
been a point everybody has made that's watched the Wolves
is like, how are we not getting ant downhill all
the time? Like this is But like Rudy Gobert is
in the middle of the floor and that's the only
place he can be and that is just what you got.
And I think it's not just Rudy, but that's a
huge part of it. And if you don't have an
elite spacing forward, which is what he was last year
like Cat then, and even then the offense wasn't very good.
This is just what you're gonna get. So, I mean,
I don't know, I don't know what the fix is,
but it's pretty clear to me what the problem is.
It's a lack of other dangerous creators that draw more
than one defender, and it's a it's poor spacing because
you have a non stretch like the ultimate non stretch
center in the middle of it all. Like that's that's
all it is, Right, They're just honestly credits to him
for like playing away that is kind of right for
this team, even if it's clearly not the best way
to use him in a vacuum. Like I think Edwards
deserves credit for Like I don't think he wants to
play this way, like pretty clearly, like he said it
now finally, but like what else is it would be
worse if he were trying to just like run into
brick walls or you know, forcing it. I think he'd
be getting a bunch of criticism for that if that's
how he were playing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, look, his drives are to throw some numbers behind
what granted, saying his drives per thirty six minutes last
year over fifteen this year, about twelve and a half.
He's passing on thirty five percent of his drives thirty
percent last year, which isn't that five percent difference doesn't
seem huge, but like it's a sixth of an increase
over what he was doing, and when the drives just
aren't as high quality either. So last year you're looking
at his shooting on drives, was it's actually lower than
I thought? Well, no, this year it's forty seven percent.
Last year he was at fifty four percent shooting. So
you're talking about fewer drives, more passing off those drives,
and the lanes just aren't as open, and so like
the quality of your drives is just down. I totally
get his frustration. We've talked a lot about again, I
would go back to that Championship Contender episode we did
about how they could maybe rework continue to rework the rotation.
I'm starting to think though, like, is it just you
have to play him with Nase Reid at all times
if you want him, and then that what's best for
your team? Or is this more of a have we
reached the point where, yeah, there will be nights where
the timber Wolves look like Capstock Championship contenders, But the
makeup of this roster is just not going to allow
a balance between Okay, and has to cater to like
the strength of everybody else. But we can also find
ways to do a better job of pandering well as
a negative connotation, but like finding ways to unlock Anthony
Edwards's best self.
Speaker 2: Well, it's sort of like, I don't know the answer
to that. I think my knee jerk that I'm less
confident in now than before is just like, well, Randall's
got to be out at the starting lineup, you go McDaniels,
de Vincenzo and Gobar and Conley. There's more playmaking there,
there's more shooting, there's more space, Like that's how you
fix it. I don't know, I'm not sure that's the
Like the magic bullet still seems like logically that makes sense,
like that type of lineup anyway, Read is it could
be Read or Devincenzo, whichever, you just like get the
spacing out there, I guess would be hard to do.
I say it.
Speaker 1: Let's revisit the Julius Randall plus second round picks for
John Collins conversation.
Speaker 2: Yeah sure, yeah, I mean Collins is gonna shoot it better,
if not more than Randall. The thing it's interesting though,
like if you just compare, say, like how about this
is it is it fair to say that like SGA
ok in Oklahoma City has other than having a pretty
good secondary creator similar like challenges in years past where
it's like, yeah, the space thing is not great and
he just has to like get into the lane, lead
the league in drives and then like that triggers the offense,
you know, like that you get the drive kick, drive kick,
drive kick thing that the Thunder have excelled at. This
year is different, but like it seemed like SGA just
to compare him to Edwards, Like is it just the
Edwards is not as effective? Now nobody's as effective as
SGA as a driver or as like an isolation guy.
That's She's just the best there is. But like how
much of it's just on him not being able to generate?
Like we're talking about like do they how do they
cater to him? Like how do they make it so
he's in a better position to succeed if he's the
guy that he started to be billed as last postseason
as like next, shouldn't it be him? That's that's like
finding a way to to like make this work. And
maybe that's what he's trying by shooting a ton of threes,
like circumstantially, that's just what maybe the Wolves need. But
maybe some of it's on him, like figure out a
way to get downhill and like make guys better if
you're that guy, I.
Speaker 1: Get there could be some of it's on him, but
it's just so tough because Andy Edwards is on a
team right now where they can send three to the
ball and it might not matter. Oka see, you can't
send two to Shay without worry about cot So. And
there's like it's not even about the supporting the quality
of the supporting cast, but the archetypes behind it because okay,
see doesn't really look at it's big, Like even Isaiah
heart and Stein is not a floor clogger because he
can make decisions from the middle of the floor at minimum,
so you don't have that Rudy Gobert element there. And
then you also like let's look at lou Dort versus
Jade McDaniels, Like there are defenses that the lou Dort.
There's value in the volume, so forget about the percentage
of he shootes, which he's been fined during the regular season.
But Jadan McDaniels is just teams don't care about him,
and they're also your second option, which I think is
a bigger deal. With Kat when he would get go down,
go downhill, you're more likely to send two to the ball.
Teams this season seemed like of the Timberwolves games that
I have watched so zero, I feel like they don't
they send one to the ball on Julius Randold, and
it's just if Julius Randald's gonna beat us, then so
be it. But they also don't care about his off
ball gravity. And I would argue when it comes to
j Dubb we've talked about, Okay, it hasn't really translated
into the non Shae minutes, like teams care when he's
open or when he gets going downhill way more than
make care if Julius Randall is open or going downhill.
That's anecdotally Yeah.
Speaker 2: No, you're you're right. I was getting a little Devil's
advocaty again, But like that, that's the thing, like when
Ant gets extra bodies. So if the ball comes out
to go Bear, which is like who you probably want
to double off, like he's not doing anything with it.
And if it goes to McDaniel's, like he's not doing
anything with it. And if it's Conny, he's gonna just
look for the next pass, which is gonna be to
someone who's not gonna do anything with it, you know. So, Like,
I think the Randall piece is really the one to
focus on, because he's supposed to be the guy that
if you guard him straight up or or even he
has advantages because you sent multiple bodies Ant, Like he's
Randall's supposed to be the guy that's gonna make you
pay as a defense, and I don't, And like, I
think you're exactly right. Defenses are like cool like that, Okay,
you want to get thirty seven, have at it. Your
team will score ninety four points and you can't win
like that. I do feel like he gets treated that way,
and that's maybe the best argument for just like him
and AUNT like he's not making ANT better. Like that's
that's pretty clear. I think you know so. And and
I think Randall's one of those rare players that just
is sort of gonna get you the production. He's gonna
get you, regardless of supporting cast, regardless of how he's defended.
And the question is, like, is that actually valuable to
winning and so far with Minnesota Like, no, I guess
it hasn't been. So maybe it's him.
Speaker 1: Is there anything too? Just to play off your point,
the cadence at which they would work on the ball,
like Andy Edwards have definitely developed, like more change of
pace and it's more methodical on the ball, But it's
someone like Shay his archetype, or like look at the
pace that Luca will operate, or it's just like it's
I don't know what the word is. It's it's maniacally deliberate,
whereas Aunt is maniacally abrupt. And there's two different types
of players. Do you think someone like that is just
better suited to handle heliocentric attention than the way that
Anthie Edwards plays? And that, to be fair, that's not
necessarily a knock against Anthy Edwards. I'm just trying to like,
if you put Shay Gilles Alexander on the Timberwolves, do
you believe that they are better off, particularly on the
offensive end.
Speaker 2: I do, But that's just because I think Sga is,
other than Yokich, the best offensive player in basketball probably
at this point. So like I think he's just better.
But I think that's a great point. Like Edwards is
someone who already sort of has a superpower that you
could further juice by like getting him the ball in
advantage situations, like if you imagine him and like the
Donovan Mitchell role on the Utah teams, where nobody ever
caught the ball at a dead stop. It was always
while you were already running and you're coming around a
screen with like a slight you know, window of daylight,
Like he would just he would be unguardable if he
always got the ball in positions where he had a
slight advantage already. So stylistically, that's for sure a factor.
Like if you compare use the Oka Ce comparison. Again,
even in previous years, SGA was with like good cutters
and guys that like like Jay Will who would space
out to shoot threes as opposed to you know that
the environment was just better in addition to SGA being
just a better player offensively at least. So yeah, it's
a combination of factors. It's frustrating, Like I do you
do get the sense, don't you that like ants not
being the best version of himself that he could be
and it's not totally his fault. I feel like that's
feels like we're losing something.
Speaker 1: And the final point here actually didn't expect to spend
as much time on it. They really maybe it pans
out long term and I know he's dealing with an
ankle injury at the moment. There was a miscalculation with
the Rob Dillingham acquisition, and the miscalculation was either and
I don't think they expected him to just be ready
right away because they went out and made the cat
trade and maybe that was financially driven. But if they
expected him to be ready away, they never really gave
him that opportunity. And so it feels like more of
a miscalculation on the part of we thought this roster
had another year of a buffer between and I guess
what does that fall on between Conley and Randall. You
thought you were gonna have enough offensive contingencies to buy
a year of development for Rob Dillingham and then he
would kind of take over demand the leading it in
next year. Because I can't I know fans, and we contemplated, like,
that's not necessarily a movie make unless you think he's ready,
Like we always you and I I know we're on
the same page with this. We're always going to approach
rookies contributing to contenders unless they're on Memphis. To be clear,
with just this a mass amount of skepticism, and so
it feels like they just miscalculated, I guess, like how
much like this roster was going to float. But then
it's also they made that deal and then traded Karl
Anthony Towns, and so maybe you would have had that
buffer had you not made the trade. I just it's
that's gonna be a fascinating transaction to look back on.
But immediately, by the way hamstrings what they can do
if they wanted to fix anything, like, you can't because
you can't aggregate salaries. It's not like, oh, Julius Randall,
Rob Dillingham, what could we get for that? And you
also just don't have that swap and that pick now
available for trade. If you thought something was gonna come
along with a one for one or a one for
two type swap.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you'd be in a lot better position if you're
trying to turn Randal into someone that you might keep
for longer term or fits better if you had the
draft assets you lost in the Dillingham move.
