Speaker 1: What is up, Fellasiko's I Am Dana Valley coming at
you with the one, the only, the legendary, the certified, fantabulous,
mister Grant Hughes. We are here to talk about the
biggest surprises and disappointments of the season. We're looking at
only teams and how they have performed relative to their
over under. We'll have a different type of podcast like
this towards the end of the season where we'll reveal
the winner of our over under competition from our discord members.
Which that's a good reminder to come in and get
in our discord because you can participate next year. And
as another reminder, the winner this year will get a
free piece of merch of their choice, but they will
have the option if they would like to co host
a podcast that's some sort of a mail bag or
maybe we'll run back. We haven't done any guests of
players this year. Like that's basically I would say the
equivalent financially of like a million dollars at least, what
say you.
Speaker 2: Grant easy and we will be paying that in a
crypto that we have just minted that might actually have
negative value. So a million dollars in negative value.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm in the process of converting my to a
coin hawk to a coin so that I can invest everything.
Speaker 2: How's that investment going for you?
Speaker 1: Pretty good? I have looked at it. I'm sure it's fine.
Why would it be weird?
Speaker 2: But best?
Speaker 1: So we're gonna start with the biggest overachievers. We're going
five and five on both ends, and we'll do a
recap at the end. You'll see it on screen if
you're watching on YouTube of anything else that stands out
where you're seeing what teams are on pace to do
relative to their over under. And like I said, this
is in final We have about a quarter a little
bit more, but maybe like a third of the season
left to go. But this will be interesting to see
which teams have performed the best so far relative to
their respective over unders. Let's get started. First up, grant
number one overachiever, the Cleveland Cavaliers. They're on a sixty
seven win pace, eighteen and a half wins over their
initial over under. Is this is this surprise you at all?
You didn't have them earmarked for a round seventy wins
leading into the season. What's wrong with you?
Speaker 2: I didn't and we didn't but we did have this
over real hard. We're not gonna do this on every
one of them, but this was one of the easier
ones on the board, I thought. And yeah, like, you
shouldn't ever project a team unless you're talking about we
might have done it for the Celtics at some point
or the Thunder actually this year, but should This is
a ridiculous pace, But like forty eight and a half, Like,
why did any why would anyone go under this one?
They just they've exceeded that, But I mean, come on, yeah.
Speaker 1: This is I think, if anything, there was an underestimation
of not just the talent in place, but the impact
that Kenny Atkinson would have on their offense specifically, just
feels way more dynamic than it was last year.
Speaker 2: And the mobile leap happened. Yeah, but not because he
is taking ten threes a game. It's just he got
way better at a lot of offensive things and that
turns out to be just as valuable.
Speaker 1: I have a question, watch you'll save it for what
will we get to the thunder? Let's let the mystery.
The mystery include number two biggest surprise relative over under.
The Detroit Pistons had a twenty five point five over under.
They were currently on a forty three win pace, so
that is seventeen and a half over their initial projection.
This is not surprising given what happened, but I don't
think either of us would have pegged them as being
one of the biggest overachievers this year leading into the season.
Speaker 2: No, and another coaching change situation, not necessarily from like
a decent coach to a very good one, but from
a coach that had no desire to be there to
a coach that did. I mean, ironically, the Cavs coach
shows up here and they're like, maybe so once the wait,
wait till the Pistons hire Kenny Atkinson, I guess is
probably the takeaway.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well man, they're going to be a contender after that.
To your credit, you did go over, I went on.
Speaker 2: I couldn't remember.
Speaker 1: They were the team that one of the teams that
I said I had to pull wins from. I clearly
did not have to, and I was clearly wrong to.
But an excellent season by them and sets up an
intriguing future. They were not like the Calves I think
you could have envisioned. We did predict over, but if
we would have said this you know in August or whatever,
like the Calves are going to outperform their win projections
by the most in the league. I could have been like, yeah,
if you had have said that about the Pistons, I
guess twenty five and a half was low enough to
where you could at least imagine it. But it's not
something I would have bought into.
Speaker 2: No, if you'd said forty and a half for Detroit,
we would have gone under so fast, you know, and
they're gonna rush that number.
Speaker 1: Three the Portland Trailblazers little so, this one's probably the
most surprising one so far that we've had over under
a twenty one and a half. They're currently on pace
for a whopping thirty four wins. Would not shock me
if they just end up with more than that because
of how they've been playing over the past month or so.
So a twelve and a half bump from their win
loss estimate, what I this one? This gets you, right?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I mean, look, some of the young guys got
better and they have enough. I mean we did talk
about a little little like minor victory lap for us
because we did say, like, look how many Basically I'm
paraphrasing us, like, oh my god, look how many guys
they have, Like they could really just like be good,
not good, but like they might not be terrible. I
don't know that I would have gone this high potentially,
but uh yeah, they you know, it's a it's a
little of strengthen numbers kind of situation with them. They've
got enough good players to have like some really interesting
lineups all the time.
Speaker 1: And they have not full I mean, the problem is
so Scoot Henderson got a lot better. A lot of
people probably didn't see that. Denny avvia I didn't start
out the season too great. His fit now looks cleaner.
Tamani Kamara is just one of the most valuable players
in the NBA. Donovan Klayton's outperformed my expectations, even though
he hasn't necessarily played a crap ton of minutes this year.
And you could say, and they also haven't run their
team like a traditional tank job. But I pointed this
out to Moret when we were talking. They're winning games
by buy like aside from really Jeremy Grant and then
before he was injured, DeAndre eight and like, they're winning
games by playing the players that he would want them
to invest minutes in.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean that's kind of having both ways. I
still think we would have liked them to sell off
some of those guys, but maybe there just was no
market for it.
Speaker 1: I Jeremy Grant still being marriages and he's sometimes I
don't need to watch him dribble into another like fadeaway,
mid range up. I'm good with that. So on this
team number four, this man another shock here. The Nets
Grant were projective for eighteen and a half. Their current
win rate is thirty, and they were higher. They had
a trade Dennis Shuter to make sure they got lower.
That's a difference of eleven and a half h and
they're still scrappy as hell when you watch they just
lost to the Cavaliers, and like it was just closer
than as any business being when you're looking at who's
on the floor, I.
Speaker 2: Mean, way to get your pick back and not do
anything with it, guys, Like I mean, I don't know.
This is one of those where it's a I think
it's if you care about like establishing a culture, this
is a huge win because, like like you said, they
do play really hard. I think Jordi Fernandez is going
to be a really good coach, and there's some value
in you know, setting a baseline for like, hey, we
play this way. Do you think they want to be
this far over their projected number?
Speaker 1: No? But I also were at the point now they're
what are they? They had the fifth worst record, they
have the sixth worst record in the league, and that's
what they're They're where they're projected to land. There are
three losses in front of the Raptors, five losses in
front of the Hornets, six in front of the Jazz,
seven in front of the Pelicans, and I mean, no
one's like the Wizards are. They're ten in front of
the Like how far down can they actually tumble? Now? Though?
So was it sort of they didn't do enough? Like,
even though they acted fairly early relative to the rest
of the league, did they not act early enough to
kind of nip this in the bud?
Speaker 2: That's the thing. Though they did, they didn't wait till
the deadline. Phinney, Smith and Schruder were gone early. I
just I don't know what else they really could have done.
I could just not. I don't know, Like they they
just play too hard and they're too well coached to
be that bad. I guess good for them.
Speaker 1: And by the way, the players are not gonna ever
tank on purpose. It's on the front off and even
the coaching staff. It's on the front office to force
you to have players in place who aren't gonna win
or be competitive. And just the nets have every iteration
of them is outperformed what they look like on paper.
