Speaker 1: What is up, fellas that goes I am dan Fa
Speaker 1: Valley coming at you with the one, the only, the
Speaker 1: certified refreshed. I can only imagine while he was on vacation,
Speaker 1: mister Grant Hughes. We're doing NBA Factor Fiction Dds.
Speaker 2: Edition Dog Days of Summer.
Speaker 1: Are going to go through a bunch of topics, some topical,
Speaker 1: some big picture, some a little inflammatory because I like
Speaker 1: to throw things at Grant and force him to deliver takes.
Speaker 1: But we welcome back Grant. I'm so excited to have
Speaker 1: you back. I apologize for doxing where you were headed
Speaker 1: on vacation, but I am pleased report you didn't text me,
Speaker 1: email me saying that paparazzi or anyone bothered you while
Speaker 1: you were in Parts unknown.
Speaker 2: Now we will call it.
Speaker 1: So thank you everyone for letting Grant and his family
Speaker 1: just you know, thank you for respecting their privacy. It's
Speaker 1: just when he goes out in public a lot people
Speaker 1: recognize him from the show, so it's tough. And I
Speaker 1: apologize to letting everyone know which state you were headed
Speaker 1: to for vacation.
Speaker 3: It's hard. It's hard, you know, like you want to
Speaker 3: live a normal life and just you know, look, nobody's
Speaker 3: sympathetic to the world famous. I just wanted I'm really
Speaker 3: I thank you for for that. Just that that intro
Speaker 3: was refreshing. I feel refreshed by that. I just wanted
Speaker 3: to get first before we do anything else, your takes
Speaker 3: on how Lebron's gonna look with the Warriors. Because I
Speaker 3: was gone, so I didn't see any news. I just
Speaker 3: I assume that's what happened. I just like, how do
Speaker 3: you like? What are their championship pods?
Speaker 1: I was actually curious how plugged in you were going
Speaker 1: to be about the Lebron news while you were away,
Speaker 1: because you do force yourself to unplug, which is smart.
Speaker 1: But you were into discord like pretty soon as after
Speaker 1: the news, which leads me to believe that you were
Speaker 1: you were really hoping it was the Warriors, so that
Speaker 1: must have been I mean feeling okay.
Speaker 3: I was hoping that. I was pretty clear to anybody
Speaker 3: that listened at any point since that possibility kind of
Speaker 3: over the past five years. Yeah, well, at any point
Speaker 3: in history. But yeah, how plugged in was I I
Speaker 3: don't know, Like I told you, I saw, I did
Speaker 3: not see a single snippet of anything on any social
Speaker 3: media platform, which is, you know, not that hard for
Speaker 3: me really, but uh but that was nice.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 3: I got the ESPN app on my phone and I
Speaker 3: read the headlines there and read articles that are of
Speaker 3: interest to me and Lebron stuff.
Speaker 1: I said, ESPN, But you meant Bleacher Report, right, just
Speaker 1: as a company man?
Speaker 3: Yeah, right, that too, and I and so I just
Speaker 3: I consumed it. I feel like the level at which
Speaker 3: I consumed NBA news on vacation was that of like
Speaker 3: a seventy five year old that only watches TV, you know,
Speaker 3: like or maybe like reads a national newspaper, which don't
Speaker 3: exist anymore, except if you're seventy five, and you still
Speaker 3: get a physical newspaper.
Speaker 2: So still get a physical newspaper.
Speaker 3: I wish, I wish. I used to love getting a
Speaker 3: newspaper right to the sports section. Remember that as a kid.
Speaker 3: Did you get? As a kid? Did you get?
Speaker 2: Do you remember?
Speaker 1: That's how we I followed, Like Kobe Bryant's free agency.
Speaker 1: At one point when he was considered, the Knicks were
Speaker 1: trying to sell him on signing for like four million
Speaker 1: bucks because his Nike endorsement would go through the roof
Speaker 1: or something. And looking back, I'm wondering, wouldn't that have
Speaker 1: been salary caps or convention to prom with that pub
Speaker 1: But you followed that like.
Speaker 2: In the newspaper looking through every day. I was like
Speaker 2: seven years old or whatever it was.
Speaker 3: I want to take that segue, but I'm not because
Speaker 3: I want to relate to you my newspaper story from
Speaker 3: my youth. So this must have been like nineteen ninety
Speaker 3: two or three where I would watch every Warriors game obviously,
Speaker 3: but those started at seven thirty and at that age, like,
Speaker 3: I'm not making it to like ten pm or whatever,
Speaker 3: so I wouldn't see the end of the game.
Speaker 2: Are I went to ten pm? Now? No?
Speaker 3: Yeah, So I probably used to be able to stay
Speaker 3: up later. But I would get the newspaper in the
Speaker 3: morning and every day go right to the sports section,
Speaker 3: check the box score to see how many points Latrell's
Speaker 3: free well scored. And then I would check because they
Speaker 3: would list like the top ten scorers, rebounders, and assist
Speaker 3: guys in the league, and I'd be like, he's up
Speaker 3: to twenty one point two, that's top twelve because he
Speaker 3: had twenty six last night. And I would just I
Speaker 3: would just follow what Latrell Spreewell's points per game were
Speaker 3: in the newspaper every day, and I was like, this,
Speaker 3: what could be better that we've gone astray? It was
Speaker 3: a better time when that's how you like learn.
Speaker 1: I also wonder how much of it is like us
Speaker 1: romanticizing our youth when we didn't really have like we
Speaker 1: had time to sit. Are you would you have time
Speaker 1: to sit through a newspaper right now?
Speaker 3: I mean i'd make time. I really wish we still
Speaker 3: got a physical newspaper. I guess I could, but it's like,
Speaker 3: I don't know, it's you know what it is a youth.
Speaker 3: Think we're romanticizing youth because it wouldn't feel the same.
Speaker 3: It wouldn't feel as incredible to be like I have
Speaker 3: all this information that it just and it comes every
Speaker 3: day incredible.
Speaker 2: You would find out things.
Speaker 1: Imagine if you only consume news that way now, though,
Speaker 1: you would find out especially doing what you do, you'd
Speaker 1: be like the last to know everything.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, I'm already kind of the last to know
Speaker 3: most stuff though, so it wouldn't be that different for me.
Speaker 2: It would just be like, hey, when it came to Lebron,
Speaker 2: you were plugged. I mean, you were in the Discord.
Speaker 3: We haven't really I was. I was surprised, right were you?