Speaker 1: I think because even look, could you could trade Randall
that Pistons pick and then if you had your pick,
like the swap or the pick that might have gotten
you Cam Johnson.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, yeah, I think it's just I don't know
charitably Dillingham maybe is there for when Conley ages out,
which were like pretty close to it at this point,
and it wasn't ever like he's gonna be our six
man on a team that is gonna make the fine.
Like me, that felt like the logic. I just if
it was, I think that that wasn't it?
Speaker 1: These are for you if we've back to back Pelicans notes.
Speaker 2: All right, Mike Scotto confirms that brandon Ingram shut down
previous talks that would have landed John Collins in New
Orleans because he did not want to end up in Utah.
Uh is that a mistake by brandon Ingram? What's the
appeal for for Utah?
Speaker 1: Like?
Speaker 2: Why do you want that's? I mean, this isn't Ingram
to Utah has been something we've sort of like seen
kicked around just because where else you know, it was
a lot of it. Uh, why would Utah be interested in.
Speaker 1: Him to get off Collins his money for next year.
Speaker 2: In order to take on I mean if it's as
a rental like that the lot it's always been, because
then you're talking, Okay, we want to keep him. No sorry,
if it's what you're saying, and it's well, we'd love
to be out from under Collins, Uh, and that next
year of the deal, so we'll rent brandon Ingram, let
him go into free agency. That's weird. And if it's
we believe brandon Ingram and Lorie market and are the
ideal front court combo, like, that's maybe weird. I don't
I the Utah appeal is I just I don't know, man,
Like I I get the New Orleans side of it, obviously,
like give us Walker Kessler maybe and we're happy or
that was before you've MESSI became a superstar. But yeah,
I buy brandon Ingram not wanting to go to go
to Utah. And I also I don't understand why Utah
would have ever been all that interested.
Speaker 1: Do you think it would have been more justified by
them over the off season before John Collins went on
to have the season that he's having.
Speaker 2: Probably probably, but I still don't understand the financial side,
you know.
Speaker 1: And I ultimately think it was smart by brandon Ingram
if he's the one who poo pooed that deal. Because Okay,
let's say you play well in Utah, they're still a
team like the Pelicans, are less likely to let him
walk for not they might view themselves as trapped because
of the Zia Williams situation. They might still pay you,
or they'll send you to another team. Maybe that panics
that the deadline er needs an infusion that's more likely
to keep you. Because of Utah situation. He could have
a lowry market in type season and they might still
like when Mattery first went to Utah, and they could
still they're at a point where so we'll just let
you go anyway or go find They might, or at
the very least, I would say they they probably more
inclined to really try and squeeze him on the open market.
He has to look at the cap space landscape and say,
any team I'm on needs to want or have an
outside chance of wanting to pay me moving forward.
Speaker 2: Well, And I mean the The other downside is if
you don't want to be in Utah, there is a
good chance that Utah's like we're going to beat the
market because it might be like two teams and you're
here now for four years in a place you don't
want to be, and we're all just waiting for the
trade request, you know, like that's that's no good. We
don't want that either.
Speaker 1: And this is the question I have about him, which
is why I included him, because so much time has
spent on Lavine now and Butler and Durant apparently by us,
is there a brandon Ingram team?
Speaker 2: I mean, he's just a hard player to have in
a major role because of all the limit, all the
things he doesn't do, Like it's everything that was like
problematic about him in New Orleans will follow him, Like
I think we know roughly what sort of player he is.
Just to compare him to Levine, Levine gives you the
off ball value like over over a career, like Ingram has,
you know, shot it more from three. But like I
think if you're comparing the two, you're just gonna trust
Levigne in a smaller to add value as a smaller role.
Now like even if he's paid not like a small
role player, but Ingram is just if he doesn't have
the ball and isn't getting the shots he likes, which
are tough too, is like, what is he doing for
you at the price point you're gonna have to pay?
So I don't know what that team is like, I
don't know. I don't see the team that's like we
need a moderate efficiency two point jump shooter that doesn't
help us very much off the ball on offense or defense,
Like who who's asking for that? I don't, I don't,
I don't know.
Speaker 1: And then there's also even if there's a team that
just want to send back contracts as New Orleans at
the point where that's what they're gonna send out Brandon
Ingram for, are they still trying to get real stuff
for him?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I don't know.
Speaker 1: This one's not gonna be any less confusing, I guess.
As we move on to the latest sign on Williamson
reporting ESPN's Bobby Marks and I think it was was
a Tim McMahan had a fascination piece the other day
about just kind of Zion's value around the league. One
rival exec said that like figuring out his trade value
is the hardest thing to do right now, Zion is
not planning to request the trade though, despite changing representation
this season. I don't even know if he has a
leverage to request the trade to be just I honestly
don't know. However, Mark Stein of The Styline previously reported
Zion techically is available. The only Pelicans consider not available
are Herb Trey Murphy and Eves mecI. Apparently an executive
from the East told ESPN though I would probably do
something stupid to get him if I were making decisions,
I just want to make it clear I'm not that
executive from the Eastern Conference. That is something I've already said,
but I'm not an executive for an Eastern Conference team.
They've kind of flowed the ESPN mentioned like Golden State
as a possible landing spot. Zion's contract is fascinating too.
They also introduced the idea that with the Pelicans just
move him. As a contract his contract's not really detrimental.
If you're watching on YouTube, you could see the way
the guarantees trigger on screen. But he has three years
and one hundred and twenty seven million dollars left. All
of them are non guaranteed, and he has to reach
certain he has to reach certain way in benchmarks and
games played benchmarks for it to progressively become more guaranteed.
And so if New Orleans really pushed forward or wanted it,
if they want off the money, they can probably just
get there. But you don't, I don't. Just don't think
you lose a transcendent talent, potential transcendent talent. However, injury
prone they are for nothing. What do you make of
all this? We've talked about it a bunch, but I
found this analysis of it interesting. So Zion not requesting
the trade is good. Maybe that means that he's happy
in New Orleans. But if you're the Pelicans, like, how
do you just approach this? Is it just we need
to wait and hope that lightning strikes in a bottle
with him for a season, or are you ready to
move on?
Speaker 2: I think all the challenges that we've discussed related to
Zion are still there, which is to say, he's hard
to build around. The conditioning and health are unreliable, and
so like, what are you really doing if he is
the central figure of your organization? Like that's just that's
a challenge that they're gonna have for as long as
he's there. But I think, like it's the nature of
this contract sort of makes it so that anytime you're
trading Zion, like or, there's no urgency because you don't
really ever get to a point where you're selling low
because of the like stacked non guaranteed seasons. So it's
like he's always gonna have appeal in some way to
a team that wants money that it can erase, or
you know what I mean, like or that's more willing
to take on the year to year like uncertainties than
the Pelicans are, who've endured them for half a decade. Like,
so I think you can, as New Orleans, if you're
comfortable with just carrying over all of the complications that
come with building around him, which I just mentioned and
we talk about all the time, you can just wait
and hope you do get a healthy stretch from him,
and either that means like, oh my god, we are
good enough with him, or it means like now we
can trade him for like real value because you know.
So it's it's weird in that, like, as long as
he's there, it's always going to be difficult for New
Orleans to like really build a functional team that you
can like sort of believe in, but like they also
have like there's a real justification for not like freaking
out and moving him, because you can be the team
that makes the money disappear if you want to, Like
there's it's it's it's very unusual, it's unique. There aren't
contracts like this, Like this is a special case.
Speaker 1: I also just so if you're moving like so the
Nets would be a fascinating team for me because he's
not going to ruin your tank this year and he's
always injured that you could just slow play it next year.
But if you're the Pelicans, unless it they're like the
Brooklyn's aren't a team that's gonna give you a couple
of first round picks for Zion Williams in And so
if you're the Pelicans, you could say, well, just getting
out of that money has value. So let's say there's
like some sort of expose, like where's what are you
doing with that money? Because if you're getting rid of Zion,
you've decided what we're starting over. You don't need that
salary slot. Yeah, if you want to, you're not getting
anyone in free agency that that first of all, not
only have you in New Orleans that's not historically been
a destination. Freeingsey has not worked like that in what
feels like years. I mean, I know Paul George just left,
jaylen Brunson went from Dallas to New York, but how
often is that stuff actually happening?
Speaker 2: Right now, you're running up against an issue I want
to talk about so bad, but we'll save it for
for Jimmy Butler at the end.
Speaker 1: But that's I just don't think are there is there
any I think if they were gonna move him, I'm
not moving him for less than two first round picks
at this point because I'd rather wait and see can
I get him healthy and reboot his value or does
this just work out? I don't understand the what are
you gonna do find a way to move him with
CJ McCullum for expiring money, like you're doing that as
part of the value Again, what does that do for you?
Speaker 2: Antonio?
Speaker 1: I mentioned that on a previous podcast I did the
other day. I would love that, and it would just
it's just not something that Spurs would ever do though.
Speaker 2: Yeah, probably not. But man, the two first.
Speaker 1: Round picks resign on Williamson with money. But they're not.
They're just not gonna do that. I would love it, though,
And that's that's the value of Wendy. By the way,
is you could everyone complains about he needs more paint
touches or let's him operate down low? Is there a
big that he can't play alongside?
Speaker 2: No, there's nobody he can't play with. That's that's the thing,
Like that of all his incredible qualities. Like there's nobody
you put on the spurs that that you say I
don't like that fit. It's not possible. You can't find
me the you put Rudy Gobert on the spurs, I'd
be like, looks good to me. Like that's I see
no problems.
Speaker 1: We are getting closer to Jimmy Butler grant just two
more teams.
Speaker 2: I hope I remember my take. Some more updates on
the ongoing dearon Fox situation. UH Sam Amck of The
Athletic reports that Fox is not on the trade market.
UH Bleach reports. Eric Pinkas says executives still expect Fox
to request out before the February six trade deadline. So
can some conflicting stuff I guess or maybe not conflicting
if it's the contention is he's not on it now
trademarket wise, but he maybe.