So Jordi Fernandez must go, I think, is the moral
of this story. Our final biggest surprise to be this
good and still rank is one of the five biggest
overachievers whatever you want to call it. The Oklahoma City
Thunder had an over under of fifty six and a half.
They're also currently on pace to win sixty seven, so
they're outperforming expectations over under expectations by ten and a half.
That is insane.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, one of the best defenses ever an
MVP front runner. Like, that's how you get sixty seven
sixty plus wins. I mean, you know, they were young
enough and there were enough new additions that I mean,
that's the thing. Is part of the reason the over
was easy is because of because of the new additions.
But I guess you could talk yourself into like, oh,
we don't know about the fit or any of That's, Like.
Speaker 1: I just let's go one step further. Had I told
you that chet Holmer would miss more than half the season,
Isaiah hart Sign and him would not play together for
basically more than half the season, and that Jalen Williams
would be contesting more shots at the rim as it
shit like that anybody in the league as a percentage
of like shots that are being taken when he's on
the court. Would you have then guessed that the Thunder
would go on to win.
Speaker 2: Sixty seven games and that Caruso would miss a ton
of time too. And then even in spite of that,
this this like defensive lynchpin that you got on the perimeter,
your defense is still gonna run away with the best
rating in the league. Like, I mean, some expectation defying
here for sure, But at the same time, like we
knew the Thunder were gonna be good.
Speaker 1: Now, I have a question for you, since we finally
got the Thunder only once in NBA history, it was
the seventy three win Warriors, and then that same season
the Spurs won sixty seven games. We've only had two
teams win sixty seven or more games twice. Do you
think it happens again this year the caveat being the
Thunder and the cas They've already won over eighty percent
of their games, but they must continue winning more than
eighty percent of their games to do it.
Speaker 2: I don't think it'll happen, And it has everything to
do with the size of the leads they both have
on the teams in second in the conference. And I mean,
it just won the historical precedent as such that you
should bet against it. But I think, like if the
races were closer, like as we look at it now,
Denver is in second in the West, they're eight games
back like the Cavs, margins five and a half over
the Celtics, So like, I don't know, I don't think
either of them is gonna push for a bunch of
extra wins. Certainly like the last two weeks of the season,
we might see some like mass resting.
Speaker 1: While I agree with what you said, I'm just gonna
say that it happens because one, unlike you, I don't
hate fun, But two isn't there also a chance that
these teams are just so deep that even when they're
not putting their best product forward, they're still gonna be
better than most of the competition. And so unless it's
we start seeing them sit all their guys against if
it's Cleveland, it's Boston, it's New York, or the Thunder
against Denver, or isn't there I mean the Thunders specifically
might just not play their top three players and still
win basketball games anyway.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, there's no chance, because that would be fun,
and we've established I'm out for that reason. I'm out
on fun.
Speaker 1: Would you care to guess? Let's save you do this.
Who is the biggest underachiever this season relative to their
preseason over under?
Speaker 2: Is it our yours?
Speaker 1: In mind?
Speaker 2: New Orleans Pelicans?
Speaker 1: It is? This is a Pelicans fans look away for
watching it on YouTube. They'd a forty five and a half.
They're currently on pace to win nineteen games. That's a
difference of twenty six and a half victories in the
wrong direction. I mean, it's just this was the season
from literal hell.
Speaker 2: This is Memphis two years ago. Everybody was hurt the
whole time. That's just no suspensions, but everybody was hurt.
That's it.
Speaker 1: There's I will say their future seems a little bit
bleaker than that. Memo his teams did, because this is
like a larger symptom of okay, well, how healthy can
Zion be? And now Dejonte Murray that achilles injury doesn't
just fuck this season of my fuck next season too.
They're in like a really weird spot. Do we think
that they get over twenty wins? Though? Because they're currently
on pace for nineteen Zion's been pretty good when.
Speaker 2: He plays he has and I mean I was gonna say,
let's talk about bright spots, Trey Murphy looking really good,
playmaking leap, higher usage, good shooter, Eve mecI nice fine, injury.
Speaker 1: I will also injured.
Speaker 2: I will say they will uh, they will not get
over twenty.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say they get over twenty because, as you said,
late season Shenanians, and they also don't have to worry
about like they're gonna have one of the four worst
records in the league. That's just a given. The second
most disappointing team. Did you want to take a guess here?
I feel like this is another one you should get.
Speaker 2: Oh god, nuh oh Phoenix, no oh come on? Oh right,
oh right, the most disappointing team on planet ear got it.
Speaker 1: Fifty two and a half anincdotally they are all between
them and Phoenix would make sense. Fifty two and a
half was their projection. They're on pace to win thirty,
so they're they've gone twenty two and a half in
the wrong direction. Grant, do you remember if he went
over or under on their total?
Speaker 2: I bet I went over.
Speaker 1: We both went under because we are geniuses.
Speaker 2: We're smart.
Speaker 1: Don't ask me what we predicted for, or at leastn't
ask me what I predicted for the Pistons. So this
is I think you can say on some level this
is the season from hell for them too, because of
what happened with Joel Embiid and then McCain breaks out,
only to now he's done for the year. What's going
on with Paul George. At the same time, this is like,
isn't it another thing with the Pelicans where it's this
worst case scenario? Was Yes, it was their worst case,
but it was also completely you could 'en vision it
right this way.
Speaker 2: If you had asked, like, hey, how's it gonna go bad?
You would have come up with this. It would have,
would you know? The McCain part is the surprise because
one although even I mean, there were people that thought
McCain was such a steal of a pick and then
for him to get hurt, like, you wouldn't have I
don't know, you probably wouldn't have actually been comfortable predicting
any aspect of McCain, the good and the bad. But yeah,
the embiid health George health slash like just kind of
looking his age. Think you could have of course like that,
that's what you would have drawn up as like the downside,
as a likely downside.
Speaker 1: I think the probably the biggest surprise is just like
where we're like, oh, should they tank, should Joelle be
shut it down for the rest of the year, is
just they've lost the minutes so far per cleaning the
glass when the big three have played together. Yeah, that's
probably not something I would have predicted.
Speaker 2: And I think too, if you'd said, what's there over
under if Embid doesn't play all year, you might have
still gone over thirty right, Like you would have said,
there's enough talent here to there they'll win you know,
thirty five games, right.
Speaker 1: Because the entire point or at least not the entire
like part of the theory of having a Paul George
and then with Tyres Massey was okay, you're bill to
navigate the structures out a beat, and they even you
looked at them getting Andre Drummond and thinking sort of
the same. Oh they have like a stop gap at
centered and it's yeah, but it's not Drummond. It's because
Yabuseli's been really good this year.
Speaker 2: What a weird year?
Speaker 1: Did you want to take a stab at the third
most well?
Speaker 2: I already said Phoenix. Can I say them again?
Speaker 1: You can, but only if you want to be incorrect.
Speaker 2: I'm happy to be incorrect.
Speaker 1: It's the Utah Jazz. They had an over under of
twenty eight and a half. They're currently on pace to
win twenty so it's a difference of eight and a
half in the wrong direction. Would you care to know
if you have them as the over under you want
to take a guess at that?
Speaker 2: I really hope, I said under.
Speaker 1: We both had under, we both viewed it, and I
mean this is correct. I don't know how good you
want to feel about their future? Was they can't afford
not to just be awful this year and they understand
the plot on like the previous two seasons.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean twenty eight and a half. Is I
wonder where that came from, Like, what's the theory of them?
I guess like, oh, market In plays a fully healthy
season and the young guys that weren't very good last
year are all better. Like that's there's still the incentives
are what they are. This draft class is like you
gotta if you gotta tank this year if you're ever
gonna do it.