Speaker 3: If you just had to say, like what was your
Speaker 3: initial emotional up Like it was surprising because like the
Speaker 3: Sixers didn't make I've now talked myself into like, you
Speaker 3: know what, I guess it kind of like I think
Speaker 3: I even said this on Discord, like I sort of
Speaker 3: get it, like they need a guy at that position,
Speaker 3: and yeah, maybe they're gonna you know, they're better than
Speaker 3: the Warriors if everything breaks right, they're better than however,
Speaker 3: many other teams you want, like of the of the
Speaker 3: Suitors that like it got narrowed down to I sort
Speaker 3: of get it, but it was still like, huh, like
Speaker 3: that's weird. There's like no because there's no like narrative
Speaker 3: explanation for it to me, And maybe that's what I
Speaker 3: was focused on.
Speaker 1: I thought the narrative explanation was they have a forty
Speaker 1: three year title drought, and so if you end that
Speaker 1: as part of it while winning a title, like your
Speaker 1: fourth title with a different team, I know people will
Speaker 1: say Jordan won all his titles with one team, or
Speaker 1: like switching teams made Lebron a mercenary, winning four titles
Speaker 1: with four different teams, especially you know, the past two
Speaker 1: coming in the age of parody, like the Lakers one
Speaker 1: and then if he won one with Philly.
Speaker 2: Now, yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 1: If you read the Dave mcmahamon piece about the behind
Speaker 1: the scenes stuff, the source saying their fan base and
Speaker 1: like how thirsty they are for a title really factored in.
Speaker 1: That was the moment I was convinced. I was already
Speaker 1: a little convinced because Rich Paul had said it. I
Speaker 1: was thinking, oh, he he was going to the Knicks
Speaker 1: if they didn't win the chance, he was going to
Speaker 1: try to go to the Knicks if they do.
Speaker 3: I was just gonna ask you that if the Knicks
Speaker 3: don't win the title, he goes there, right, Like, I think.
Speaker 1: I think that's and there are probably other changes made
Speaker 1: at that point by them. So but yeah, that it's
Speaker 1: confirmed to me, especially because he's living in New York too.
Speaker 2: Now that also confirmed to me that. Okay, so he's
Speaker 2: doing the JJ Reddick.
Speaker 1: He talked to the Sixers about it, but it was
Speaker 1: surprising and they look, we have a factor fiction on
Speaker 1: the Sixers.
Speaker 2: If you want to, we want to start there.
Speaker 3: Yeah, h where's that?
Speaker 2: When I go factor fiction.
Speaker 1: The Philadelphia seventy six ers will have a top fifteen defense.
Speaker 3: So I had to look up what they were last year,
Speaker 3: and it was seventeenth. And they have lost several guys
Speaker 3: that if I'm a little skeptical of some of the
Speaker 3: numbers because they just don't pass the smell test, but like,
Speaker 3: they've lost several players that were pretty significantly positive plus
Speaker 3: minus contributors as far as they're like on off defensive
Speaker 3: efficiency numbers. They also lost Kelly Oubrey, who was like
Speaker 3: by far one of their worst on off defensive helpful pieces,
Speaker 3: which is like, okay, it's kind of like that doesn't
Speaker 3: quite check out either. He's not great, but he's like
Speaker 3: not terrible. Like Quentin Grimes is gone, I should have
Speaker 3: I should have left it up. Paul George is gone.
Speaker 3: He was a hugely positive defensive force. There's another guy
Speaker 3: who I can't remember. They didn't have like crazy opponent
Speaker 3: three point shooting luck one way or the other, if
Speaker 3: you want to say they were, they were a little
Speaker 3: bit luckier than unlucky in terms of like how accurately
Speaker 3: opponents shot threes. So I guess, like my response is
Speaker 3: answer the question with a question like what reason is
Speaker 3: there for them to be better than they were last year,
Speaker 3: which was seventeen. So I guess I would have to
Speaker 3: just say fiction because I don't feel like Jalen Brown
Speaker 3: plus maybe steps forward from VJ Edgecomb is enough to
Speaker 3: make some massive difference, especially if you just I think
Speaker 3: Don Barlow is he gonna play more because he was
Speaker 3: a huge defensive piece for them last year just based
Speaker 3: on the numbers, even though he didn't play a ton,
Speaker 3: I just don't see the reason to be like, yes, absolutely,
Speaker 3: they'll be above the midline defensively.
Speaker 1: Well, I think it starts with the one question would
Speaker 1: be does Joel Embiid just play in more games? And
Speaker 1: if he does, do you think he is still capable
Speaker 1: of elevating the defense because there were moments during the playoffs,
Speaker 1: quite a few of them where I think you would
Speaker 1: come away feeling differently.
Speaker 3: I mean, I I don't feel confident saying Joel Embiid
Speaker 3: will definitely be a helpful player full like, and you
Speaker 3: just you can add whatever end of the sentence you
Speaker 3: want on that, right, like how many you know is
Speaker 3: he going to be a net positive offensive player? Does
Speaker 3: he is he going to definitely fit? Is he going
Speaker 3: to definitely be a good like I don't know. I
Speaker 3: think if I had to guess, like, I think he's
Speaker 3: probably not going to be a good defensive player like
Speaker 3: and and you can get away with you can cheap
Speaker 3: out and say because he's gonna miss half the games
Speaker 3: or whatever.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 3: It's not like a totally fair way to analyze it.
Speaker 3: But I don't imagine him being consistently more mobile or
Speaker 3: have or to have greater stamina as he continues to age, right, Like,
Speaker 3: I don't know anything possible, but I don't see him
Speaker 3: being being likely to play more or play better than
Speaker 3: he did last.
Speaker 2: Year, which I think is also fair.
Speaker 1: I look at it as I do think at least
Speaker 1: as a zero win or have to defend the top guy.
Speaker 1: A top guy, Jalalen Brown is an upgrade over Paul
Speaker 1: George defensively.
Speaker 3: Would you say that on well, you can make the
Speaker 3: same sort of hacky criticism of Paul George as I
Speaker 3: did of h Beeb's, like, well, how good a defender
Speaker 3: is he if he's on the bench for half the season,
Speaker 3: But like, do you think Jalen Brown on balance is
Speaker 3: a more impactful overall defensive piece than Paul George.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say yes, just because I think that there's
Speaker 1: value in seid Like you're gonna go up against teams
Speaker 1: when you look at how many teams or the best
Speaker 1: teams are trying to assemble like X number of ball handlers,
Speaker 1: I think it's valuable to who you're gonna trust to,
Speaker 1: you know, defend at the point of attack or another
Speaker 1: advantage creator. Are you trusting Paul George or Jalen Brown?
Speaker 1: I know NBA defense is way more complicated than that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: if you have to defend a strong link not one
Speaker 1: of the weak links.