Speaker 1: I will say no Amy, because I think he used
to be on the King's beat, right, but he's always been.
Speaker 2: He's local too, so like he's yeah, he's very much on.
That's the guy you pay attention to for for Kings stuff,
for sure, among national writers, among probably anybody honestly. Ammick
also notes the Magic are supposed to be heavily involved
or interested in fox Stein. Mark Stein says the Spurs
will be seriously interested over the offseason. We have heard
the Houston rumblings in conjunction with Houston not being interested
in making a trade. So just looking at Fox here,
but let's go, let's go like sort of sequentially, do
you believe that the Kings are not considering trading him
right now that he's not on the market.
Speaker 1: I do, and my stance will remain that I think
it would be dumb to do so unless he asks
for out. Like this isn't a Kevin Durant situation where
I think the Sun should make the call. You're dealing
with an All NBA type player in his prime who
is not communicated yet to you, Like his next contract's
going to be expensive, he will still be the same
type of player on that next contract. So unless he
asked for out, I wouldn't be looking at moving him.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we've talked about it a little bit. Now. You
made me remember it's like, try everything else before you
go to trading foxs And actually we did. We said
that before Mike Brown got fired, right, it was like,
here's all the other things you should do before you
trade Fox and they did one.
Speaker 1: So that was prescient, that conversation of aging so well,
even though it was it was it posted like ten
minutes before he got fired.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we missed a massive development, but we sort of,
I don't know, pointed to it.
Speaker 1: We just fore casted it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we cast it. There is I do have some
more Kings notes. You want me to get through those?
Even if they're not on the screen.
Speaker 1: I think they're kinda well, it's gonna the other thing
do you expect Fox to before we move to the
next slide, which might be more about the Kings going
the opposite direction, like, do you think Fox, what would
be the value in Fox requesting out?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: Is it just if you waited. Let's say he asked,
like January fifteenth, when all these other guys will come
out as we'll be traded. It's just well, now you
might have more say over where you go because the
Kings have less time to figure it out, because doesn't
it also increase the risk that well, then you have
to stay on a team like Anthony Davis did that
you requested a trade from for a half season, and
shit's just awkward.
Speaker 2: I think that's part of it. I think the flip
side of that, which is the sooner you get to
this new team, the more information you're able to get
about it from Fox's perspective, to see if this is
where I want to, you know, sign my next contract.
That that's part of it too. Maybe now that's more
of a difference between like now versus the off season,
because now versus the actual trade deadline is a month
and whatever. Yeah, I don't know, I could I could
see now this hasn't been reported or anything, but it's
like what we have seen come out just suggests to
me that Fox is like seeing the King's situation with
clear eyes, and it's like we're not a contender. I
don't know how we get there. I want in my
prime of my career to be on a contender, and
I'm not the reason we're not a contender. Like that's so,
I think he's just surveying the landscape, and I think
correctly concluding like this isn't where it's gonna happen for
me in terms of like maybe winning a title or
making a conference final. So like, I get it, it's
just now it's a time in question.
Speaker 1: Basically, I would still be threefold point very quickly if
he requested a trade. Now. I think one, you might
as well play out the season and see if you
make all NBA and he can get a five year,
three hundred and forty plus million dollar deal, then you're
locked into there for another year. But that's a lot
of money. Two, the teams that are being mentioned, and
I'd be curious to know what your favorite fit for
him is. The Magic, the Spurs, and the Rockets just
sort of the primary teams that would be wanting to
go after him. Those are all teams that I don't
think internally are motivated to make a mid season deal.
I think they would all because Orlando all the injuries,
and then with the Spurs, that's really not how they operate,
although you could make the case that Wenby's so good,
now do you treat him with urgency? And then Houston,
I just I don't think Houston should make them If
I'm the Magic or Spurs, Yeah, I'm giving up what
I need to give up to get Fox, So I
think that would factor into it. And then the other
thing is here too, that the Kings are going to
be fine because Kean Ellis is starting now.
Speaker 2: So that ut, yeah, you saved the big the best
point for last. I think I like his fit on
all three of those teams, and I just think, like,
I guess, I guess if you're willing to wait for
him to actually hit free agency and sign him then,
which is a year and a half away, right right, Yeah,
I I I that's so far down the road that
maybe this burs could justify that. But for all three
of those teams, it's like, if you want ieron Fox,
go get dearon Fox. Like, just just do that and
have him on the team now. And then if you
still think, oh, we're not quite ready, it's really about
twenty five twenty six or twenty six twenty seven, fine,
but like, just go get him if you can get him,
I don't. I just don't want to wait a year
and a half to sign the guy. It looks mockty.
Speaker 1: So if you're Fox, though, are you short circuiting your
one chance at the supermax by requesting a trade now
and then two? Wouldn't you rather let's throw the super
max out of the equation. He will have more control,
I would think over where he goes if this season's over.
He just has the year left on his deal, as
opposed to teams believing, hey, is he year and a
half before free agency, like we can sell him on
this place. Why would he have more control because he
has that just one year left before free agency. So
if he tells you I'm not going to extend, I
think teams will take that as a more salient point,
like over the summer, than they will now. Whereas well,
we got a season and a half to show you that, no,
you actually are going to stay here.
Speaker 2: Well, what I would worry about is getting to the
point where you are just gonna hit free agency and
then nobody has any money and you your options are
You know that that's hard to imagine, But it's not
off the table because we're sort of in that or
if you're in a situation like it'll be this summer
where any free agent is like do I want to
play for Brooklyn? Like I don't know that now san Antonio,
I think is maybe the exception because they could have
the money potentially to sign him what to an off
season and a year and a half from now. I'll
just keep using that term, whereas like Houston may not
and Orlando may not, so like but then I yeah,
I think the problem really, as I'm thinking about it,
is that like if you are the Spurs and you
just want to get him now, like, it's not he's
gonna be He's gonna cost three firsts like and and
stuff probably, so like that could be prohibitive if you
do think you can sign him, I don't know. I
just I just want to do it now, and if
I'm Fox, I really want to do it now because
I'm just like.
Speaker 1: I'm not interesting. That's interesting. So of the three, you
think the Spurs are the team that are like, if
he's available out like, just go get him.
Speaker 2: I think so because if you're the Spurs, then any
team that gets him now potentially has a favorable situation
because if he does get to free agency, You're like
nobody's nobody can pay you what we're gonna pay you,
or like two teams can pay you what we can
pay you and they suck you know, like you don't
want to go play. You left Sacramento because you didn't
like their ceiling. You want to go play for Brooklyn,
You want to go play for whoever else has money.
Speaker 1: I would just fave the Spurs acting so Unspurs like,
so I'm gonna say the Spurs too, the other Darren
Fox stuff. So this would be the flip side of it.
Teams are waiting to see. Uh this is per Michael
Scott of whop type, whether the Kings actually make a
panic move soloving the firing of Mike Brown, and this
would be is said. What I find fascinating about this,
and Sam A mcadds like this is they've had extensive
talks about Cam Johnson with the Nets and so I
think there's two questions I want to ask about this. Grant,
Let's let's stick with Foxtar a second. If the Kings
make a move like this, is it really a panic
move or do you think that it's more so they
have a good read on the d'haron Fox situation. They
don't think that trade request is coming down the pipeline
because if you think he's gonna ask to be traded,
I really do think it would take a special brand
of stupid to trade future first round picks.
Speaker 2: Right well, the Kings.
Speaker 1: Speaking of a special brand of stupid.
Speaker 2: I think that's a good question. I think, like, what
does a panic trade even look like for them? Because
if it's a cell, that's almost like good call, like
if you, oh, let's get off to bard rozen or
something like that's yeah, I mean not that he makes
a ton, but it's like that I don't like to fit.
Maybe we should never have liked it. Selling wouldn't seem
selling would seem to maybe be the right move given
like some of the tea leaves so far. If it's
a bye, like what is a so Cam Johnson, I
don't think would be a panic acquisition. Well, unless you're
keeping up first, yeah, then then then then it's like.
Speaker 1: I think, I think what makes it is it considered
a panic move because they can't trade it would be
a conditional twenty twenty seven first round pick, and that's
where it gets Oh, you're not giving up this year's
first round pick, because that's already technically gone, or maybe
maybe you're bad enough that you keep it, but now
you've traded a conditional first round pick that, by the way,
if it's conditional and you end up being good enough
this year, well now that obligations extending past twenty twenty seven.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I guess just using Cam Johnson and our like
ballpark expected price, that wouldn't feel like a panic trade
to me. It would. It might still be dangerous though,
because I do think you need to take you need
to view Fox as a short timer. I think, I
think so, Like if that's the reality, I don't. I
think you need to be looking to acquire first as
opposed to giving them up for a good player, but
not someone that's like, well we lost Fox, but we've
got Cam Johnson anchoring. You know, that's just never gonna
be the thing.
Speaker 1: I would qualify a panic trade with them, and a
selling is probably the right. Like we talk about being proactive,
that's the writings on the wall. I would look at
it as a buy that costs you even a first
round pick at this point, and if it costs more
than that, and it's not because Cam Johnson, you're not
getting Cam. I would be shocked if they Kevin Heurder,
Trey Lyles. And that twenty twenty seven pick for Cam
Johnson was a deal that Brooklyn accepted. And so now you're, yeah,
are they gonna throw in Devin Carter? So like to me,
if you're getting a non star or a non like
someone who just you know, fixes everything, and you're giving
up because I can't even say the equivalent of more
one first round pick because a twenty twenty seven first
round pick that could spill out, that counts as panic
to me if the player is not so their trade.
While I do think that they shouldn't, I'm seeing this
seas and through unless the Aaron Fox says otherwise, can
you get a Jonathan Isaac without giving up? Like that's
probably what they need to look at and anything else
you could talk me into one one asset plus salary
for Cam Johnson not being a panic trade. But do
you think Cam Johnson's a good fit? What do you
think that he does for this team? Aside I guess
deepen the rotation of dependable players, Like what does he
do that you think? But like fixes the Kings?