Speaker 1: And honestly, if anything too, you would have assumed that,
like these projections would have kicked in that oh, all
the veterans won't finish the season on the team. We
knew market it would, but then they proceeded to trade
none of them anyway, So it's just like and they're
still gonna miss it. Good job by the jet. I
was worried that Will Hardy was gonna get fired for
conduct not detrimental enough to the team, and it's clear
that he won't. Would you say my question on them?
And this is probably worth its own podcast, which is
very quick. Are they under like the most pressure to
capslock hit on this draft of any team that's going
to be in the top you know, seven to eight picks.
Speaker 2: I think, well, I'm trying to think of if is
anybody even close.
Speaker 1: I guess I think has a case. But while their
window to be really bad is small at the moment,
like just the two years. Yeah, they are still just
in the early stages of it all. This is kind
of year three of the Jazz's reset.
Speaker 2: Then it has to be them, like you might say
Washington just because but they're early too, and like maybe
so like they've got enough cracks at it from what
we know of the previous high picks that the Jazz
have made, Like they ain't a cornerstone in there, so
you like that's and you've had two shots at it,
so this one has to hit.
Speaker 1: Do you want to take a guess at the fourth
most disappointed?
Speaker 2: Should I say Phoenix again?
Speaker 1: You should because they're the answer.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Oh, I don't even want to say I had them
projected for so many wins. This is just man, I
miss all the time, but this is egregious. Forty seven
and a half was they're over under. They're on pace
grant for thirty nine wins. That's a difference of also
eight and a half. I don't it's it's you can
explain it, like we've seen it, we've watched it. Just
kind of implode in real time. This is just this
is disastrous for them because we'ren't the point where last
season they were fairly disappointing, but you could say, oh,
I've seen enough to think, or maybe I haven't seen
enough to think that they get to the plan they were.
People projected they were going to beat Minnesota last year,
like that was I think you might have even been
one could And now I don't think. Let's say they
get into the playoffs by virtue of a play in
which isn't guaranteed, I have zero fate, Like what is
the team they would need to face in the first
round for you to think they get more than a game?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's brutal, like they I don't think they're If
you get more than a game, like who knows, you
might get a Booker Durant combined heater. But they're just
not defensively non threatening offensively. The whole is way less
than the sum of the parts. And like we've talked
about before, like this is it's it's not like they
were decimated by injury, Like this is like fairly close
to what they were going for roster wise, and this
is the real Like, man, that's that's rough.
Speaker 1: You want to take a guess at the final most
the fifth most disappointing team, and the last one we'll
talk about.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna go higher up the standings a little bit
and say, oh, there's two candidates. I'm just gonna change
my answer. I was gonna say Dallas, I'm gonna say Orlando.
Speaker 1: Okay, both of those are wrong. It's the Charlotte Hornets.
They had an over under of twenty nine and a
half and they're on pace to win twenty one. That's
also a difference of eight and a half. They I mean,
that's this is another situation. It's not even it's not LaMelo.
He's missed time, but it's okay. Now, Brandon Miller's done
for the year. Mark Williams was never healthy and they
tried to trade him, and then he proceeded to play
another bad game, like against the team that was supposed
to straight for him. Sorry, I don't mean to laugh.
That's not funny, except it is. This is like kind
of explainable, and I think it's almost encouraging because I
probably did pick the over for them. I said, if
LaMelo was gonna be healthy, there's enough talent here and yeah,
I did hit the over. Oh you hit the over
as well, So we were both wrong. But I'm like,
this is you know, the Jazz. You look and say, Okay,
I'm okay that they're on this list, and I'm okay
with the Hornets being on this list, they're gonna get
another top pick. They have LaMelo, they have Brandon Miller.
There's things they need to figure out, but I think
the organization is at least focused on the bigger picture,
which is just not something that you could say ever,
like before two seasons, past two seasons.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think right, I think the overall it's a
good thing that they're here. And I guess the miss
just was LaMelo alone, even he's missed enough time to
where we can take a pass. But like, I think
we both were just kind of the mind that if
LaMelo plays a healthy season like this team just the
offense will be good enough to offset however bad the
defense is. And and Miller, like Miller's out to like
there's a lot of there's a lot of cover here
for the Hornets to be this bad and not feel
too disappointed about it.
Speaker 1: All. Right, let's throw on the full screen look of
how all these teams are performing to see if anything
else stands out to us, and you grant anything any
other teams, you're kind of looking at this, Like I
said on the screen, we have all the teams. You
can want to check it out on YouTube by how
many wins they're going to exceed or miss their over underby.
Speaker 2: I think it's interesting, don't you. I think we had
some pretty like tough conversations about the Pacers, like, oh,
how you know Phony Conference finalist and like, and they're
gonna basically hit their number. That's the one that jumps out.
Same with the Knicks. Actually they're right there, they're half
a win over. Just the ones that are actually close
are the kind of the most interesting to me, trying
to think when they're the Celtics too, which was a
high number. Yeah, those those three kind of leap out.
Anything jump out to you.
Speaker 1: I obviously Orlando, but like that's one that at least
can be explained. I mean, their inability to address uh,
the like the shooting issues and just the overarching offensive
issues remains annoying. I will say the Spurs are currently
on pace to outperform. They're over under in light of
the wemby absence, they'll probably end up skewing it in a
different direction if I one that's really standing out to me,
and it's just they should be ashamed. It's like, why
are the Bulls about to outperform themselves by five victory?
Speaker 2: I was just gonna say, what what are you guys doing? That?
That has to be like the biggest mistake right of
any of these. Like why at the Kings being four
and a half under?
Speaker 1: Uh?
Speaker 2: That you know they were trying to win, like that's
the goal there that that's pretty disappointing.
Speaker 1: And even I'm like, I can't remember what I did
with the Raptors and they've just been injured and clearly
not focused on this. Sly, I've of course hit the over.
I always smashed the Raptors over. I'm an idiot, but
like that's surprise.
Speaker 2: Though four and a half under seems like it seems
like they're way worse than that, you know, but when you.
Speaker 1: Look, yeah, it seems like you're right. It does seem
like given how much time Barnes and quickly missed and
like now they make the brandon Ingram trade and he's
banged up and they've dealt with other injuries. I yeah,
so it's like it's I guess it's almost impressive, But
I got to stop hitting the Raptors over what the
ell doesn't matter with me, are you if? I now,
I know a lot of people assume that, like bad
teams probably aren't supposed to miss their over under by
that much. I'm almost shocked the Wizards that are like that,
I think speaks to how low they're over under was
set to begin with that they didn't miss it, Like
there's still six and a half under and they were
projected for twenty and a half. But that's a team
that you would think, like, oh no, they're gonna figure
out a way to be in the double digits. But
if you're gonna be basically twenty one wins as a
projection coming in, I don't know how much lower are
you supposed to go?
Speaker 2: Right? Yeah, Like mathematically it's almost like you just shouldn't
assume anyone's ever gonna win fewer than twenty just because
it's happened so early. But that was a pretty easy call.
What about the Wolves being seven and a half under,
Like that's just I mean, speaks to disappointing one. But
like nobody seemed all that concerned about the Cat for
Randall and de Vincenzo trade. Maybe everybody thought like, oh,
that doesn't matter. Edwards is just like on a rocket
ship to the moon and that'll offset everything. Seven and
a half hundred is a big number for a good team.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they were fifty two and a half and we
both hit the under and we recorded this. I think
we did ours after the Karl Anthony Towns trade, because
if I remember correctly, we did league past rankings. We
did three hours and it became No. One void because
of that trade. We never even published it or it
went up at the NBA podcast. So, by the way,
another one that stands out just sort of like reinforces
what the fuck is gonna go on here? Miami missing
by five and a half When we're used to them,
even amid injuries and drama, they tend to overperform during
the regular season or at least like they always just
seem to figure out a way. And so I guess
in previous years, if you would have seen them miss
by five and a half wins, you might say, oh,
like they're they're going to be fine in the postseason
and moving forward, and now they've kind of entered the
territory where it's I don't think they deserve that type
of benefit of the doubt.