Speaker 3: I think you're probably right that. But that's even more
Speaker 3: of a playoff thing, right where it's like we have
Speaker 3: to stop this guy and he's gonna be in space
Speaker 3: isolated a lot. Jalen Brown's better at that. If you're
Speaker 3: talking regular season defense, I think the game's played thing
Speaker 3: is just I don't know what to do with that,
Speaker 3: but I would say Paul George is a better overall
Speaker 3: defensive piece than Jalen Brown is over the course of
Speaker 3: a season. Most of that's off ball, but like, yeah,
Speaker 3: I don't know. I guess like here's the thing you're
Speaker 3: asking can they be top factor fiction, will they be
Speaker 3: a top fifteen defense. They're seventeen last year, and we're
Speaker 3: sitting here making a case that, like, well they might
Speaker 3: not be that different, so like it's possible, but like that,
Speaker 3: if that's an over underline, that's a really good line,
Speaker 3: because I like, I don't think they're gonna be There's
Speaker 3: no way their top ten. And I also don't think
Speaker 3: they're worse than twentieth, So like you're just they're right
Speaker 3: in that range. But I just to circle all the
Speaker 3: way back, I don't see enough compelling evidence that the
Speaker 3: collection of players they have now are meaningfully better defensively
Speaker 3: than what they had last year. It might be a
Speaker 3: little bit, but it also might be a little bit worse.
Speaker 1: Well, I think they're backup center situations probably worse. But
Speaker 1: Drummond wasn't a huge defensive like he hasn't been. This
Speaker 1: makes me never really been an above average room protector,
Speaker 1: even when he's had county stats. I think getting Dean
Speaker 1: Wade probably helps there.
Speaker 2: Sure.
Speaker 1: Also Kentavia is called the Pope, have every have anything left?
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say fact, they will be a top fifteen defense.
Speaker 1: They feel so talented. I think you could. There's some
Speaker 1: really fascinating and I trust VJ. Edgecombe defensively at least
Speaker 1: relative to his position so well that I think that core.
Speaker 2: And what do we say all.
Speaker 1: The time too, They're gonna be a terrible rebounding team.
Speaker 1: I'm definitely worried about that. But what do we say
Speaker 1: all the time that if you can get your defense set,
Speaker 1: So if your offense is good and you can get
Speaker 1: your defense set, that's a big help under itself. And
Speaker 1: just even like, can Joelle and Bed be like twenty
Speaker 1: percent better than he was last year while playing in
Speaker 1: the same thirty eight games or forty one games probably
Speaker 1: goes a long way.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's interesting. Like I guess even though I'm not
Speaker 3: as bullish on their defensive potential as you are, I guess.
Speaker 2: We're like if you told me top nighteen, I'm probably
Speaker 2: like right, yeah, no, we agree.
Speaker 3: It's like we're in the range. Like midpack is is solid,
Speaker 3: I do think at its absolute best, and Dean Wade
Speaker 3: is a good guy to bring up, although like, I mean,
Speaker 3: how how many years are we going to be like
Speaker 3: Dean Wade? You know, Advanced metric Superstar is like doesn't
Speaker 3: seem to matter all that much. In the end, I
Speaker 3: think the defense can be good enough at its best
Speaker 3: to make this team on a lot of nights look
Speaker 3: elite because I think the offense is gonna be great.
Speaker 3: Like I just I just I you know, shocker, Like
Speaker 3: they have a lot of talent and they have like
Speaker 3: Lebron isn't what he was, but he's going to make
Speaker 3: that offense better even if it's just like that dude
Speaker 3: scores in transition all the time. Now, like that's a
Speaker 3: fun thing to do in your forties all of a sudden,
Speaker 3: but like there will be times where you're gonna look
Speaker 3: at a sixers week or two week long stretch and say, like,
Speaker 3: is this the best team in the East. I think
Speaker 3: for all the reasons we've kind of tiptoed around the health,
Speaker 3: the the the up and down nature of some of
Speaker 3: their key guys, like they they won't sustain that level.
Speaker 3: But I think the defense will be good enough sometimes
Speaker 3: to like pair with an offense that's gonna look great
Speaker 3: a lot of the time. Right, Like I think there
Speaker 3: do you agree with that? Like this this team's like
Speaker 3: top level is very very very high. It's just like, yeah,
Speaker 3: what percentage of the season. Can they reach that level.
Speaker 1: And can they sustain it or can they be at
Speaker 1: that level when it matters most because Embiid's kind of
Speaker 1: a part of that too. And you could also ask
Speaker 1: the question, this would have been a good factor fiction,
Speaker 1: like will Lebron play center this year?
Speaker 2: Like factor fiction Lebron spends more than one hundred minutes
Speaker 2: playing center this season.
Speaker 3: I was like, I was thinking of it in terms
Speaker 3: of like a percentage, so because that would be pretty
Speaker 3: small if he plays I don't know who knows how
Speaker 3: many minutes that guys, well, I think he will play
Speaker 3: some center.
Speaker 1: I was gonna say, let me look at his career
Speaker 1: high where he's played at center at like the in
Speaker 1: terms of the share of his minutes, and see, like,
Speaker 1: so is he ever logged?
Speaker 2: All right?
Speaker 1: So I guess in twenty four to twenty five, fourteen
Speaker 1: percent this is Perkeley named Glass of his minutes came
Speaker 1: at center. Although they're saying in twenty one twenty two
Speaker 1: forty nine percent of his minutes came at center.
Speaker 3: The basketball reference is a little wonky. On is that Glass?
Speaker 2: Oh?
Speaker 3: Interesting? I trust that a little more. This seems impossible
Speaker 3: they played that much center fourteen and a half factor fiction.
Speaker 3: Fifteen percent or more of Lebron's minutes will come as
Speaker 3: the day Facto five with this team. And I think
Speaker 3: you look at it in that situation, you're going Dean Wade,
Speaker 3: Jaalen Brown, Edgecombe, Maxi, Lebron right, which is the full lineups.
Speaker 1: By the way, still not enough shooting somehow when your right.
Speaker 3: When you go small, you don't quite I don't know.
Speaker 3: I mean that's pretty you'd like a little more. But
Speaker 3: if Edgecombe continues to shoot fifteen percent, I'm gonna go over.
Speaker 3: Why not? Like I think, I think there are gonna
Speaker 3: be a lot of nights where it just makes sense.
Speaker 3: It's almost like you spare him a little bit defensively
Speaker 3: if he just gets to hang out on the back
Speaker 3: line and relax, although you probably call him up into
Speaker 3: pick and rolls in that.
Speaker 1: Case, right, I think he should exclusively play center when
Speaker 1: he's going up against Yo, Kic and wemb just like
Speaker 1: all the top guys.
Speaker 2: Don't spare him, don't spare him at all. Yeah, what
Speaker 2: is up? Fellowsikos you're listening to this episode right now
Speaker 2: thinking Wow, it would be so cool if there were
Speaker 2: no ads on it.