Speaker 2: I mean he gives you a forward that isn't Keegan Murray,
which is the only forward they really have. Like that's
you know, he he would address a spot of weakness.
But like I think what we would what we've been
saying is like the Kings, you know they and I
think what King's fans, It's hard to know now, I
think everybody's pretty down. But like Cam Johnson type acquisition
is that is, if you thought Fox like he's not
going anywhere, Cam Johnson would make sense like he's he
could help them or someone of that level could help them.
It's it, but it is a panic move. I think
if you believe Fox is just not someone that's going
to be there, which which I think, like you what
do you let's let's relate. This is the core question,
like do you think dearon Fox is on the Kings?
Does he sign a new contract or an extension with
the Kings?
Speaker 1: Not if he doesn't make all NBA and even yeah,
because he's probably not going to give that up. So
have we seen anybody pass on? Like that's no, right, So.
Speaker 2: That's you know what that like that points towards his
own urgency to move because he's gonna want to sign
that with somebody else, right, right.
Speaker 1: I'm saying he can't sign that much, Like he could
get an extension with another team, but the supermax is
only going to come with the Kings.
Speaker 2: Do I not know the rule? He can't get it
if he makes all NBA this season playing for the Spurs.
Speaker 1: No, because you need to be on the team that
drafted you, right, like the I don't remember he's not,
Yeah you do, because he's not. That would be like
the veteran extension that he's not eligible for.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're right. That's the whole point of the rule
is to try to keep you guys on the team
that drafted him. See. I can't even remember old CBA
stuff anymore.
Speaker 1: Because they introduced too many new CBA things.
Speaker 2: That's on me. Anyway. What else we got? We got
another team here.
Speaker 1: The Toronto Raptors.
Speaker 2: Are you all right? The Future of Yaka Pearl a
five part documentary.
Speaker 1: Series ohing us I wouldn't put it bad.
Speaker 2: Mike Scotto says the NBA execs are wondering if Toronto
will look to move him. Pearl does have two years
and thirty nine million left on his contract. He has
a player option for twenty six, twenty seven is a
good center, Like he's a good NBA center, starting caliber.
Speaker 1: Fron Off hot takes left and right in the middle.
Speaker 2: Of the pack. Well, it's just like, I don't know
if you're talking like it might it seems silly if
like executives are wondering if Toronto will move him, talking
about like he's Jimmy Butler or whatever. There there is
like a real conversation to be had because of what
he makes it and how good he is. Where does
Pearle like solve the problem? Though? Like what what is
there a team out there where Oh, he's the answer.
Speaker 1: I also look at it and say, I do think
he's better than he's He's more dynamic, I'll say, than
these players. But if you can get vouch or Yonis
Valanciunas for a second round pick in a contract you
don't want, I'm not looking at Yaka Purl. The bigger
thing to me is the Raptors don't have like the
future of their center position locked down, So why would
you move a good player who also you could say
he doesn't fit their timeline? Toronto has this weird open
ended timeline where we haven't seen their full group together basically,
ever Manual quickly just returned. That's great, but they could
wind up on a faster track for all we know,
just because they have good players there. So I get
why executives might be monitoring it, but I'm not. That's
a weird thing where I hate that for everybody involved.
If I'm Toronto and I get an offer that bowls me, Yeah,
Yaka Purl's not untouchable, but why you're not, Like the
Bulls should shop Nikola Vucevich for whatever they could get,
The Wizard should do that with Yonas Valentunis. They should
not do that with Yaka Purdl. And if I'm another team,
what I prefer to have Yaka Pearl over this season's
version of Nikolovuchevich, probably just because there's like a steadier
version of Yaka Purl there that isn't gonna sub marine
your entire existence that we sometimes seen with foos. But
I'm not giving up, Like why would you trade Yaka
Purdle for a throwaway first round pick? And then why
are you giving up two first round picks for Yaka Purdle?
Shown me the team where that would make sense to do?
So I hate this for everybody involve. Nobody monitored Yaka Purdle,
not even the Raptors.
Speaker 2: I think they should trade him to the Spurs for
a future first that we get to discuss whether it's
going to convey or not for several years. I like
to close the loop on things that way.
Speaker 1: He's like, of all the players we've talked about, well,
who's more likely to get moved Yaka Pearle or t Aaron.
Speaker 2: Fox dearon Fox? How about that?
Speaker 1: I think I'm with you. It is time to talk
about Jimmy Butler. Everyone's been awaiting it. We haven't really
talked about Jimmy Butler on this podcast at all this year.
Jimmy Butler grant he is basically requested or demanded a
trade now.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: He says he doesn't think he can recapture the joy
of playing while still in Miami. Point blank. That was
That's one of those things we've talked a lot about. Well,
does do exchanges convey differently from tech to when you
actually hear or watch them?
Speaker 2: Not?
Speaker 1: This one? It was awkward, af Did you watch it?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I have seen I have seen this one.
Speaker 1: That dead silence was just like it.
Speaker 2: Felt almost performative, like a touch of it, but partly
because it's Jimmy Butler, Like you know, he he does
lay it on thick sometimes, I think in his in
his messaging.
Speaker 1: Now here's my question. He has now ESPN Chomp Serane
came out with the report immediately after that press conference.
He would prefer to be elsewhere, but Butler reportedly doesn't
necessarily care where, which you don't really see. Is that
a reflection of him just wanting to cause maximum chaos
or a reflection of his market because initially when it
wasn't kind of official and his agent was all upset,
there was the MAVs, the Sons, the Warriors, and the
Rockets were his list of preferred teams. And we've kind
of gotten confirmation that like two of those teams just
wouldn't even be interested. It'd be the Duves with the Suns,
and then the Sons need Bradley Belt a waves, no
trade clause and the Heat to maybe have like their
front office to have like a bunch of annual r So,
i I'm just like, what what is your read on that?
But but did he actually tell us where he wants
to go? His hair was lime green? So was this
a Celticston situation or an alternative Minnesota Timberwolves jersey situation?
Speaker 2: What you read on that there's some lie, there's some
that colors in some of the Pelicans like Marti Gras
jerseys too, So that was where my mind went.
Speaker 1: That's not close enough to the Spurs fiesta like Green.
Speaker 2: Mill, right, there's somebody else has like a weird green
alternate that I can't think of now.
Speaker 1: I don't know Patty's day years ago. It's behind me.
Speaker 2: He wants to be on the Knicks. Uh So my
first thought was, like, are are we finding players still
for trade requests? Can go that allowed? Because this this
was deliberately falling short of I want to be traded.
It was I need to go somewhere where I can
find my joy. And they said, is that here? I
forget who's asking him? And he said, I don't know,
or it's probably not. So it's just like I do
think I'm cynical. This felt like a calculated I'm gonna
say as much as I possibly can about how unhappy
I am and how much I want to be traded
without doing whatever it takes to get over the line
of This was a trade request that I can get
fined for in addition to all the other stuff you're
saying about, like you know, opening up the market.
Speaker 1: It was adjacent to having Rachel Nichols on site for
the interview immediately after the tour deforce like that was
it was that level of calculated they did. There was
a report that the heat might suspend him for it,
but they didn't announced that they won't, at least as
of now as we're recording this. I don't can you
get fined like he was asked about it, and also
he might like we at least we know what he
put on his twenty twenty five vision boarder in his
Gratitude journal of need to be somewhere I could recapture
the joy and it's not here.
Speaker 2: I just wanted to have some joy, you know. Shouldn't
we wish that for everybody?
Speaker 1: Do you think this was inevitable? Right? Because he let
the bread his camp, whether they denied or not, let
the bread combs kind of fall out, and then pat
Riley probably had talks with the teams on the list
of various teams didn't like the offers, said they weren't
going to trade him, and it was almost just a
day are saying you're gonna have to make this ugly
on your end. I find that interesting because I don't
think Miami wins here by letting it get Like, if anything,
Jimmy Butler's trade value right now is less right than
Jimmy Butler's trade value like at the start of the season, Right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think so. I think that's right, just because
if he's further on in the contract and.
Speaker 1: Then I know you're not trading him on your terms
is basically where I'm getting at.
Speaker 2: I think that's right. Does does part of you? I
think it's probably counterproductive for Riley to take like the
hard line and come out before this and say we're
not trading him. Part of me like enjoys owner like
management being like you sign a contract, we're in charge.
Like you don't get somewhere else unless we say so.
I like, And a lot of the reporting I read
today and speculation was just kind of like, right, he's
the only executive in the league that can do this
because like he's never gonna be stripped of, Like he's
just in a position where he can be a hard
liner like this, and like, yeah, you want to walk
walk like that you're gonna but you're gonna sit here
and be miserable for several months.
Speaker 1: It's probably not smart, Sam pressed he try to do that.
I don't know why, but could you even envision him
acting like I could.
Speaker 2: Do it in a way that was like that seems right,
that's a way to play it, you know, or that's
a reaction. But does any part of you. I don't
know if it's probably not a good instinct, but I
do kind of like it when the party that's actually
in charge, like contractually says no, no, no, Like this is
you don't get to just be difficult and get what
you want. You know what this is. This is the
parenting side where that's like, I am not gonna cave
to your tantrums, to your rational behavior. You can make
this as hard as you want, but I'm still in charge,
and I'm gonna cling to that illusion for as long
as possible, probably to my detriment, which I think map
pretty perfectly onto what the Heat are doing right now
in the position of authority.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, this is just tough because he also
he still intends to decline his fifty two point four
million dollar player option. I think a lot of teams
might view that or people. I would say a lot
of people would probably view that as a bad thing.
If you're a team, you might actually appreciate that because, oh,
he's willing to get paid less for a longer time
he's not getting and if he does, it'll be a
two year thing. I mean, like, you're not an I
just can't see based off what the market's going to be.
Unless that's why Brooklyn is pear clutching cap space at
the moment. We want Jimmy Butler on this team. No,
they don't. So where are you going? Detroit can maybe
a Caspace or Washington They're no. So I'm just I'm
fascinated because I think Miami drawing the hardline stance is right,
but it's also their fault that they kind of got here.