Speaker 2: A duo here for very different reasons. The LA teams
both being seven and a half over, like the Clippers,
we thought were a decent candidate to be like, oh,
they're going to be in the teams maybe like that
could happen. And then it's really hard for the Lakers
to like exceed public opinion because those their numbers are
always skewed high, and there's the Lakers are seven and
a half over, which is like, I don't know how
that happened.
Speaker 1: I by the Clippers were another team. I said this
at the time that I was just ripping victories. I
said they were going to be awful. I destroyed their
offseason seven and a half. I guess they were working
from a lower baseline. But yeah, the Lakers, this is
just and all these vitals, aside from their actual record,
point to a team that is not this good. But
at some point, I guess you just have to trust
the wins and losses and the wins and they're just
you mentioned this during our previous pod where they look
like I know they have some personnel, but they look
like they should be god awful on defense now post
Anthony Davis trade, and maybe it goes that way, but
it's yet to go that way.
Speaker 2: They've made it far enough to where you have to
sprinkle in a little doubt that it's gonna fall apart. Uh.
Speaker 1: Are you upset that the Warriors are on pace to miss?
But I bet the Warriors if I had to pick
a team that's in the red right now that I
think finishes in the green, I mean, they're just the
margins so thin, So it's the Warriors by the full.
Speaker 2: I think that's right. I'm I suspect I went over
pretty hard, but I mean, yeah, they they should. They
should get to what So this means I'm trying to
do some quick math. I think they were at like
forty six or forty seven or something like that preseason.
That's they got some work to do to get there.
But it's possible.
Speaker 1: And for those interesting I will never count this as
betting advice, but you should continue to short whatever I
say about the Grizzlies because this is gonna be I think,
like the sixty year running I hit their under, They're
gonna go over last year I hit there, I went under.
For so many years they kept exceeding it. The one
year I go over, they were terrible. I went under again.
They've been mostly awesome. So just keep that in mind
for futures. And then finally, like if the Hawks still
finish in the green after what happened, I like, I
don't understand where that team is going or where it's head.
I can kind of see the theory of what they're
trying to build around Tree Young, but I don't trust it.
And if they wind out up out performing a win
total that was I think spot on like thirty five
and a half, if they end up with like forty
forty one wins, I'll be pretty impressed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the uh, the Grizzlies last season performance is pretty
clear proof that it is very much personal. But like
between them and you, that they they just don't want
you to be right.
Speaker 1: Ever, let's talk about and Ingram and the future of
the Toronto Raptors, because brand Ingram just signed an extension
three years, one hundred and twenty million dollars, fully guaranteed
player option. On the final year, it will account on
average for about twenty three percent of the salary cap.
It'll top out at about twenty six four point six percent,
excuse me, and it goes through his age thirty season
is when he has the player option four. And if
I didn't mention this, the max extension he could have
signed right now with the Raptors was three years and
one hundred and forty four, So it's less than that
had he gotten a free agency I don't assume a
five year deal would have been on the table, grant,
but a four year deal four year max would run
almost two hundred and nine. If you wanted to go
for five years, I think it would have been around
like two eighty or something. So this is not the
maximum amount of money that brand Ingram could have got
if he went into free agency. Is my point. I
have a couple. There are like two main points about one.
What do you think about the brandon Ingram contract. Let's
start there.
Speaker 2: I'll answer your question with a question, how sure were
you when you saw Well, I'll just give you my experience.
I saw three one twenty and I was like, I
would bet my life that that third year as a
player option, and it was because it just like it
had to be based on what the market seemed to
have been for him, and the sensibility of like let's
get on the market, Let's let's go two years and
get back into free agency for one more big deal,
like that was so really good bye him. I think
kind of making the best of a situation, like getting
to a team that was going to pay him and
ins far as he had control over where the Pelicans
traded him, and kind of like getting the best he
could short term and preserving like some optionality for like
another big deal if he if he gets his value up.
I think now what I think about the deal is
going to hinge on like how he goes about improving
his value in these next two years, which is to say,
like I think he needs to be kind of a
different player or or like a pretty extreme version of
what we've seen in spurts from him to really like
get the market to come back around to the idea
of Ingram being worth even if the max numbers you're
talking about or anything close to it, you know what
I mean, Like specifically talking about the shooting volume from three,
the continued facilitation like that kind of stuff I think
I think will determine, like one, his fit with the
Raptors and two sort of where where he lands in
terms of like the next free agent crop in a
couple of years.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I was. I guess I wasn't surprised that they
kept him, because why else would you trade for him?
And I expected an attention. I don't. I guess I
don't know where I expected it to fall, because if
you just look at what the cap space landscape was
going to be this summer, even if we stretch it
and say some of the teams that might create cap space,
if it's the Spurs, if it's the Pistons, we know
the Nets will have cap space. I didn't see where
the offer was coming from. But I think the Raptors
are a perfect example of it only takes one team.
If you want him, you will figure out a way
to either cut the salary cap space or then you
worked out a sign in trade. I think I'm fine
with the money. You look at it through like the
percentage of a salary cap, like it's just under twenty
five percent of the salary cap for brandon Ingram for
the life of this deal is fine. I was actually
probably more surprised than you, I guess, seeing it was
three years. But I was a little bit surprised that
the Raptors gave out the player option because part of
the value of him getting paid now, to me, should
have been, if this works out, you'd like to have
the flexibility of keeping him for the full three years
rather than leaving, because if this works out, they're not screwed.
They could still pay him, but then he gets to
get out the peak of his market that you helped rebuild.
So that I guess the fact that it wasn't more
team friendly was probably the thing that surprised me a
little bit, just based off how barren I considered his
market in free agency.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's interesting because he presumably he got it, got
the player option because of the threat of just oh,
I'm not going to sign anything, and they had to
cave on that aspect of it. So it isn't he
did have some amount of leverage, which you sort of
get because like for Toronto trading for him, not that
they gave up a mint, like we're talking Bruce Brown
and Alynock and like one first, but like you can't
trade for him and then not keep him. I think,
so he had some power there. So yeah, I mean,
the player option is bad for Toronto's side because inherently,
if it turns out to have been a good deal,
they will lose him, you know, and if it's bad,
they'll have to pay him too much when he opts in,
Like the risk is with the team in player options,
but like I don't know, so yeah, I guess the
financial terms weren't I didn't didn't really bump me too much.
I think the fit and sort of how what that
means about the overall vision of this Raptors team is
kind of the are the two like most interesting angles
to talk about? So, like, as you look at who's
on this team with big deals, You've got Scottie Barnes, obviously,
you've got Emmanuel Quickly.
Speaker 1: R J.
Speaker 2: Barrett's got a decent sized deal for his role. Even
Yaka Peertl's making plenty of money for his role. And
now you add Ingram that suggests this team is kind
of done. Like there's you know, this is the team
for a while. How do you feel about that? And
how do you feel about the ceiling with with Ingram
being like the number two guy?
Speaker 1: Now, I think I'm okay with it because we know
they're going to get a high draft pick this year
and that will give you some flexibility to either develop
someone who's super high end or you could look at
it and say, would this team consider making a trade
where they're combining that pick to one of their other salaries,
because I think you can make the case that the
player who becomes most let's just chuse the word redundant
or superfluous here would be RJ. Barrett. And so if
you attach that pick to RJ. Barrett's money, like, what
does that actually get you? And you can also say,
even with Brandon Ingram on the books, it'll be close,
but like, this team could still be under the salary cap,
not salary cap, excuse me, the luxury tax next year.