Speaker 3: We have the power to make this the last ad
Speaker 3: you ever hear. And that's not a threat, it's more
Speaker 3: of a promise. The best way to support the podcast
Speaker 3: is to join our Patreon, which you can do at
Speaker 3: patreon dot com. Slash Hardwoodknocks, NBA tons of perks there.
Speaker 3: In addition to the promise of and not threat. Can't
Speaker 3: emphasize that enough of no more ads, which is a
Speaker 3: huge bonus. We're going to do a couple of Patreon
Speaker 3: subscriber only pods every month. You get access to our discord.
Speaker 3: You just get to be a bigger part of this community.
Speaker 3: You get our sincerest appreciation, which really can you put
Speaker 3: a price on it? If you want to support the pod,
Speaker 3: that is the best way to do it. Thank you
Speaker 3: again as always for listening and for watching.
Speaker 2: And now back to the show. Your pick.
Speaker 3: All right, well let's i've let's get through this. There's
Speaker 3: kind of two here. We can take them together. I
Speaker 3: guess factor fiction the Clippers did that shit, so.
Speaker 1: I by the way, I'll call fast and it's it's
Speaker 1: more so like I don't think the latest. A lot
Speaker 1: of people were angry that Pablotry recorded his latest podcast
Speaker 1: about the r I f C which I was not
Speaker 1: lying in discord when they first asked, I don't know
Speaker 1: if you listened to it. They asked, what do you
Speaker 1: think r I f C stands for? At this point,
Speaker 1: I had no idea it was related to the Rhode
Speaker 1: Island UH soccer Club.
Speaker 2: Uh. I thought it was like rolling in fucking cash money.
Speaker 1: It was just like I thought it was gonna be
Speaker 1: something like ridiculous, like this is what they found, Like
Speaker 1: this is like this.
Speaker 2: Is kind of the smoking gun.
Speaker 3: Their bread somehow stood for circumvention, Like yeah, they're just
Speaker 3: that brazen about it. Really, I fucking circumvented that would
Speaker 3: be that would be your your acronym for that one.
Speaker 1: I didn't have a pri you had said, and you
Speaker 1: can relate it now that you just don't have the
Speaker 1: brain space through any more of this stuff, which I
Speaker 1: think is fair. But the amount of people, a lot
Speaker 1: of people who I respect, so not just random people
Speaker 1: on the internet, who were showing disdain for this follow
Speaker 1: up reporting the tenth Stallman or whatever it was. I
Speaker 1: appreciate it in the sense of I don't want to
Speaker 1: be talking about this, but like this doesn't interest me,
Speaker 1: But I do feel like the stakes are fairly high
Speaker 1: because it's just you're a.
Speaker 2: Trained lawyer too, and so like the heat did they
Speaker 2: did that? Shit?
Speaker 1: To me is like I can be reductive like that,
Speaker 1: but it really is all a bunch of circumstantial evidence,
Speaker 1: and you're not. The league's burden of proof is different.
Speaker 1: But people keep saying like they haven't found the smoke
Speaker 1: and gun. I'm like, they've yet to reasonably explain anything.
Speaker 1: And I can't get over. One of the most hilarious
Speaker 1: lines in podcasting to bring it back to most recent
Speaker 1: events was like that guy basically answering was it Brett
Speaker 1: Johnson or whoever it was in Rhode Island. The part
Speaker 1: of the development program maybe was the mayor saying, Kawhi
Speaker 1: and Yo, Dennis Robertson and miss frankl they care deeply
Speaker 1: about affordable housing.
Speaker 2: In Rhode Island.
Speaker 1: I hope they care deeply about affordable housing, but Rhode Island.
Speaker 1: And then the other thing too is yes, NBA players
Speaker 1: do invest in these USL teams. There's also in in
Speaker 1: now Smith that tends to accompany it. And so I'm
Speaker 1: not saying.
Speaker 2: This proves X, but I would like more information on well,
Speaker 2: are there other instances of a big name player signing
Speaker 2: so many like or making so many investments or having
Speaker 2: so many endorsements, and they're just never mentioned. I would
Speaker 2: be cured.
Speaker 1: I want to know more information about that stuff. And
Speaker 1: I also think to wrap up you had said one
Speaker 1: of the points you made in discord was if the
Speaker 1: NBA's goal was to try to make people just to
Speaker 1: be tired of this and hope that it dies out,
Speaker 1: they succeeded with me. I get that, but just because
Speaker 1: of what sort of happens here, and you want there
Speaker 1: to be some semblance of rules when it comes, like
Speaker 1: tampering happens rampantly already. If Salary caps her convention is
Speaker 1: now more on the table, that just it creates this,
Speaker 1: whether it's happening a lot or not, it does like
Speaker 1: it gives oxygen to the belief that there is. You
Speaker 1: can't trust the NBA, you can't trust what's happening, you
Speaker 1: can't trust the result. People already aren't. They say they
Speaker 1: don't trust the results that are happening on the floor
Speaker 1: because the refs are being bought off or because of Gambler.
Speaker 1: So that and that stuff sounds insane, But this only
Speaker 1: just like I said, lends oxygen to it. So I
Speaker 1: don't think this revealed anything that.
Speaker 2: Proves, oh, they did this.
Speaker 1: But I'm just at the point where it's I've yet
Speaker 1: to hear a reasonable explanation.
Speaker 2: And Mark Cuban has.
Speaker 1: Tried, gone on podcasts, gone on Twitter dialogue, I have
Speaker 1: yet to see a single explanation that makes me stop
Speaker 1: and say, you know what that makes sense? Like they're
Speaker 1: they're they're like, so it's not maybe I'm just too
Speaker 1: invest it already in the public like the court of
Speaker 1: public opinion. But have you seen anything that makes you say,
Speaker 1: you know, yeah, they've they've sufficiently explained X.
Speaker 2: Well.
Speaker 3: No, So, at some point early on in this process,
Speaker 3: I was under the impression that the sort of the
Speaker 3: standard here was well, first of all, the burden of
Speaker 3: proof was on the clippers to provide some rational like
Speaker 3: basically they were guilty of circumvention if they could not
Speaker 3: produce a rational explanation for like all this stuff, right,
Speaker 3: remember that, Remember when that's where we kind of were,
Speaker 3: And to your point, haven't seen that, haven't seen any
Speaker 3: like a satisfactory rational explanation for how these different agreements
Speaker 3: like made sense outside of them being designed to circumvent
Speaker 3: the salary cap, so like that seems quaint in hindsight,
Speaker 3: and that this ties to my just general fatigue with
Speaker 3: all this, like the RIFC stuff is more of the
Speaker 3: same and whatever, you know, Like it's yeah, it's it's
Speaker 3: worse because it's more right of the stuff that is
Speaker 3: seemingly against the rules. But like we're now at a
Speaker 3: spot where the players Union and David Kelly is saying,
Speaker 3: what I'm taking away is basically, should the league decide
Speaker 3: there is a punishment in order here, it's gonna have
Speaker 3: to be one that we agree with, which is to say,
Speaker 3: like mild enough for us to agree with, or we're
Speaker 3: taking this to arbitration and this is gonna like this
Speaker 3: will be resolved in twenty fifty, Like you know, like
Speaker 3: this is like give us a punishment that we think
Speaker 3: is okay, which is like a wild way to put it.