Because now it's also that Terry Rozier trade is still
one of the most inexplicable trades in recent memory, because
you're out a first round pick in two and twenty seven. Now,
so what are you valuing back? Do you just think
you're going to be good enough so you trade Jimmy
Butler for whatever, and depending on what's coming back, could
you make the case from Miami side, before we even
talk about teams that might be interested, could you make
the case that they're just like better off letting his money,
daring his money to come off the books.
Speaker 2: Then this is exactly what I wanted to talk to
you about. So normally, and I do this more than you,
I would say you got to do something because he
can walk, and you always correctly say, well, you can
sign and trade. It's not like you hit this, the
contract expires and you have no recourse as the hero.
Not not really true. I'm wondering if if the new
CBA is such that, and with the example recently is
Paul George and the Clippers, because I said, like, why
wouldn't you preserve the asset? Why wouldn't Why wouldn't you
just pay him whatever you need to pay him and
then trade him because you get something instead of letting
him walk, because what are you going to do with
that money? I wonder if or do you think now
with teams with just the new rules, nobody's really totally
figured out how to like win the game with the
new current rules. And I wonder if or if you
think the value of just letting a guy walk or
is there now value because you can be like you
just want the clean books, because there's nothing worse now
than being stuck on money. That's like bad to like
moderately bad because it just inflexibility is everywhere the rules,
that's harder to make trades just with aggregation, and can't
take back more than more than you sent, all this
other stuff depending on which apron you're in. I wonder
if you think maybe now there's increased value in the
heat saying, for example, you will stay here the rest
of the year, you can opt out and you can leave,
and we'll be happy to move on without having taken
back money we maybe didn't want in a trade and
a lot of it because this is fifty million bucks.
And if that's true, does that revive free agency which
has been a complaint everybody's had, is like nobody moves
in free agency anymore. All these extensions, all these whatevers,
all these trades. Do you see the connection there where
it's like if suddenly teams are willing to let guys
walk and hit free agency, they're not afraid of that.
I do think it's possible that we see a return
to where's Jimmy Butler gonna sign or where's the whoever's
next year? Like I think those two things might be linked.
Speaker 1: That's an interest. I hadn't thought about it through that lens,
And you might be right, because did we kind of
see this on smaller different scales where Washington probably could
have gotten a second round pick or two for Tyas
Jones and made the active decision to say, we'll let
him walk. We're better off having him for the rest
of the season. And then even with Paul George and
the Clippers, they kind of made they they knew he
wasn't signing the extension that they offered him, and they
knew what he wanted, and they kept him anyway. And
then even the offer like the most aggressive offers came
from Denver and Golden State apparently to get him via
signing trade a sigre from the Sixers, they made the
decision to let him walk for nothing because they didn't
want some of that money on the books. And you
could still go back. And does that still make the
most amount of sense? I had not thought about it
that way, But I guess it's all relative to you
know what you're gonna get back, and I guess what
you're saying, though, to actually be less generalized about the
way I'm responding to it is, well, previously you would
have said, we'll just get what you can for a
player you know you're gonna leave. But now if get
what you can means throw away first round picks and
money on our books, beyond even Jimmy Butler's contract, why
do it? And maybe that flexibility They're not gonna do
anything with that additional flexibility and will they even have
it depending on they're paying Terry Rozier and they have
Tyler hero bam Adebayo. But it's well, we didn't hamstring
ourselves with players we didn't want, and okay, we punted
on like a first round. And that's the other thing though,
because you mentioned before we started recording this that the
Heat want if they make a trade with the Dubs,
they want Jonathan Mingo back in any deal, Like, what
is the team that is then gonna come in with,
because what is Jimmy Butler's value? And it will vary
by team, but which team should be the most desperate
to get Jimmy Butler that actually has more because you
could argue that, yes, the Sun should be desperate to
get Jimmy Butler. But that's the exact type of package
where it's what is my I still tend to romanticize
those distant first round picks. So if you're gonna get
a twenty thirty one Phoenix first round pick and you
have to take on Bradley Beal, I might consider it
is the rather than go the route of letting Jimmy
Butler's money come off. But I hadn't thought of what
you were saying, and I think you might be right.
And does that stance though, even if it doesn't directly
contribute to the returner free agency? Do we see like,
is it a better negotiating position for the Heat to
where oh, it really looks like they're gonna let keep
him and we just saw the Clippers do this. Does
that make other teams who really want him or quote
unquote need him more inclined to up their offer?
Speaker 2: I think in general, anytime those teams do this all
the time, they project like they try to drive up
offers by saying we love this guy or we're not
gonna trade him, just because that conveys, well, you're gonna
really gonna have to blow us away because we're not
going to take. You know, we're not even interested. You know,
it's just a pretty standard negotiating thing. I do think
that with teams specifically like Miami. Now, my like theory,
if it's even rises to that, I think doesn't apply universally.
Like it works in Miami. It might work. Look at
the teams that we're talking about. The Clippers did it.
That's a free agent destination, LA all right, Like Miami
can do it. Miami is going to be a free
agent destination like Memphis in New Orleans. If you say
we'll just let them walk, we don't need it, Like
that's less of a good idea because your ability to
do something with your flexibility and the cash you're saving
or whatever in free agency just isn't what it is
for these big market teams that free agents want to
go to. But I think I think it does give
Miami negotiating leverage, and I think specifically Miami probably has
reason to believe the value like flexibility and not having
bad money is better for Miami than it is for
a lot of other teams because of what it can
exp in free agency, Like flexibility just matters more if
you have more opportunities to add talent through as many
means as possible, and not every team is on equal
footing that way. So like of the total revival of
free agency, Like maybe I'm overstating it, but like in
some isolated cases, I do think it's gonna make more
sense to just say I don't want Bradley Beal and
another year that salary and other stuff for Butler. I
would rather just have the ability to do what I
want with my and I don't want encumbrances, you know,
even if they come with sweeteners like distant picks.
Speaker 1: Could that also bring about the return of Well, then
we're just gonna maybe it doesn't bring about the return
of free agency, but we see the reprioritization of getting
back short term contracts because you can also argue the
mechanism to up the value of Jimmy Butler would be well,
if there are unsavory deals, I don't even I mean
Bradley Beal would be one, but the Sons don't have
the assets to attach. Is there another team where it's
we're taking back this money we don't want. But like
that was the difference between us getting two first round
picks and one first round pick for Jimmy.
Speaker 2: Butler, maybe I think, like to use the Beal example,
I don't know, Yeah, I guess, I don't know. I
don't know. I'm not sure what my answer is to that.
I just think, like Beal being an example, teams that
have the kinds of contracts that, like the Heat, would
like to avoid getting back if they can just to
use this specific example, like the sweet and the Sons
can't sweeten it with first unless they do your Ryan dundeal.
But like, I don't think teams like that are gonna
have the sweeteners to like make it worthwhile to really
to tip the scales in favor of we'll take this
bad money because teams like teams in that position, Like,
I don't know, it's hard to do this without more
specific examples. It's just I don't know. I guess what
I'm saying is increasingly the idea of just not taking
back anything I don't want, regardless of what I might
want that's coming with it starts to have more appeal
to me, like from the Heat's perspective, like just just
and this is coming from someone that like nothing makes
me happier than rowing things away because it feel like
it simplifies my life and so like the team, I
would be constantly like, you want to leave, great, I
don't want anything back. That's gonna be clutter like that's
I might not be the best person to pull on
the subject.
Speaker 1: And but this gets to the point though, of okay,
so then what is Let's start with the teams that
were on his initial list. The MAVs are non starter,
I do you buy. We've talked already about the Rockets
don't want to make a mid season trade, and they've
also prioritized getting someone on their timeline. I kind of
view them as a non starter as well.
Speaker 2: I would agree.
Speaker 1: I would agree the Suns I view as a non
starter for the Heat as of right now. I honestly
don't know if if you got I'm gonna say the
number twenty five pick in this year's draft, a twenty
thirty one Sons pick unprotected, and then Bradley Beal waves
his no trade clause. That's like basically what they're top.
That's that's conceptually, by the way, because we're assuming they
could get a first round pick for Ryan Dunn. Are
you doing that trade? Is Miami?
Speaker 2: I think so Beal has next year and one more
or is it just he has a.
Speaker 1: Player option, but he's probably assume he's probably gonna PA.
Speaker 2: I don't want that contract, Like you just saw a
team pay to get off of it, Like I don't.
I don't want it. So yeah, I guess they're I mean,
we're just talking theoretically because the offer you said, like
you said, just the Suns can't do.
Speaker 1: It, clear I would give up the Like I'm trying
to think of a team I like used Boston, Like
you could use Jayden and Springer tech lead, but then
you need to find a team and take on jay
and Springer because the money's all wonky. But like I
think I would give up a late first round pick
for Ryan Dunn. I don't know if I'm kind of
overstating that. So like even one of these younger teams,
like if the Jazz think they have a throwaway first
round pick, like just go out there and get like
to Yeah, I don't know, but I don't think based
off what Miami is saying, their messaging would indicate that, no,
they don't want Bradley Beal's contract. But I would also
say Bradley bial is someone that could in theory play
and you don't own your first round, Like you're not
going to regain control of your draft in theory until
after twenty twenty seven, Like you're not kind of out
of those obligations, but they're probably well, it's probably even
gonna wave his no trade cause to go to a
worst team or right in theory, it could be a
worse team.
Speaker 2: That's the thing. Like there's so many barriers, so that
leaves the Warriors, right, and that's the team where if
you're Miami and you're being offered Kaminga Wiggins to first
a couple a little bit more matching salary, you should
do that. If you're the Heat, you should absolutely do that.
And like that no question my counter would be.
Speaker 1: In this is coming as someone who proposed the more
ambitious trade from the Warriors and way before these trade demands,
I'm not giving If I'm giving up Johnathan Kaminga, I
will give you this year's first round pick and we'll
figure out a way to make the money work. And
that is it. That is not like Jimmy Butler has
requested a trade. He's headed towards free agency, Like that's
where my offer's gonna max that maybe they don't want
to pay Jimmy Butler, but they also might not Would
we rather pay Jimmy Butler for the next two years
or do we want to pay Johnathan Kaminga for four years?