So with Brandon Ingram on the books, they have like
eleven million space under the tax and so that's not
factoring it. Okay, what happens with Chris Bouchet, Like keeping
this team together while adding a draft pick is not untenable.
So I feel okay about where they're at financially. It's
just you when you look at the pieces. Even brand
Ingram is a number two. But in the larger context
of this team, if you don't think they're gonna move one,
if you're not moving Yaka Pertl. I'm not saying you should,
but like, now you really need brandon ingram as a
three point shooter to hit for spacing purposes, for Scotty,
just the whole nine and a half court offense. You're
also kind of betting on seeing a level defensively from him,
probably that we really haven't, at least not for more
than like a season or a half season. And so
I think it's like kind of a series of interesting gambles.
And my biggest question to you, there's so much to
unpack there. Take wherever you want, but like, how do
you feel about him as someone if they're not gonna
put him on the ball? Primarily just like is he something?
Because what I think benefited RJ and you didn't see
a ton of it in New York. He's been able
to in Samson Folk and Trey on their podcast framed
it this way, like play within the flow of the offense. Yeah,
that's something that we haven't And to be fair, I
don't know that New Orleans has ever really tried aside
from having him be like a standstill guy, we haven't
seen him given the opportunity or been forced to play
within the flow of something off the ball. Do you
view him as a player who can do that?
Speaker 2: I think his treat well. One of the reasons the
Pelicans didn't want him back is because he didn't prove
he could do that consistently. And like the types of
shots he likes tend to be kind of ball stopping shots,
Like he wants to get into his bag and shoot
two point jumpers, which like fits his like he's he's
a lanky wing that can shoot over a lot of guys.
Like that's I understand why that he feels that says
bread and butter. We've both touched on it, though. The
three point volume, which which was at a career high
this year over six per game, that's got to be
the floor and like you would just you know, teams
have conversations with agents and players before they do deals
like this about like what the terms of the next
deal are going to be. I don't know how common
it is to have the conversation touch on I'm like,
here's what we need you to do on the floor.
Are you good with that before we execute this trade?
Because Ingram does have to be a kind of extreme
version of what he's been and a pretty different version
of what he's been for this to go like maximally, Well,
I guess like so you can see the vision of it,
I can see it. If you think Ingram can be
more of a quick decision, get off some threes, you know,
get into your bag if you need to. It's the
end of a shot clock. He might be the guy
that's best equipped to do that on the team. Yeah,
do you have concerns to questions before we get out
of here, do you have concerns that the dynamic between
him and Scottie Barnes is a little too similar to
the one between him and Zion Williamson that we didn't love,
which is to say, the bigger star is best on
the ball, doesn't stretch and therefore is like a clunky
fit at least with the previous versions of Ingram. And then, secondly,
from the Raptor's perspective here overall, was getting Ingram an
ambitious move or was it unambitious because of like what
they seem to have locked themselves into.
Speaker 1: Ceiling wise, So let me answer the first one. Initially,
I I'm not as worried because Scottie Barnes is just
a more versatile player than Zion William right stuff. Yeah so,
and I think Scotty Barnes is also has been willing
to try or exist in different type of usage states.
I think the bigger key there will be Ingram is
rated for basically his entire career in the ninety percentile
or better of off ball gravity and off ball shot making.
So to me, it comes down to if he buys
into it. It's not a talent or ten thing, it's
a will Hey thing right. And I think the way
that Darko has used RJ a lot of the time,
I think that you can get Brandingham to buy into that. Now,
this leads into your second question. I don't want to
say it was on it's this seems like an opportunistic move.
I think it was ambitious in the sense of you
gave up a first round pick that's probably not going
to be good to get someone who you then needed
to turn around and pay that you're only guaranteed to
have for two years, so you only have him under
team control because throw this season out the window for
two more seasons. So it was risky, but you're also
not going to get as tough to fit in as Brandon.
Ingram can be just the type of value he provides
for a first round pick and like not just an
expiring contract us. So Kelly Olynic's money for next season
is probably skews in that negative. Yeah, at this point.
So what I worry about it? Though? And I would
I guess I would answer your question with another question
is do you think it's tenable with RJ in the
mix of the barns Ingram's because I think this makes
by the way, I think this makes a manual quickly
even more important the ball handling now maybe not, but
just as a spacer and even beyond me RJ stuff. Though,
Was this the direction for the Raptors to take this,
knowing that they could have let's just say, a top
seven pick, could be top five, could be the first
overall pick. Do you think that this was the direction
that the Raptors should be going down?
Speaker 2: I think they had already gone far enough in this
direction that like moving in a different one would have
been prohibitively tough, because you you know, they did get
picks for Siakham, but the OG deal got them quickly
and bear it, and they they gave quickly a bunch
of money and kind of you know, they're not locked in.
They're not in. You're not like, you know, cripplingly unflexible.
But it's like you kind of have a rough idea
of who's going to be taking up the biggest chunks
of the salary cap here for a while. So I
think I think it makes sense. I get I do
just continue to circle back to will will Ingram to
use your turn, which I think is dead on, like
just buy in to what needs needs to be his
role on this team. And and it's and it isn't
a question of can he be good at it? I
think he absolutely can. Yeah, it's like does he want
to do that? And honestly, it would behoove him to
do that because if teams around the league see he's
willing to shoot ten threes a game or with you know,
some insane thing like that, It's like, guess what, You're
way more valuable now because you fit everywhere.
Speaker 1: You will get paid again.
Speaker 2: Into you, Yes, and you will be paid. That was
the problem before. You don't fit everywhere because of how
you prefer to play offense. The Barrett piece of it
is kind of like it does just feel, well, what
do you Barrett has like blossomed as the facilitator. This year,
he's been better than he's been with the Knicks, Like,
but I'm not sure what his role looks like if
Barnes is going to be on the ball and Quickly
is going to be on the ball and Ingram is
a five assist guy, like what is Barrett? Just are
you good with a slasher? And that that is is
maybe that ties to Ingram willing being willing to shoot
threes too, because if Barrett's you know, like collapsing the
defense and having a guy out there that you have
to account for matters more. I don't know, Barrett's a
weird fit. I take your point on that.
Speaker 1: I am interested to see how it all come together
specifically with I'm not even because I think just Quickly
fits with Yakub Brandon, Ingram, r J Barrett, and Scottie Barnes,
because I think I RJ. Bats are willing to try
a bunch of different stuff, like just coming over from
Toronto from New York and the way he's been using
Toronto is proof of that concept. But unless you're gonna
like maybe they find out like should they bring him
off the bench and that allows more of sort of
a natural fit or I think people might frame this
as oh, quickly or RJ Barrett. It almost becomes just
looking at a spacing perspective. I wonder if them becomes
is that RJ. Barrett or Yaka Pertle and you need
to kind of remake your vision of what needs to
be at the five spot right now again because you
have Ingram and I don't know the answer to that.
That's why I really want to see it all. I'm
more open minded to this working. But I was talking
to Raptors fans on Blue Sky about this. A lot
of them were sort of which I think is fine.
They had like the Raptors Colors goggles on. They were
really excited about it, and I understand that. But I
think a lot of people were framing it as the
only alternative was what does cap space or flexibility like
that do in a Toronto market. That's accurate. If my
one concern was that, oh, they should just go into
free agency and get guys, I was more so thinking
like and this, I think the cardinal sin would then
be did they prioritize the wrong type of return for
og Anobi. But they started down this path last December
with the Oceanobe Trade, where they actively decided to prioritize
talent over picks and prospects, and I'm still not I
think the world of Scottie Barnes when we did Who's
going to be better for the next five years? I've
picked them over a bunch of dudes that I think
made you. It made me uncomfortable, made both I was uncomfortable,
but it just made me. You have the timeline to
where you could have been more gradual about it. And
so that's some going to kind of be watching here.