Speaker 3: It's like if you went to your kid that did
Speaker 3: something wrong, like what do you think your punishment should be?
Speaker 3: And me like, I think I should get a bag
Speaker 3: of oreos every night, and you're like, well that seems reasonable,
Speaker 3: Like that's this isn't this It's getting kind of like
Speaker 3: farcical where it's like, so does the NBA have like
Speaker 3: the ability to punish in a way that it sees
Speaker 3: fit or is it afraid of having this go to
Speaker 3: arbitration forever because the players' union is going to make
Speaker 3: us think of it, and and this just never gets resolved,
Speaker 3: and so does does it? You know, Like this is
Speaker 3: where I'm just like I'm kind of checking out now
Speaker 3: because it's getting to a point where one, like I
Speaker 3: guess I just don't care anymore. And two it just
Speaker 3: seems like what's gonna happen here is either nothing or
Speaker 3: something very far away, or the league will just kind
Speaker 3: of land on a like a perfunctory kind of punishment
Speaker 3: that is so lame as to be acceptable, and we
Speaker 3: just move on and we kind of stop thinking about,
Speaker 3: like it's kind of wild that like the richest owner
Speaker 3: in sports basically got away with, you know, spearhead, if
Speaker 3: not spearheading, allowing to happen like real fucking cheating, like
Speaker 3: like and you can say, like some version of this
Speaker 3: happens everywhere, okay, but like this is the one we're
Speaker 3: dealing with. I will just as a bigger point, like
Speaker 3: I definitely have defended Adam Silver a lot, and I'm
Speaker 3: just thinking, like this guy works for the owners, Like
Speaker 3: he doesn't really have that much power. The league's in
Speaker 3: a very good place. Twitter and other social media outlets
Speaker 3: amplify people that think the NBA is in crisis when
Speaker 3: like I don't know, zoom out and it's doing pretty well,
Speaker 3: I'd say, and like that's kind of his job. But
Speaker 3: like this is a mess, and I don't know how
Speaker 3: much power he actually has to to like clean it up.
Speaker 3: But this is a bad I even I will concede.
Speaker 3: Like this feels like it's being either mishandled or sort
Speaker 3: of like more ne faitivariously dealt with in ways that
Speaker 3: aren't interested in equity or fairness or whatever.
Speaker 1: It feels like it's trying to, like what is the
Speaker 1: least controversial ending to this gets the least amount of attention.
Speaker 1: It almost is are they negotiating a quote unquote plead
Speaker 1: deal in public with David Kelly saying what he's saying,
Speaker 1: and that's sort of.
Speaker 3: Yeah, right, Like you're what you're saying is like it
Speaker 3: If you really try to drill down and simplify this,
Speaker 3: you could make a pretty strong argument that what the
Speaker 3: league seems to want to do is like almost crowd source,
Speaker 3: like just let's see which way the winds are blowing,
Speaker 3: let's address this, let's punish this conduct in a way
Speaker 3: that ruffles the fewest feathers, but we still get to
Speaker 3: say we did something like that's a cynical reading of this.
Speaker 3: But now the potential for like the punishment to literally
Speaker 3: be like negotiated as opposed to just handed down like
Speaker 3: that seems like what's happened. If that's not what's happening,
Speaker 3: they're doing a bad job of making it seem otherwise.
Speaker 2: And there does seem to be because the factor fiction
Speaker 2: here is well, what if I said they did that? Shit?
Speaker 2: Are you choosing factor fiction on that?
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's that's what the exercise is, right, fact, it's
Speaker 3: all circumstantially you know, supported, But there's enough circumstantial evidence
Speaker 3: for me nothing has changed since we talked about this,
Speaker 3: Like on day one, it was just like this looks
Speaker 3: this looks funky to me, and the Clippers have failed
Speaker 3: to explain it.
Speaker 1: So yeah, fact, do you factor fision that it will
Speaker 1: leak into twenty twenty seven because of the looming thread
Speaker 1: of arbitration, But also is it sounds there was the
Speaker 1: report from the Athletic that the investigation was over, and
Speaker 1: then Adams Silverman, it'sund like this was all going to
Speaker 1: be wrapped up before the season. But then the report
Speaker 1: comes out that this could from Baxter Holme, that this
Speaker 1: could spill into twenty twenty seven because of arbitration, and
Speaker 1: so we're gonna have to tackle another There's a transaction
Speaker 1: that's going to be related to all this, but factor fiction, this.
Speaker 2: Is going to this is going to leak into twenty
Speaker 2: twenty seven.
Speaker 1: And I want to ask before you answered, I want
Speaker 1: to ask you is what is your read on this
Speaker 1: taking so long? Is it more likely that and all
Speaker 1: speculation here of course, is it more likely that kind
Speaker 1: of what you alluded to before, that this has just
Speaker 1: been improperly handled and unnecessarily drawn out? Or did wash
Speaker 1: the Lipton find all this nefarious shit? And what we're
Speaker 1: actually waiting on is they're trying to be thorough because
Speaker 1: the punishment and the findings are gonna be so nuclear.
Speaker 1: Or is it the longer it takes, the less you
Speaker 1: are convinced that anything material is gonna come from this?
Speaker 1: Because I think there's a strong case to be made
Speaker 1: for all three of those stances. The only thing I'll
Speaker 1: say against the one where it's taking so long because
Speaker 1: they're gonna drop the hammer. I do feel as if,
Speaker 1: just given the level of detail that the pub that
Speaker 1: pabloatore and is you know, staff and the crew members
Speaker 1: that Pabulatory finds out have gone into this, if there
Speaker 1: was what is the law firm found that Pabulatory finds
Speaker 1: out as not even sniffed yet, that would lead you
Speaker 1: to believe the old man they're good to bankrupt the
Speaker 1: Clippers of Picks until twenty fifty or something.