That's an interesting discussion to have.
Speaker 2: Right absolutely, And if so, if you're the Heat, and
I was gonna say, I think the fact that the
Warriors are probably the only game in town means that
now the Heater, we would like to have Butler's money
off the books and no encumbrances against the type of
offer you're talking about where it's it might not be
two firsts, it might need to you know, the Warriors
can hardball it a little bit because there's no competition.
So like there are certain things that just have to
be in the deal. Kaminga seems like he's one of them,
but like Wiggins also has to be in the deal.
And if that's the case, like, if you're the Heat,
you should take that. You should take wigs in Kaminga
and filler for Butler without picks, Like I think so
the Warriors like could be in a position of advantage here,
except that goes back to their side of it is
like do you want to do you want to rent
Jimmy Butler and or then pay him fifty million dollars
a year for two more years. I don't know the
answer to that. I lean towards no, don't.
Speaker 1: John Thaankaminga's had like three good games in a row,
so I don't think that you could wrong.
Speaker 2: Time to ask right, it's untouchable again.
Speaker 1: Well, and also if the if the Heat are gonna
accept that type of offer, and I think this is
the best spot to move on to at least one
of the reports, execs are wondering about a certain team,
but are there just better suited trade partners then? Because
the thing with that offer is, well, now we have
to turn around and pay Jonathan Kaminga. What even if
you like him, but now we have to pay him
for let's say a minimum. I guess you could go
the three year route, but part of the appeal would
be no, we want that deal to stretch out as
like you don't want to do what Houston did with
Jalen Green for instance, where he's basically a placeholder. It
feels like there so are there better teams suited? And
one of the ones that was mentioned was execs told
Michael Scotto of hoops Ype they think the Nugget should
make a run at Jimmy Butler using Michael Porter Junior's deal. Now,
Denver can only include hiss of right now one conditional
first round pick in twenty thirty one. Butler makes forty
eight point eight million this year, so the deal would
basically have to be MPJ, Naji and Sharich for Jimmy
Butler and Alec Burks. And you could expand that include
a bunch of different teams. And if the heat like
one of the youngsters, maybe Denver's willing to give up
Christian Brown. I think they wouldn't, but like if they
were willing to give up Julian Strather, you could expand it.
Is therere a team to take on Charlotte or Nay
Naugy or I don't think they would give up Peyton Watson,
but like that would be a conversation to have. I
have other teams I want to throw at you. But
do you view this as if you're from whose side?
Let's start from Denver side, because I think it's always
easy for us to say Miami will say no, if
you're Denver, it's costing you. I'm gonna say it costs
you one of your youngsters. That's not Christian Brown, your
only first round pick MPJ. But you're also getting off
Chards and nause which would be part of the value
for you. Are you ultimately making that deal?
Speaker 2: I think I am, and and that might have to
do with I I think a feature of it might
be being off mpg's deal. Like you probably you probably
replace it with Butler's, but maybe you don't. And so
if what you get out of this is a title
run with Butler this year and then you have slightly
cleaner books with MPJ not being on the on them anymore,
that's you could frame that as like a decent like
damage control aspect of the trade, which has some favorable
sides to it. I think I do it. Uh are you?
Where are you on it? You don't like it?
Speaker 1: They probably do it because you're getting off two deals
that in retrospect, one of them we at least one
of them we knew in the moment with charge never
should have been given out in the first place. I
guess I don't view. Is Michael Porter Junior on his
contract a more precarious asset than Jimmy Butler on his
next contract? Is what this would come down to? Because
the spacing stuff would worry me. But like, if there's
any offense that could just figure out how to be
top five while lowering their three point volume, still it's
the one that has the greatest player alive and Nicole Yokich, Yeah,
I just I wonder is this it's sort of I
won't even say optimizes. It increases their ceiling, yes, but
I also feel like short term end long term, it
might lower their floor.
Speaker 2: I think that's right. I think that's absolutely right, And
I think you might need to just worry about the
ceiling for now because like you can't. Yo Kic is
different than like Fox, where it's like I don't know
if this team's going anywhere, Like yo Kich is the ultimate,
Like you need to honor this guy, like you need
like he's the best player in the world. You have
to be making win now moves, and we've criticized them
for not doing that by letting the Casey Pee leaves,
and it's just like you have to do this. This
they it makes more sense for them than a lot
of other teams. And I think it's a reasonable question.
Would you rather have Butler for two more years at
fifty or MPG? At what like thirty eight or forty.
I think if you're talking ceiling at the answer is Butler,
you're talking floor, it probably is Porter. But because I
think earlier could just not be helpful.
Speaker 1: I think you're right. How do the heat view that
where it's what they're getting back. Let's say is let's
say they have to take on Nase, they get a
youngster that's not Christian Brown, they get that first round
pick an MPJ, so or say Nause or Sharg one
of those teams. You figure out a way to send
them another place. I still it's easier to move out,
are you, Tario Sharz. That Naji deal goes on forever. Yeah,
it feels like, you know, shout out to Grace Gene,
who had corrected me. I said, like he signed it
like two or three summers ago, and it was like no,
like that happened more recently. It feels like he's been
on that deal forever. So you're probably taking on Nause
with MPJ. I'll just say strather and then that first
round pick. Is that enough for you to move off
the stance that you were previously describing of if we're
just not getting back enough things that we like, we'll
take the even if not the flexibility, like the financial
breathing room.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it's close because like and now, the
way you've set the hypothetical up, they're not taking on
both of them. But the nause and SARCH deals are
kind of exactly what they might be trying to avoid
in taking the posture of we'll just let them walk.
And even MPG maybe maybe that's money. Like it's debatable,
right whether MPJ is like a positive value contract.
Speaker 1: There's no way he's a positive value contract. I don't
think is that uture or worse?
Speaker 2: Yeah, So so that would give me pause. But if
it's and if the Warriors are like, we're leaving the table,
because I think you'd just rather have KAMINGA Wiggins, Gary
Payton or whatever they're expiring you could get, because then
you at least no.
Speaker 1: This is the problemise. I tend to value those because
I don't think the Warriors you're not getting. If you
make a trader with the Warriors at this point and
they're giving you a first round pick that spans later
than twenty twenty six, I would be shocked.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And so the.
Speaker 1: Idea of getting a twenty thirty one Denver pick is
just like I mean, pat Riley's probably not thinking six
years in the future to be fair. So there's that.
But I don't know, man, that's a tough one for
me because you have to pay Kaminga whose deal Woolen
theory then go longer than mpj's. But could you also
argue that, all right, MPJ is at thirty eight point
three next year than forty point eight. Is Kaminga just
not even gonna touch that average annual value? I don't like.
I wouldn't give Jonathan Kminga thirty million dollars a year
right now, I don't think.
Speaker 2: I don't think so. The Warriors basically didn't. It's he
didn't take that. I think thirty was the number, and
he's like if it if the difference was between thirty
and thirty five, that's I don't know about. That's weird.
Speaker 1: He should if thirty was on the table, he should
have signed. He should have.
Speaker 2: But that's just not how he and his camp are wired.
I don't think, and again can't blame him like I
think maybe maybe he's at we can't talk about him
in anymore. So, Yeah, I think that Denver deal, that's
when you think about for sure, if you're Miami, especially
if like as we've kind of gone through, your options
are pretty limited. Otherwise, do you have what are some
other teams that we can think about?
Speaker 1: Here? The Hawks, DeAndre Hunter, Clint Capella who's expiring, and
then they own the King's pick this year. They have
the Lakers pick this year. Is that a deal and
Atlanta would be in the tax after that deal, so
you just figure out a way to shave off salary elsewhere.
But as a baseline, if that's what Intlanta'd be giving
up is a first round pick that's not their own.
I mean, they could give up a twenty twenty nine
Atlanta first, but I would argue vehe against doing that
one exactly, don't do that. So you're looking at and
I would probably say they're gonna give you. I would
say the worst of the Kings of the Lakers pick
plus DeAndre Hunter and Clin Cappella, or maybe say the
better of I don't care, but it's one of those
plus Hunter and Capella. Let's start with Atlanta, because again
I think these are just easier to tackle form. Would
you if you're Atlanta, are you thinking like and by
the way, cause you mentioned this with Atlanta before, they
do not control their next three draft picks. This year's
a swap next year, and then twenty twenty seven, the
Spurs all have control over those.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean I'd be worried as Atlanta for the
five straight years of All Star seasons DeAndre Hunter would
have With the Heat, you'd feel pretty bad about that.
Speaker 1: We've been playing well this year, and there's they're also
in a weird is there another contract? Let's say that
the Heat are only interested, like maybe you're even wanting
to give up both the Lakers and Kings picks for
some reason. Is there another You look at their books
and it's like, who are you trying to get? Like
bog Dot Bogdanovich has a ton of value to you,
even Hunter, you're not looking at other contracts big Oh,
we'll just throw it in here to get to Jimmy
Butler's money. They don't have another one of those big
money deals. That's because on Yaka Kungu, that's not necessarily
a deal, especially if you're treating quin copella that you're
gonna want to flip.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's that's an interesting deal because like what I
would say because the Hawks don't control their next three drafts,
you'd worry about, like what about we could bottom out
if we do trade stuff for Butler and he leaves,
or we pay him a bunch of money and he's hurt,
and that turns into like, you know, not dead money
per se, but like pretty close to it. But if
you're just I mean, I really like Hunter. I think
he's had a great season. If it's Hunter and Capella
and it's like, all right, well, like you know, how
much worse are we? We still have Trey, you know,
they still have quite a bit. They wouldn't bought him
out necessarily.
Speaker 1: Is it because you're getting Butler in the stuff he
does on ball? Would you feel better if, as Atlanta
by making it Larry Nansen bogged in Magdanovich plus Capella
rather than keeping Hunter.