They haven't boxed themselves into a corner. They can get
out of this. I just I'm very curious to see
if it all works out. And I don't necessarily know
that I understand what the optimal version of this Raptors
can be even if it works out, because if branding
was a good fit, what do you view them as
relative to the rest of the Eastern Conference?
Speaker 2: Right That's the thing I think the only thing that
we can say with some level of certainty, because who
knows how the piece will fit together, is like the
Raptors priorities are to have good players on the team
right now, Like that's that's what this has been about.
And whether that turns out to be the right decision
or the wrong one. Honestly, is gonna hinge on how
wealth Ingram fits into this core grant.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about everyone's favorite topic, the state of the
NBA game, and the genesis of this is we've already
kind of done. I recorded with more from the NBA
podcast like the post All Star Break fallout, so this
isn't although you had an interesting thought about what was
discussed then that I wanted to ask you about. But
I always forget this time of year. I mentioned this
to you that as soon as like the super Bowl's
over and we get out of the All Star break.
This is not a brag. It's more of just like
I forget, the number of radio and podcasts requests I
receive just goes through the roof. And this past week
was that sort of revelation of oh, like, oh fuck,
like I'm gonna have to not have to I enjoy
doing it, but you're gonna have to figure out. I
said to you, was like I had to do two
in one day. It felt like so much. And the
question I'm continuously asked right now is whether they're using
it as All Star break. Is the impetus. What Raymond
Green has said Eddie Johnson in response to Draymond Green,
what other people have said is just the eNB they've
asked me about, like how do we make the NBA
game better because it's so much worse? Yeah, And I
believe it comes down to a perception problem more than anything.
And I'm just curious where you land. We've talked about
this before, but it's like these people are asking the
questions and I want to be able to have a
discussion about without saying because I do think part of
the problem is if I sit here and just say, no,
you're fucking wrong.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Like what is.
Speaker 1: What are the biggest things that stand out when people
are I know they're asking you this question, when you
see people saying the game is worse? Like what are
do you think are the biggest misconceptions that are driving
like what's going on right now?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Like I when you when you come across that stuff,
and like the radio hits are the wrong place to
do this because it's all like you know, bing, bang
in and out, like you know, it's not it's not
like a let's have a drawn out discussion, Like I
want to ask, like what do you mean like what
like when if someone says like it's worse, well, okay,
like why Like so I think the most common answers
that you get to that question are, all, it's too
many threes like that. We've we've heard plenty of talking
heads say everybody shoots threes. Offense is homogeneous, which is
kind of just an offshoot of like everyone wants to
shoot a lot of threes, right, you know it all
looks the same.
Speaker 1: What are the other like main gripes. I guess like
there's not as like creativity is one short? The other
one I get a lot is uh, players not playing
enough load management?
Speaker 2: Yeah, they don't care. Yeah, So I think I think
to have a productive discussion it you almost have to say,
like we you and I agree that like it's actually
just subjectively wrong that the quality of the game is worse, uh,
and and that you can you can show that in
any number of like you can get the numbers that
show like how much more players are moving around, like
how many more intricate actions there are by every offense,
like and look for us, it's hard because we're in
a silo and we've heard and agree with like all
the counter arguments. So I feel like I'm just regurgitating
stuff that maybe a broader audience like hasn't heard because
they're not in the same silo. But it's like, yes,
everybody wants to shoot a lot of threes because mathematically
those are the best shots, those in shots at the rim.
So if all you're saying is everyone wants to shoot
threes and therefore the game is worse, it's like you're
just not watching how teams go about trying to get
those threes and how difficult it is, and how much
strategic like thinking and counter thinking is required in the
push and pull of like we want to get certain shots,
how do we do that? How does the defense try
to prevent you from doing that? So I think like
there's no way to say this without it coming off
as like being an elitist or calling someone like just dumb,
But like you aren't watching very carefully. If the reason
you think the game is worse is because teams shoot
a lot of threes, you know what I mean? Like
that that feels like a threshold issue that we need
to get over and then from you know, even the
the idea that players missing time is like a choice
or is somehow evidence of the game being worse. I
would push back and say, like players are missing time
because the game's harder, like it's physically more taxing, like
the things you're asking Just take centers for example, like
a center thirty years ago didn't have to do anything
on the perimeter almost ever, and like block to block
and and so many other like Ben, Like, we just
can't talk about this without referencing the video Ben Taylor
put together comparing basketball games just randomly chosen from different eras.
Like the amount of stationary stuff that happened in the
eighties and nineties compared to today is just like it's night
and day. Like every player is moving and processing and
thinking and changing direction like to just an extreme degree,
an extremely increased degree now versus then, And it's it's
harder mentally, it's harder physically, And so yeah, you're gonna
miss time because you're asking your body to do stuff
that players thirty forty years ago just never did. So
I mean, I just I don't really know what to
say other than like you're entitled to enjoy whatever era
you prefer. That's fine, but it is to me just
objectively wrong that the actual product on the floor is worse.
I just don't know how you can pay any level
of attention to it and conclude that so you know
what I mean, Like, I don't know what to say
to the radio host, I guess is the answer.
Speaker 1: I've had some look and you're right, it's not the form.
I just had a recent one. I don't even remember.
It was a station in Louisiana. I was the RP
three show. I think it was called the So shout
out to them, like they made the entire segment about that.
I don't think that necessarily everyone wants to hear this,
But I honestly don't know because the word you were
were in our silo. But I would say, if you
have a preference for the like the previous era, like
you just like that you liked slower basketball, You liked
possessions that were easier to follow because there was less movement.
And I don't know if this is the reason players
are missing time, but like the game is faster when
you look at the app don't even forget pace. Look
at the average offensive possession time today is about fourteen seconds.
It was closer to sixteen in ninety six ninety seven.
Those two seconds may make a difference when you're talking
about more movement. In general, you're covering their smaller players
guarding bigger players. The way that guys are built nowt
like the way that bigger players can move like cal
Anthony Towns is an example, is like the way that
he can get going downhill off the dribble. That's not
what a bit like. Imagine one doing that as the
big but then two having to defend that right. So,
what I really think the bigger issue here is is
that it comes down to a failure in communication, and
I think that more speaks to a failure in how
the league is covered, because I think since the game
has become more complicated, it is now harder to cover.
I would like to think, per your proprietary metrics, that
we do an excellent job of covering the league. They
entirely get large now at least trying to be authentic
about it. But it's hard and there are people that
if you want to know more about how like the
x's and o's of it, if you go watch it,
like the Ben Taylor video, Go watch that video. But
thinking basketball, just google on YouTube and it'll show what
players and media members are getting wrong. It is so
much easier to follow a possession, especially if you're trying
to track defense. And there's so much more stuff happening
now that I have all the respect in the world
for people who are able to break it down in
real time or even after the fact, But that's not
enough of mainstream coverage. And I don't know necessarily the
root of it because I think stuff that factors in.
It's easy for me to sit here and say there
should be more of this, but to do it in practice.
There's less time in between plays than there is at
the NFL, as an example, because that's considered just the
flagship coverage. When you look at, oh, the NFL coverage
is so great, it's so nuanced. There's fewer plays in
the NFL and there's fewer games, so there's more time
to digest and synthesize this stuff. You don't have that
in the NBA. The other thing is too that everything
feels like it needs to be presented in more bite
sized form, and so you're not gonna be able to
have this discussion over the length of a sixty second
TikTok video. And if the NBA is truly trying to
gear itself towards that. I don't know who. We had
this discussion off air, honestly don't know who the NBA's
target audience is. That's maybe a problem, or maybe they've
decided our target audience is this. They're not interested in
these long, nuanced, some people might say overly meticulous breakdowns.