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, there's just like a lot of separate
Speaker 3: questions here because like whatever they did or didn't find,
Speaker 3: you know, it's it's material to what the league wants
Speaker 3: to do punishment wise. But then this the specter of
Speaker 3: arbitration is like, well, does it even matter how what
Speaker 3: the league wants to do punishment wise, because they're just
Speaker 3: gonna have to go to an independent third party and
Speaker 3: say like, here's what we think, and the players' union
Speaker 3: will be like, here's what we think, and they got
Speaker 3: to meet somewhere in the middle. So I would say that, like,
Speaker 3: I don't know what the nature of the agreement is
Speaker 3: between the league and the law walk till whatever what
Speaker 3: the law firm is that that's doing the investigation. They
Speaker 3: might be like on retainer, they might whatever it. But
Speaker 3: with that as a caveat not knowing like how exactly
Speaker 3: the league is paying for this. If you give a
Speaker 3: job to a law firm, they're going to and you
Speaker 3: don't say we need this by this date or we
Speaker 3: like here's the timeline it must be completed, but like
Speaker 3: this law firm, they're gonna want to bill as many
Speaker 3: hours as they can. They're gonna want to be as
Speaker 3: thorough and spend as much time on it as they
Speaker 3: can because it's lucrative. Like that's you know, that's how
Speaker 3: it works.
Speaker 2: So if you.
Speaker 3: If the league is not exactly like pressing for a
Speaker 3: resolution quickly, then like it's kind that like kind of
Speaker 3: works in tandem with the law firms incentives to be
Speaker 3: like we're gonna be as thorough as you could possibly
Speaker 3: and maybe maybe also less cynically. This is just really
Speaker 3: complicated and there's like a lot of stuff to go
Speaker 3: over and and you're they're being incredibly thorough. I don't
Speaker 3: I don't know. I would just say that the pace
Speaker 3: of things so far suggests to me that this will
Speaker 3: go into twenty twenty seven, and that's pricing in all
Speaker 3: the stuff we've just talked about with like there's this
Speaker 3: whole other section of the dispute to be resolved, potentially
Speaker 3: in arbitration. So like, I don't know, I I I
Speaker 3: can totally imagine this continuing to drag on, which takes
Speaker 3: us to kind of a related factor fiction. Kawhi Leonard
Speaker 3: will not be a Clipper next season? What say you?
Speaker 2: I'm going to say so.
Speaker 1: Ramona Shelbourne had the quote that the Clippers are prepared
Speaker 1: to bring him back if for some reason the trade
Speaker 1: falls through. I'm gonna say fact, he will not be
Speaker 1: a Clipper next season. I just feel as if I'm
Speaker 1: also going to claim fiction that this builds into twenty
Speaker 1: twenty seven. I think there's some type of resolution, whether
Speaker 1: it's insufficient or the Lee actually does drop the hammer.
Speaker 2: I will say historically, with the exception.
Speaker 1: Of the Donald Sterling Soka, which was like Clippers, excuse me,
Speaker 1: Silver's first, that was basically like he was right as
Speaker 1: he took the commissioners, like.
Speaker 3: He's like yeah, he's like, here's your office. Guess what
Speaker 3: little bit of a problem you're gonna have real with welcome.
Speaker 2: And that seemed like pretty easy. Vell it was like
Speaker 2: a public.
Speaker 3: Sentiment was like one hundred to zero on one side
Speaker 3: of that thing. So it was like this was yeah,
Speaker 3: that wasn't easy. That was like a great like training wheels,
Speaker 3: here's your job as commissioner kind of task.
Speaker 2: I would argue, I've become more I don't.
Speaker 1: I think Adam Silver is incredibly intelligent to people who
Speaker 1: think that he's an idiot and just doesn't I dismissed
Speaker 1: those thoughts, But there is just a level to me
Speaker 1: of functional impotence here with him as the commissioner where
Speaker 1: you mentioned before, is he willing to punish teams to
Speaker 1: the extent or are they negotiating these punishments?
Speaker 2: While you like the new.
Speaker 1: Lottery reformation and I am kind of excited as much
Speaker 1: as I didn't support it, of what the hell is
Speaker 1: the league gonna look like next year with all these
Speaker 1: teams trying and you could already see it reflected in
Speaker 1: the win totals. Yeah, I still think if he was
Speaker 1: if he find owners to the maximum of his power,
Speaker 1: that he was able to find owners, we probably wouldn't
Speaker 1: have had such a strong tanking discourse anyway, but they
Speaker 1: selectively enforced it, and the punishments for six figures doesn't
Speaker 1: sound like it sounds like a lot, But it's not
Speaker 1: to these owners, to these teams. They could say that
Speaker 1: it is, but it's not. It's a it's a write
Speaker 1: off for them, like they'll figure out a way to
Speaker 1: expense it somehow.
Speaker 2: I'm sure.
Speaker 1: So that's why I'm I'm also just like cynical at
Speaker 1: this point. But the skeptic me thinks that they're gonna
Speaker 1: want this to end and the Kawhi trade will go through.
Speaker 2: Could there be a detail that's different?
Speaker 1: I mean, hum would be the I'm gonna I'm gonna say, fact,
Speaker 1: he's not a Clipper next season. But if this investigation
Speaker 1: drags on, is there or is not? Let's say the
Speaker 1: investigation is done but it goes to arbitration. Is there
Speaker 1: any way that the deal still goes through? Or would
Speaker 1: you say if this isn't wrapped up as the raptors,
Speaker 1: you can't can you even talk yourself into giving will
Speaker 1: you adjust the return because it's a first round swap
Speaker 1: two first round picks Brandon Ingram and Grady Dick. I
Speaker 1: like I don't do the Clippers even want to take less?
Speaker 2: Would they take less? Would they rather just bring Kawhi back?
Speaker 3: Yeah? Well, I don't know what to do with this
Speaker 3: one because I because I've said I think it's pretty
Speaker 3: likely that this whole thing does drag well into the season.
Speaker 3: I feel like I have to say that Kawhi will
Speaker 3: be a Clipper, right because like, the trade can't I
Speaker 3: would assume that, like the trade's on pause now because
Speaker 3: of the uncertainty of the results of the investigation and
Speaker 3: the punishment stuff. So like, mightn't it just stay on hold?
Speaker 3: Or I guess I could cheap out and say, like,
Speaker 3: he won't be a Clipper, but he also like won't
Speaker 3: play basketball. Does that count? You know, he's got to
Speaker 3: sit out or something, So I would.
Speaker 2: Say he's still on the Clippers books. Yeah, that's the thing.
Speaker 3: It would be. Would be inconsistent. Wouldn't it be inconsistent
Speaker 3: for me to say I think this whole thing drags
Speaker 3: into twenty seven because it also why will be on
Speaker 3: the Raptors? That feels inconsistent.