Speaker 2: If I can keep I'm keeping Hunter.
Speaker 1: I think Daniels Hunter is actor ressa say Butler like
that does That's a lot of a lot of versatility
on the way it is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I like the fit honestly, because like I
don't you don't want Dyson Daniels having to playmake that
much like I mean, he's fine, but like you don't
anyone if it can be a young running the offense
and Jimmy Butler's helping and everybody else just like get
in where you fit in and shoot threes and defend
and be versatile. Like that's a pretty good theory of
a team.
Speaker 1: Honestly, you would prefer keeping Hunter or basically it's keeping
Hunter over Bogdanovic.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think so, because you Jimmy Butler. Jimmy Butler
can be a primary playmaker sometimes, like you know, if
he's a second guy or runs backup units, like that's he's.
Speaker 1: Even though the percentages say differently. I'm just wondering, like
does like does that hurt their floorce basing somehow with
Bogdanovic going out rather than Hunter, But conceptually it shouldn't.
And now you're dealing. I mean, Bogdanovitch is older than
injury risk himself, So I think you're right. And I
don't think, by the way, if I'm the Heat and
apply for the other teams involved, because the amount of contracts,
I don't like Bogdanovich, Like that's not a deal breaker
for me, that's not a terrible deal. So I actually
think if I'm Miami, I prefer Atlanta to Denver.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I could see that.
Speaker 1: I keep that first round pick is pretty valuable.
Speaker 2: Well, but from Miami's perspective, the picks are just coming sooner,
right if you do the Atlanta deal as opposed to
we're just waiting seven years, six years for a for
a Denver pick. I don't know, are you trade?
Speaker 1: Would you trade both the twenty twenty five picks from
the Kings and the Lakers to get Jimmy Butler? If
you and let's say you even get to pick the
outgoing salary that's attached to Clan Capella.
Speaker 2: In that scenario, those will both be outside. I was
gonna say the lottery, Well.
Speaker 1: The King is, the Lakers is unprotected, Yeah, the Kings is.
I think it dropped to top twelve or eleven protection.
I'll double check, but it's still it spills out. So
they get it from Sacramento. It's top twelve, and then
it's top ten, and then if it doesn't convey, they're
going to convey a twenty twenty six second round pick
in twenty twenty seven second round.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's a valuable pick.
Speaker 1: But if the Kings trade the Iron Fox though or
they and they don't send out the pick this.
Speaker 2: Show keep it. Yeah, yeah, I would give up.
Speaker 1: I give up both because I don't the Lakers aren't
going to get rid of Lebron on an AD right
this season, So what is that? Are you punting on
a late lottery pick at worst?
Speaker 2: If this were last year and everybody agreed the draft sucked,
that would do it in a heartbeat. I feel like
the depth of this one makes me think a little
harder about it.
Speaker 1: I was listening to the Game Theory podcast with Samvasini
and he said he was having trouble like filling out
his big board once you got into the late teens
and twenties and so like, this is considered a very
top heavy draft, and so was Atlanta. I might feel
I would give up, especially if I get to pick
who gets attached to Clin Capella. I'm giving up both
those first, I think.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think probably so so that might be a
better deal because you're not giving them money like MPJA
that maybe you do, or maybe you don't want talking
about the Heat.
Speaker 1: The only other team. I'm trying to focus on dark
horses here, and the framework would have to be just
we could talk it out, But what about Memphis?
Speaker 2: So I guess the question, the threshold question is does
Butler address enough of what Memphis needs, which is hard
because it's like it's been top five on both ends
all year to justify, Because that's gonna have to be
pretty pick heavy, right, Like, I I don't know, like
what are the what salaries is Miami? Like, yes, we'll
take those without a bunch of sweeteners.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because you're looking at Brandon Clark, you have Marcus
smart has another year left on his deal, and they're
probably I mean they have Terry Rozier and Tyler hero
I don't know why they want Marcus smart Man. Yeah,
that's it would have to be pretty pick heavy. But
Memphis owns all their own picks, and also just I
know they're injured. But if you're able to include a
Gigi Jackson or even like, that's not nothing, and that
would be it's almost right up the heat's alley. These
guys who are super cheap that have shown utility and
maybe you could take a flyer on them and turn
them into someone even better.
Speaker 2: I wonder if like I don't know that I would
even consider this, but but the Grizzlies have the ability
to put packages together that are pretty different from a
lot of other teams we've talked about, which is to say,
like you could trade Zach Edie Jalen Wells as like
the principal outgoing guys, Like you could just make it
take our young guys that are good. Because if you're
the heat I think that has a ton of appeal
because you have so much team control over like good
young players. And then if you're the Grizzlies, like we've
talked about the rotation getting shorter, I think Wells would
be in it no matter what in the playoffs, but
Eadie might not. And so if you're just trying to see,
like can we can we do it this year? I
think you can make the case. And then maybe you're
not giving up a ton of draft equity. You got
to find the salary somewhere, and Miami's gonna have to
take salary. It doesn't necessarily want. But like what if
you built it around young guys.
Speaker 1: So I guess what you're saying is they could have
two all frameanses, because I don't think you could give up,
Like you can't give up Zach Edie unless you believe
Jayhuff is it and he can't be traded. So if
you think Jayhoff and Jaron Jackson JUNR, but you have
to almost theoretically move Brandon Clark as well, like you're
really stripping your So I guess what would Memphis do too,
of Vince Williams, Jalen Wells, GGI Jackson. I'm assuming Jalen
Wells plus one of GG and Vince Williams, let's say
a first round pick, and then Memphis is basically going
to structure the phillery filler salaries they see fit, which,
by the way, like they might also just have to
do like they don't have a big money player.
Speaker 2: That they have a Dallas problem where it's like you
have to trade five five players to.
Speaker 1: Put the difference between them and Dallas. Dallas is deep
and Memphis is infinitely deep. Apparently right, Well.
Speaker 2: I wonder if I don't have it open in front
of me, but would Memphis have the issue of, like
we physically cannot fill out the rest of these roster
spots and stay under like they don't have the Dallas
issue in that sense, do they?
Speaker 1: So when you're looking at their approximity to the tax
is pretty close. I think they're like two and change
under other one point eight million dollars under, So you
have to factor that in. But if you're willing to go,
you can go into the tax too. I know their
ownership doesn't want to hear it, but yeah, that's like,
but between Marcus Smart and Brandon Clark and if Lukenard
waves hiss, no trade clause, you've already gotten like to forty,
it's like you're pretty close. Like you could figure out
a way to stay underneath the tax and get Butler,
I would think, and fill out the roster.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's well, we've talked. You've talked me into that
being like kind of viable. I don't know that Memphis
would do that. Memphis would have to believe a rental
shot at a title this year is kind of worth it,
because like, I don't know if you want to pay again.
All the thing hanging over all this is like, do
you want Jimmy Butler's next two years?
Speaker 1: You have to worry about jown Juds. You just gonna
get paid. Yeah, he's going to get paid. John Moran
and Desmond Bayne and then Jimmy. It's short term. But
now here's the thing I think Miami does that deal
by the well I don't know they're taking back a
lot of weird money, but I think they do that deal.
What if things are just so far gone and like
you Memphis doesn't have to give up a first round
pick in that scenario, do you just but you can't
guarantee Butler's coming back. I think the hardest player to
part with is Jallen Wells. Do you just like, you know,
we have to do it.
Speaker 2: It's funny, like it shouldn't be this way, but Jalen
Wells is such found money that it's like, well, you know,
we shouldn't even been able to have get to what
a stroke of luck we got him anyway, so it's
like a bonus so we can trade him, you know, like,
which is dumb because he actually is good and valuable
and you should go forward with guys like that. If
I just just based on the initial like parameters I
set out where it's like, if it's Edy and Wells
and you're getting Butler back, you like that for this year? Right,
like that you're better this season if you do that. Yes,
I mean I'm just thinking of like Wells is really
great for a rookie and is a pretty good starter
today eating someone I don't think you can use against
every playoff opponent you're gonna see potentially.
Speaker 1: It's so I'm looking you're right, But then I'm also thinking, well,
who is like your centers at that point? Are Santi
al Dama? Does he as he need to be included
in this? And then are you making it harder on
Jaron Jackson Junior to where he's mighty bee not playing
his optimal defensive role as much? So it's not to me,
it's less about the eaty of it all, and like
what does the but I guess you could say you are.
Speaker 2: Making it about eating Yeah, right, Yeah, I think I
think the problem is you can't think of the deal
in those terms, like because if you say, yeah, we're
better with Jimmy Butler than Jalen Wells and Zachi Edi,
you know, if we're trying to win four playoff series,
that just isn't what we're actually talking about. You have
to think about the next two seasons.
Speaker 1: The more we talk about it, the more I think
both teams say no to what we're outlining.
Speaker 2: Yeah, maybe because you are still giving Miami money that
it maybe doesn't want to have at least even though
it's in like little chopped up chunks, it's still terrible.
Speaker 1: Like of the deals that we mentioned Marcus Smart and
that's so short term, it's not gonna be detrimental, right.
It'd be funny if Memphis couldn't figure out a way
to trade for Jimmy Butler because Luke Kennard invoked his
implicit no trade claws. Would be one of the funniest
story lots.
Speaker 2: Do you have any other teams?
Speaker 1: So I was just gonna throw a couple at you
unless you have do you have something you want to throw?
Speaker 2: No, no, hit me the Spurs they're a team again.
I just said, like, find me the guy that doesn't
fit the Spurs could do it, like for sure. I
just don't is this is it weird that like I
don't know if I want Butler around Wembin Yama as
like a it like this is a guy that's gotten
himself traded several times. Has been awesome, but it's like,
I just he's not getting them to contender status and
then if you pay him for the next couple of
years after this on an extension.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the benefit the Spurs is because their most important
players with the exception of Devin Vessel are all still
on their rookie scales, is that you might have one
mega expensive season with Jimmy if that I mean because
we're only talking about Jeremy Sohan's next deal basically on
the life of Jimmy Butler's next contract, Right, you don't
think you just don't think that Jimmy Butler is good
enough to elevate them, and you think the like de
Aaron Fox is obviously more preferable, but in terms of
what you have to give up and get ability, Jimmy
Butler seems a little because they just have between Barnes,
Kelton Johnson and Zach Collins, like those are just contracts
that you don't need to have moving forward.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think part of it is, I you know,
it's it's like the Warriors argument is like I don't
know that he gets them to where they want to
be that would justify it. Although such a different set
of circumstances with the supporting cast on those two teams.