And then the final thing before I throw it to you,
there needs to be a stomach to build up momentum
for this coverage. And I'm going to liken it to
the play in tournament. Now had two NBA Mid season Cups.
There's already talk of getting rid of it, moving it
to not compete with the NFL. I'm not saying the
mid Season Cup, the NBA Cup, whatever it's called, is
a home run, but if you want it to mean
something to players, to fans, you need to have the
stomach to give it time through those trucks, through those
valleys before it ever reaches a peak. And the NBA,
and I think a lot of businesses in general, they're
so focused on these short term returns and impressions and metrics.
We're never gonna know if a lot of the stuff
that could work. And let's circle it back to the
more nuanced covers that we want. Where do I think
there's a place for legacy debates, for ring debates, for
the covers that we get. Trade talk, sure, I don't
want to be writing about trades in March. Trades can't
happen in March. It is a failure in the way
that the game is disseminated to the fans. And if
you're saying, well, that's what draws the engagement, you need
to have the stomach to shift that, to show them like, no,
this stuff can be interesting too. And if it turns
out again, I don't know if you can do that,
Maybe it turns out that the NBA's demographic doesn't want
that stuff and they care more about rankings overall. There's
also a way to do and I think this is
what we do among the things we do best. There's
a way to centralize your coverage and say, rather than
we're gonna bounce around the NBA and talk about random things,
we can talk about surprises and disappointments and then get
into why and be more specific and make it your own.
The idea is maybe cookie cutter in the search of centralization,
which I totally understand, but like the actual content within
it doesn't have to be and so I chalk most
of this stuff up too. There's that, And then I
also think very I promise this as quickly the former
players talking about this, I think there's always going to
be will be guilty of it two by saying like
our error is better than the next one. But I
also think that because the level of money involved now,
there might be a tinge of resentment to where players
in the nineties as non stars weren't making anywhere near
even when you account for inflation, what role players are today.
So maybe there's sort of an undercurrent of resentment there.
I don't know, And that's the That's the other thing
is we I do think a lot of us have
to acknowledge that in order to make impressions of the
game better. I don't know that we can pretend to
have like I won't speak in absolutes about it, is
what I'm getting at.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think just to touch on the the idea
of like the messaging that needs to be there, or
like you know you what you what you hear? A
lot in conjunction with this conversation is and JJ Reddick
has said this, you know the people that are discussing
the game and in prominent positions in the NBA media
that spend a lot of time speaking ill of its
current state, like it feels it's it's unfortunately like that matters,
you know, like if the game is as good as
you and I are saying it is, like, shouldn't the
merits of that just carry the day? And everybody who
actually watches it will come to decide that, like, no,
this is great, Like I just look at the athleticism,
look at the sophistication, look at the skill, look at
like there's no stiffs like anywhere on the floor and
there used to be a minimum of two at all times,
Like shouldn't that Like So it's it bums me out
that we need to care about what the talking heads
are saying. But that's just reality. And I think the
problem is, and you hit on this a little bit,
it's just like it's all now. Draymond is a bit
of an exception, although he's at the end of his
career and is just kind of liable to say anything.
But it it is just guys that are back in
my daying it like that really is you look at
who all the prominent voices are that discuss the league
and it's retired players, and it's often like really really
good retired players who for like lots of reasons, like
feel like the game when they kicked ass at it
was its best, right because like that's kind of self
aggrandizing in a way, like it was the best then,
and I was the best at it, and therefore, like
what happened what's happening now is worse Somehow. I just
think it is true ultimately that we need more celebration
of it, and we need more highlighting of like no, no, yeah,
this result, this play resulted in a three. Look at
the fifteen things that had to happen in five seconds
for that three to be generated, Like isn't that amazing?
Like I do think the audience can be sophisticated enough
to appreciate that sophisticated is the wrong word, Like that's
a cool thing. And if you show a cool thing
to people and explain why it's cool, they'll get it.
So that's what it needs to be. Because if you
continue to allow the loudest voices to be negative ones,
then yeah, like I mean, look where we are in society,
like this is this is not just a basketball problem.
Like you can really steer public opinion by having some
very loud voices say things that aren't true. So like
it's just on people that actually care about the sport
and appreciate like how much flat out better it is
now to just say so and like say why it
doesn't need to be you.
Speaker 1: Know, you don't need like a you know, thirty minute
video on like one play to explain what, like just point.
Speaker 2: Out the cool shit. There's a lot of it. Like
it's not hard.
Speaker 1: I think the issue and that coverage exists, but I
don't know how accessible it necessarily is. Because again that's right,
then that's the needle to thread is like don't turn
every like nobody wants to sit.
Speaker 2: Through a science lesson. But like there's gotta be ways
for like the more what's good about the more niche
coverage that diehard like nerd fans care about. You got
to find a way to package that so that a
broader audience cares about it. Like that's maybe that's a challenge,
but like it will help the game grow and make
more money and be more appreciated for what it is
if you can do that.
Speaker 1: I do, and I honestly think it's an insult too,
thiscation of let's use NBA fans specifically to just assume
that you can't do it this way and that the
only type of engagement is rage engagement that's worth pursuing.
So the accessibility thing is just a big one, And
I just don't know. I don't I'm maybe things change
with the way like now Amazon and NBC are getting
in the fall, everyone seems optimistic about some of the
cast they've put together. I will say this is the
cynic in me. I'll just believe it when I see it,
because I've even seen outlets broadcast partners invest in this
stuff kind of, but then they get away from it
so quickly because it's not working out as much as
the people who are maybe driving these decisions. They're not
invested in the actual game of basketball or the way
it's covered. They're just invested in the bottom line. And
so if you see Kendrick Perkins going on air and
saying that, you know, LaMelo Ball is better than Michael
Jordan or something, I'm just throwing something ridiculous like that.
Speaker 2: You personally believe by the way you've told me that
in confidence.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but that's like I feel like that wasn't spicy enough.
That's a real take that someone can and should have.
So I don't I don't necessarily know what the answer
is there though, and I don't really know who to
lay it at the feet of, because even the NBA,
for as an example, has these alternative broadcasts that you
can access to where it's like the guys from it.
I'm not saying you have to love it, like Nate
Duncan and Danny LaRue doing these alternative it's a different
viewing experience than just listening to the you know, the
regular broadcast who are listening to the national televised ones.
Like the alternatives are out there, but they're not marketed
that way like the game is marketed as. I don't
even know what the game is marketed as anymore. You
kind of just gets into All Star Weekend a little
bit where uh mort had said, like it unfolded like
it was a bunch of lawyers in a room that
were just kind of out of touch with what like
the product needed to be. And you have kind of
a differencepin on that, which I find interesting too. And again,
all this stuff we're removed from all Star Weekend now,
But I think this shit matters when it comes to
driving interest in the game.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I think that's that feels like a
miss to me because the people that are deciding what
happens at All Star Weekend are the ones with the
most information on and greatest incentive to like drive audience
engagement like like, so that's to say, it's marketers, it's
branding people. It's people that work at the NBA collecting
data on like what fans like the most, Like do
you really think like they're not. The decision making process,
I guarantee you is built around how do we make
this appealing to the most people in the audience subsections
that we care about? Like so, and I think this
so like I have a hard time believing that, like
the NBA is not throwing like every resource at how
do we engage? How do we make people enjoy this?
How do we make people care? Pay attention? Whatever? And
I think and I'll throw myself in this bucket, like
not super interested in All Star Weekend? Not super inches
could not be less interested in mister beast like doing
a half court shooting competition or like in the Mac
McClung of it all that that was actually really fun.