Speaker 1: No, because they the Raptors could still go ahead and
Speaker 1: make the trade anyway. Would the Clippers be willing to yeah,
Speaker 1: like with.
Speaker 3: The lege allow of the trade, not knowing like what
Speaker 3: it might do.
Speaker 2: They always did. The reason it got held up is
Speaker 2: because it was it was.
Speaker 1: It was like a Eureka moment apparently for I just
Speaker 1: Bobby Webster used to work in the league office. The
Speaker 1: fact that this wasn't I don't care if he knew
Speaker 1: it and they thought they had talked about it, like
Speaker 1: that needs to be ironclad. You understand what's what's going
Speaker 1: to happen if you're acquiring. Why that is still I
Speaker 1: have not I've not detached from this trade being walked
Speaker 1: back or put on hold.
Speaker 3: Well, okay, well then since you since you're giving me
Speaker 3: the stamp of grant, you're not being inconsistent. I will
Speaker 3: say that it is fact that Kawhi will not be
Speaker 3: a Clipper next season. He'll be somewhere else. It'll be
Speaker 3: Toronto or who knows, Like maybe the Raptors back all
Speaker 3: the way out and the Clipper send him somewhere else.
Speaker 1: Like that's well, wouldn't the alternative be his con He
Speaker 1: doesn't go to Toronto's contract gets voided and he signs
Speaker 1: somewhere else.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you do get a couple bites at the Apple
Speaker 3: this way. So yeah, we gotta go fact on that one.
Speaker 2: I guess this will be my pick. Here's this one.
Speaker 1: Here's a broad one factor fiction grant. The NBA will
Speaker 1: have under three fifty five win teams next year. Now
Speaker 1: let me take you on a very brief journey for
Speaker 1: the inspiration behind this.
Speaker 2: This has only happened.
Speaker 1: The NBA has had two or fewer fifty five win
Speaker 1: teams just twice over the past twenty years. And if
Speaker 1: you also go and look at the win totals, now
Speaker 1: there's only two teams that have win total projections higher
Speaker 1: than fifty three, and that's the Thunder and the Spurs.
Speaker 1: So factor fiction on this one.
Speaker 3: So that first of all, that that feels nuts to
Speaker 3: me that those are the only two teams projected to
Speaker 3: win or that have over unders of greater than fifty three.
Speaker 3: This I still have to say fiction. I like, because
Speaker 3: what this to say fact? I think, like step one,
Speaker 3: I think it's an acknowledgment, or you'd have to be
Speaker 3: very convinced that like the East in particular has like
Speaker 3: twelve teams that could all win fifty games but can't,
Speaker 3: and so everyone's winning like forty one to forty eight
Speaker 3: or something like that. Not crazy, just because we may
Speaker 3: get to affect or fiction on just the general depth
Speaker 3: of the East, which is fascinating to me. But you're
Speaker 3: also probably saying that the lottery reform is going to
Speaker 3: have a pretty wild effect on preventing team really bottoming out,
Speaker 3: and but in doing so just gifting a bunch of
Speaker 3: wins to the high end teams all the time, and
Speaker 3: so that because usually that's how you get a couple
Speaker 3: in the sixties and some high fifties. I think it's
Speaker 3: I think the lottery reform will have an effect. I
Speaker 3: still just where I stop the analysis on this is
Speaker 3: you is in your first note of it's happened twice
Speaker 3: in the last twenty years, so there's a ten percent
Speaker 3: chance of the last over the last twenty years that
Speaker 3: you know fewer than three teams will will win fifty five.
Speaker 3: I think there's gonna be plenty of teams that win
Speaker 3: more than fifty five. I'd go, like, just totally uneducated,
Speaker 3: guess they'll be at least five six teams that win
Speaker 3: fifty five.
Speaker 2: Like, I just how many teams won more than fifty
Speaker 2: five this past season. I don't know.
Speaker 3: I should have looked at that before, I just said
Speaker 3: five or six? How many was it? Are you looking
Speaker 3: at it now?
Speaker 1: There was two in the Eastern Conference and two in
Speaker 1: the West, so there was four or four.
Speaker 3: Maybe it's a good number. Then five or six teams
Speaker 3: are rich, But I'm still going fiction. I just the
Speaker 3: historical precedents kind of overwhelmed.
Speaker 1: So to that end, though, then who are you because
Speaker 1: two is I'm gonna say fiction here too, because we
Speaker 1: just have to get to a third. But I did
Speaker 1: find myself thinking, well, what's what teams are guaranteeing win
Speaker 1: fifty five plus? Let's look at it based on the
Speaker 1: thunder for sure? Yeah, would you throw the Spurs in there? Again,
Speaker 1: I think they're young, they'll get better.
Speaker 3: Yeah, absolutely, I would throw the Spurs in there next.
Speaker 3: So Detroit one's sixty, is Detroit gonna win?
Speaker 2: They got better? But sixty is a huge threshold to clear.
Speaker 3: Well, they only need fifty six.
Speaker 1: That's what you're right, But it's also just there's what
Speaker 1: I got into is, so think about we talked about
Speaker 1: Philly what their ceiling is. They're actively going to steer
Speaker 1: themselves away from their ceiling during the regular season at
Speaker 1: points I imagine players are gonna miss time. They'll be maintenance programs.
Speaker 1: The Knicks even coming off two deep playoff runs, including
Speaker 1: a championship, Jalen Bruns and just had risk surgery and
Speaker 1: then yeah, they like, are they gonna get better?
Speaker 3: Give me a couple others. I think Cleveland is a
Speaker 3: really good bet to win more than fifty five. We've
Speaker 3: seen them do that, I think. I think, honestly, I
Speaker 3: think Boston always trusted James Harden led team. Well, yeah,
Speaker 3: I think the cel Celtics won fifty six last year.
Speaker 3: I don't see why they can't win at least that
Speaker 3: many this coming.
Speaker 1: See they could, but there's no I think last year
Speaker 1: I would have come in and said, you know what,
Speaker 1: I probably would have said, I'm only guaranteeing the Spurs
Speaker 1: and the Thunder to win. I might have had the
Speaker 1: Nuggets and or the Knicks up there last year as
Speaker 1: well and missed there. I'm gonna say fiction because two
Speaker 1: is so few, But if we would have said under four,
Speaker 1: I might say fact. I like, I feel the line
Speaker 1: is that razor thin to me because so many of
Speaker 1: these other teams are like, there's just you can't just
Speaker 1: count on beating the Wizards anymore. That's not a thing
Speaker 1: that can just happen. Even Memphis is a team that
Speaker 1: I've looked at their over under it's like super low,
Speaker 1: and they just have a bunch of real NBA players
Speaker 1: on their own.