I just don't understand. I don't understand why the Spurs
would be like heavily motivated to go after Jimmy Butler,
Like what's like, what's the just cause, like we want
to see what Wemby looks like if we can make
a like semi deep playoff run this early like that. No,
I'm just trying to think. I mean, I think that's
that's semi valuable. But I don't know.
Speaker 1: If you can get Jimmy Butler for cause there. I
guess Zach Collins's deals pretty but like Keldon Johnson and
Harrison Barnes, I don't think are deals that Miami would consider,
Like those are rotation players. So if you can do
that and it's costing you two non Hawks, non distant
like two protected first round picks, is that worth it?
Saying well, okay, he might be a rental, but if
you're givna have two first round picks and maybe part
of the appeals getting off of Zach Collins too, I'd
roll the dice.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that makes it more enticing. And I think like
if you're the Spurs, you just love to trade your
own like twenty twenty seven and twenty eight first because
those are gonna be probably well, I mean, they're not
gonna walk like if something has gone wrong, if the
Spurs twenty seven and twenty eight or twenty six and
twenty seven picks. Our value are actually like in the lottery.
So you're just you'd it'd be a bet on yourself
from sant And why wouldn't you if you're the Spurs. Yeah,
I don't know why. I don't like Butler and San Antonio.
You make a good case. I just like I don't
of all the tea. He's not the guy to me,
I don't. I don't know what he accomplishes for them
that is worth what it would cost.
Speaker 1: I think it's quick. But if you were able to,
and it might be complicated, you're just giving up the
Ruie gab Ins and Jared Vanderbilt moving hood your fino
let that gets you to the money. Should there be
any interest from the Lakers, that's gonna cost your last
bullets in the first round chamber.
Speaker 2: I think they're in a they're like on the opposite
end where I think like, yeah, probably, I think I
think you well, just cause every it's it's year to
year for the Lakers as it is, so you know,
or at least that's that isn't how they've operated weirdly
because they have kept the powder sorta dry. I would
like that a lot better than San Antonio because he does.
Butler would give you just another really smart player who
can be can take the load off James as a playmaker,
do all the things that you Yeah, and he's now
he's not going to space and we know that like
space and defense is what you need from Lebron and
counterparts generally speaking. But then I don't know, do you
do you still need to like tailor make a roster
around Lebron? Is he good enough for that anymore?
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't know, Jimmy Butler, is he good
enough for that? I just that's iffy. I guess I
don't even know if that's if those two first round
picks that they could give up, Like, is that enough
for Miami? Just say yeah, they include whatever salary you want.
I guess it should be, right.
Speaker 2: Might be? I mean I would think about it. It'd
be a lot nicer if they had Dilo still, so
you could just give more expiring salary to Miami.
Speaker 1: I think this is a quick one. But do you
see the Pacers could do it? What do you think
about the Pacers?
Speaker 2: I had not thought about the Pacers at all, So
you're what are you? What are what's Indy giving up here.
Speaker 1: I think the core tenants here are. You figure out
a way to do it and you are left with
Jimmy Butler, Tyres Halburt, and Pascal Siakham as the core,
and then it's one of Turner or nem Hard, maybe
both is still on the roster because you have the
top and salary, you have Math, and you have Walker,
you have Nie Smith, so you might be able to
get there without but it might cost you Turner. But
it's the crux of it is I think you're left
with Jimmy Butler, nem Hard, Halliburton and Siakham is the
that's sort of the foundation of your team.
Speaker 2: Man. So if you lose Turner, you've got quite a
quite a hole there in the middle, unless you want
to play and play center the whole time, which I
don't think is a realistic strategy from Miami side of it,
I guess from Indies side, I don't think. I don't
think that's the move. Just like, man, you're so expensive,
You've got so much money going. If you keep Butler, Butler,
Siakam and Haliburton that I just think you're just that's
not a team I feel comfortable having to operate with
like a lot of minimums going forward like that. I
don't love that.
Speaker 1: You're right, the only other animal mention I would maybe
this would constitute the panic trade that was referenced. Do
the Kings look at themselves and say, if the Rosen
can be a part of this deal, and you have
the Kevin Herder money and you have Trey Lyles and
we're just talking about picks, maybe Devin Carter has to
be involved, but you get Fox the bonus Butler, Keyan Murray,
Kean Ellis even moving forward? Is that does that do
anything for you?
Speaker 2: That would be the Panic trade for sure, Although like
I think, if you're able to keep Keegan Murray that's
kind of a win. What I'm not as why is Miami?
What's so again? That's your right? Like every time we
go to Miami side, it's like, well, why would I
don't think they would do that?
Speaker 1: Kevin Hurt only has a year left and like we'll
get up threes and look, the Heat don't have their
first round pick this year, They're not gonna have it
in twenty twenty seven. That kind of spans the life
of DeRozan's contract and he is still a not I
guess his aging curve is bad, but he's still someone
I would think this season it's all right, he'll help
us remain competitive, and then you reevaluate. I mean, if
you're getting King's first round picks.
Speaker 2: Post that, you know, good argument that is that is enticing. Man.
It's good to be back. It's good to be back.
Where everything we say about the Kings is just like.
Speaker 1: A knock did anything that we mapped out. I think
Atlanta's one, and maybe Denver's, but Denver's just feels so unlikely.
So Atlanta's offer would be enough away from the core
teams for us to we're running full circle as we
close out here where you're talking about that he just
might want to dare him to get the money off
the books. I think the Atlanta scenario feels most palatable
to me. And even if you included Denvers, I just
don't know if you're not the Nuggets or you're not
a contender, I don't know how much that team would
then value Michael Porter Junior's deal. And so Atlanta's to
me seems like the if you're Miami, excuse me, it
seems like the the best one that we laid out.
Speaker 2: I you could just check check me on my bias.
So if we open the field all the way back up,
do you think Kaminga and Wiggins and expiring salary and
a first is a better offer from Miami's perspective.
Speaker 1: So it'd be it's basically Kaminga Wiggins A first versus
I'm gonna say Bogdanovich and two first and then Klinkopela
is expiring money. Yeah, and both of those first are
in twenty twenty five, though, well, the Kings might not be. Ooh,
I just I guess the Warriors deal is better. It's
what pick is that though, So like if it's twenty
twenty six, I think it's definitely better.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And then I think the selling points are Wiggins
is someone you could trade for potentially like significant positive value,
you know, yeah, and then Kaminga is whatever you think
Kminga is, Like, that's that's good. It's the year of
the pick and what you think Kaminga is are the
two like like pinch points here.
Speaker 1: The thing I don't like, though, is because Cominga is
considered like all the other parts that we've kind of
mentioned have been either expendable or it's just DeAndre Hunter Bogdanovic.
Those are plug and play. I don't love Kminga and
bam Autebaio together on the front line. And then are
you viewing Minga as a wing? Yeah, in which case
I don't think he's a wing. I think it's a
discussion to be had. But Atlanta Golden State, I think
among if you could tell. That's assuming Atlanta would even
get involved, by the way, because the olden Station is
more likely to be involved.
Speaker 2: That's the thing is. The more I think about it,
the more it's fairly clear to me that the Warriors
can have the best offer if they want to. And
I don't want Jimmy Butler like that's it's just they
could do.
Speaker 1: If you're the Warriors, would you do that trade? Probably
the first Wiggans and then it's salary.
Speaker 2: Probably not. I don't think I would not for Butler.
Speaker 1: I think it's funny you're tomorrow You're Kaminga pilled and
I'm Andrew Wiggins pilled.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm cominga pill again. I'm occasionally I wouldn't say
at the moment I'm cominga pilled. I'm more Warriors aren't
where they need to be with Jimmy Butler pilled and
it's not worth it to give up the outside chance
that Kaminga could be good. And Wiggins is very very
favorable deal like and picks.
Speaker 1: I don't.
Speaker 2: I don't like the idea of this needs to work
with Butler or it's gonna get ugly in a in
a hurry, like I don't like. I'm not uncomfortable with that.
Speaker 1: I think I'm with you, And that's just if I
was rooting for Chaos. I hope it's like a Denver
or in Atlanta, just like, oh yeah, that one. I
kind of love the fit in Atlanta, though, if you're
having if you're keeping Hunter with Dyson Daniels and Zachary
Reich and Jael Johnson, that's that's a fuck ton of
versatility on.
Speaker 2: The pre I mean, you still a kong lose your
center now, So that's even he's more versatilely.
Speaker 1: Pretty fucking small after that. But like clear Capella, I
vacillate on him sometimes say, all right, like people are
just underrating him and that's why does he look like
he's forty on something? Uh, grant, you asked us what
was gonna happen to the forty minutes that you I
didn't spend.
Speaker 2: Talking off air there was.
Speaker 1: It was spent on Jimmy Butler. Do you have anything
else or do want?
Speaker 2: No? I think we should stop this immediately. I mean,
I don't. I regret nothing. Those forty minutes were a
good part of my day.
Speaker 1: Match.
Speaker 2: Thanks everybody for listening, for watching. Come up with more
Jimmy Butler teams that we didn't, even though we did
roughly half the league so far, I'm sure there are
more teams willing to take on fifty million dollars for
a thirty five year old. Remember, if you haven't Rate
Review subscribed wherever you're listening to your podcast, if you're
watching this on YouTube, make sure you give us thumbs up,
leaves some comments, make sure you're subscribed there. Tell your friends.
Word of mouth really helps tell your enemies, and I
think that's going to cover it. Trade deadline will over
a month away, so exciting times. Shouts franklinly Keen an apologies,
Jared Allen