Speaker 1: That was fun. Like Kevin Hart. In my life, I
use a lot less Kevin Hart. But you know what,
you know who likes this is getting my point? You
know who likes Kevin Hart?
Speaker 2: Young people. I'm not a young person, like, so All
Star Weekend is not for me. All Star Weekend is
for like people of an age, and this is mostly
teenagers and kids that the NBA is targeting to build
lifelong fans with stuff they like, which is to say,
if you're like twelve, because I can remember being twelve,
holy shit, Like, look at all these players that I
really like. They're on the same team. They're gonna play together,
and they're gonna play against a team with a bunch
of other players that don't play together except for today.
That's insane. Like if you're of a certain age and
you're not jaded like we are and haven't seen thirty
All Star games, the novelty of that is still gonna
like blow you away. So that's one thing. The other
thing is I had a friend that took his son
that's like a tween to to the arena and it's
like everyone lost their shit for mister Beast. He's for them. Like,
so the NBA is putting is like appealing to the
customer base. I think it actually cares a lot about
and it's thinking hard about the ways to do that.
Kevin Hart's part of that, you know, mister Beast is
part of that. There's not a whole lot of great
excuses for like the downtime. I don't know what you
do about that. That feels like a mistake between the
actual All Star Games plural. But like, I think the
league is actually succeeding in a lot of ways. I'm
not persuaded by the like, well, look at the brand engagement,
like no miss me with that we're talking about like
what's interesting to fans? I think for it's just it
isn't for me. But I and so like, I don't
think the league really cares that much if it's successful
in reaching me or like impressing me with All Star Weekend.
I think it is for younger people, and I think
it they did like it. I think, like that's the
thing is the people that are complaining about it are
not from that demographic, and I think all the evidence
suggests the NBA cares about that demograph and not so
much us, We're gonna care about the league no matter what.
It's trying to grab new people. That that's that's the
whole game.
Speaker 1: That's and that's it counts the miss on my part too,
because my whole interpretation of Mister Beast being there was well,
how much of a like crossover is there between mister
Like is mister Beast drawing in new viewers? But maybe
it's more of a thing like, well, our viewers already
like are into mister Beast type of logic, And so
I might have dismissed that too quickly. Yea, I do
think what you touched on, and we've already talked about
it in relation to the actual game. This is another
instance of mythologizing the past, as it you put more
distance between it, like and yourself because All Star games
they make it seem like Kobe was out there like
that's when he tore his achilles, was like really like
trying to win the All Star Game. No, like, that's
these all like it was about when I was younger,
like seeing the different jerseys and then the highlights, which
is just you want to know why the NBA's invested
in those and those are all over a Bleacher reporter
or an ESPN app like, that's probably the stuff kids
are interested, like, oh my god, Steph Curry threw a
lob to Kevin Durant or something. What I do wonder though,
and you mentioned we mentioned this a little bit with
the Draymond Green in his comments. Do you think, like,
how much does it matter. Let's say, as an instance,
that Lebron James dealing with this ankle thing and that
ends up not playing last minute, his spot could have
gone to someone else, But it's also we didn't know
he wasn't playing, and that's someone that is putting butts
in seats and people want to see. Do you think that,
even though I'm sitting here and saying I don't think
players went full boar in the All Star Game in
years past, do you think that there is still maybe
a disconnect now with like how much of an obligation
they view it to play in that game versus then,
or is that you know, is that also being exaggerated.
Speaker 2: I think when you start messing with the format of
the game, and to the extreme degree that they're messing
with it now, I understand it seems like logical for
players like Lebron to say like I'm okay, Like I
don't need, I really don't need to be involved in
this now because it's like we're headed towards the Pro Bowl,
which is flag football, you know, like that that feels
like the direction we're going, and that may not be great,
but I think, like, again, it's not for me, Like
I've seen enough All Star games. I get it, and
like the ones that I romanticize are the ones I
watched at a certain age that captured me, Like I'm
already captured. We can you and I can complain all
we want. We're not doing that, but like and fans
of our age and our demographic can complain. The league
already has us I And so it's just it's just changing,
and everybody that's like enjoyed something for a long time
is uncomfortable with change and uncomfortable with like no longer
being the top priority of a thing that they used
to be the top priority for right And I think.
Speaker 1: Kevin Durant kind of hit it on the head when
he said cancel it because everyone likes to complain about
the NBA more than watch it. Well, and he's not
I mean that's hyperbole in some respects, but it's you
get to what he's saying, because there's when we've gone
through the dunk test, will another star do it? It's
kind of the same thing here where it's just there's
more for these players to loan than gain, lose than
gain at this point by doing something extra because they've
become a meme, or they're not trying hard enough, or
they should played better. And that comes with the territory
of making so much money and in an age where
just everything is just quantified, collated, like disseminated, like in
an instant, And so I understand that they're compensated accordingly,
but I do think that comes back to bring this
for full circle, is would perception among fans be as
negative or is inclined to just think about the discourse
following Lebron not playing it was I saw a bunch
of segments. I didn't watch them in full, but like
I grew up on Kobe and I'm tired of First
of all, I'm tired of fucking hearing Shack's name when
it comes to like working, Like did you even watch
back then? He was just bigger and he was great,
But like, don't pretend that Shack is like the billboard
for diligence when it comes to your career. But like
that's the immediate thing we pounce on, is rather than
like you go take me through that All Star game
that you're talking about, whereas they gave it there all otherwise,
shut the fuck up, because you can be you can
criticize the game without just being doom and gloom about it.
And it just feels like everything we latch onto when
it comes not we pecifically or everyone specifically. Too much
of the negative or low hanging, low browse slants are
latched onto because we think that this is what either
fans want or is the only thing they're capable of
appreciating or responding to. And I just don't believe that
that's the case.
Speaker 2: I think the foundational issue is that, like every algorithm
in every social media platform will tell you that negativity
spreads faster and feels louder and does better than positivity,
and so like that's just I mean, you could you
could cite that as the reason a lot of talking
heads are shitting on the game. Is like that sound
bite's gonna get spread faster and farther than them saying like,
you know what, game's pretty good, or the All Star
Game was fine, or like we're saying not for me,
Like that's that's just where we are with It's not
basketball specific.
Speaker 1: No, it's a weird human condition, right, because what are
you more likely to do just at large? Are you
gonna go leave a review about a positive experience you
had at this restaurant? Or you more likely to leave
a review like something goes someone had a really bad
day and like your food was wrong or they were
nasty to you. It's just it feels like we're more
conditioned to respond to negati or come even voice our
negativity than to voice our positivity.
Speaker 2: Yeah, All Star Game's fine and or it's not for me,
so so I don't care. Well, they should probably revert back,
But if they're going to stick with this format, that's
the same thing with what we're just talking about. If
you're changing coverage, like you need to give it more
than a second right with it. Yeah, and I agree
with that even if it's not perfect. Let's give it
five years and see how it goes. Trim the downtime
in between it.
Speaker 1: And I'm saying I will say I'll stand by this.
I don't think less basketball. When it comes to basketball,
is ever the answer for best that we agree on?
How about we close on that. You're ready to think
us down of that?
Speaker 2: Thanks everybody for listening for watching. Let us know what
you think? Uh, if like, what do you say to
because if you're watching or listening to this, presumably you
do enjoy the game.
Speaker 1: What do you say to people that if you're through
the age of twenty five? Specific I would love to
know yes and and prove me right and say you
care about mister beast and he's not for me and
that's fine because I'm old. Thanks everybody for listening for watching,
Rate review, subscribe, leave us our comments here on coming YouTube,
Join our discord, which is another place we can you
can engage with us and discuss the quality or lack
thereof in the modern and duleague game.
Speaker 2: Link for that YouTube.
Speaker 1: Podcast description shouts Frank mil Keena apologies chaired Allen