Speaker 3: It will be really interesting to see. You know, you'll
Speaker 3: need more seasons to get a real answer. But but
Speaker 3: what we might get some information on. What we will
Speaker 3: get information on this year is just how much a
Speaker 3: team is able to steer itself to the bottom. Because
Speaker 3: we you know, Memphis was egregious last year and some
Speaker 3: of the rosters that played Utah all all that, you know,
Speaker 3: the Pacers got in trouble, all these things, like it
Speaker 3: would seem like eliminating that kind of stuff could swing
Speaker 3: wind totals by a lot. But like there's just so
Speaker 3: many variables and so many like organic injuries, and like
Speaker 3: you know, the Thunder and Spurs are just gonna win
Speaker 3: every night, So there's you know, it seems like there's
Speaker 3: gonna have to be some teams with wind totals in
Speaker 3: the low twenties. Again, I just I'm really interested to see, like,
Speaker 3: end of the year, what's the what's the record spread
Speaker 3: look like? Is it gonna be as condensed as as
Speaker 3: the lottery reforms would seem to be designed to make it.
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 1: Can Here's a fun impromptu stat heading question for you.
Speaker 1: There are two teams that right now public win totals
Speaker 1: were projected to win fewer than twenty five games. There
Speaker 1: are win totals over excuse me, under twenty five under
Speaker 1: which two teams are they?
Speaker 2: Well, the Kings have to be one that oh them,
Speaker 2: that's correct, there's.
Speaker 3: A lot of so under twenty five.
Speaker 2: You said, yes, so twenty four and a half for a.
Speaker 3: Few last year, I'm there's I got I got some
Speaker 3: candidates here.
Speaker 2: I would go, I'll.
Speaker 3: Go one strike and you're out on this, by the way, okay, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: it's I'm gonna just throw two out there. I would
Speaker 3: say either New Orleans or Brooklyn.
Speaker 1: It's Brooklyn, okay, So those are those would be my
Speaker 1: relegation zone teams, by the way, would be Brooklyn, New
Speaker 1: Orleans and Sacramento. Those are my three relegation zone teams.
Speaker 1: Now here's another one there are You're not looking at
Speaker 1: the win totals right now, are you all?
Speaker 3: No, No, I'm looking at last year's records.
Speaker 1: Just for re there are six teams where their win
Speaker 1: total is set at fifty and a half or higher.
Speaker 2: You know where two of them are. But can you
Speaker 2: gave me the other four?
Speaker 3: Yes, first thunder obviously, uh so fifty one plus wins.
Speaker 3: Detroit's got to be one of those.
Speaker 2: Correct?
Speaker 3: Are the Lakers one of them? Just because they're the Lakers?
Speaker 3: One good? That would be stupid.
Speaker 2: Let's see, well, Boston that that is correct. Two more,
Speaker 2: the Knicks that is correct. One more.
Speaker 3: Hmm. I'll say there's like there's I'm just saying the
Speaker 3: teams I'm considering. I don't think Miami would be thought
Speaker 3: of that way. So it's like Cleveland and Denver and
Speaker 3: maybe like the Rockets. I'll just say Cleveland because I
Speaker 3: said them earlier. Strike two, okay, Denver.
Speaker 2: Strike three? It was the Sixers.
Speaker 3: Oh shift, Yeah, it's from my brain. Yeah, I mean
Speaker 3: all those other teams could win fifty that I mentioned
Speaker 3: pretty comfort fifty one.
Speaker 1: I think if I'm looking at so the Raptors being
Speaker 1: so are forty five and a half right now, which
Speaker 1: I think if the quadrait goes through, they're a team
Speaker 1: that could win fifty. The Pacers being at forty four
Speaker 1: and a half. I look at them as a team
Speaker 1: that could win fifty. The Lakers, I've not been a
Speaker 1: fan of their offseason, but they have Luca and Reeves
Speaker 1: and Walker Castler's healthy.
Speaker 2: They could win fifty.
Speaker 1: The Rockets, the Calves, the Timberwolves, the Nuggets, the Sixers,
Speaker 1: the Pistons, the Celtics, the Knicks, the Spurs, the thunder
Speaker 1: myself at all, no that that team is.
Speaker 2: So they're not winning fifty, dude.
Speaker 3: I mean, didn't they win forty eight or did they
Speaker 3: win fifty two years ago? They won forty five last year?
Speaker 3: Great all year.
Speaker 2: They won forty five last year, all navigating some pretty
Speaker 2: gnarly injury issues. So that's fair. It's funny we haven't
Speaker 2: mentioned Miami. Could you see them winning fifty? I can't mean,
Speaker 2: I guess.
Speaker 3: I guess, but I wouldn't feel great predicting that at all.
Speaker 2: You want to take us to our next factor.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I was trying to find a find one. Well,
Speaker 3: I'm I'm interested in your take on all of these issues, Dan,
Speaker 3: I want you to know that, but one that jumped
Speaker 3: out Factor fiction. One of Jalen Duran or Peyton Watson
Speaker 3: will sign the qualifying offer. Basically unheard of for players,
Speaker 3: certainly of Duran's level of reput.
Speaker 2: He didn't that's right, he didn't do it. Camp Thomas
Speaker 2: just did it.
Speaker 3: And Quentin Grimes, like Quentin Grimes was the real like
Speaker 3: poster boy for like he did what what do you
Speaker 3: think here? Like the longer this goes on, it's really
Speaker 3: about Watson because Duran is not There's no chance Duran
Speaker 3: passes up, like I don't know one hundred and forty,
Speaker 3: one hundred and fifty on the absolute lowest end, we haven't.
Speaker 2: We've heard nothing though about what are they offering him?
Speaker 3: Right, which, you know what, good good job Pistons and
Speaker 3: good job Duran's camp because who cares. Let's wake me up.
Speaker 1: I don't know about Durran's camp because they were trying
Speaker 1: to use the Kings's leverage at one point when the
Speaker 1: king matters, just like who.
Speaker 3: Who could we put out there that like this would
Speaker 3: be believable like Sucker Sar Kings. But this really about
Speaker 3: Peyton Watson, right, Duran's not taking the qualifying offer. What
Speaker 3: do you think I'm gonna say?
Speaker 1: I'm going to say fiction, because you're right that it
Speaker 1: is just about Watson and I'm even wondering, as Peyton,
Speaker 1: I've seen the reporting out there about the five for
Speaker 1: seventy million. I read that as I read that as
Speaker 1: that was an offer probably last fall or something that
Speaker 1: could not have reasonably been even if you don't want
Speaker 1: to give him a Christian Brown's contract.
Speaker 2: Yeah, what did tar Esan.
Speaker 1: Just get like five for five for eighty one or
Speaker 1: something like that, And it was just like Peyton Watson
Speaker 1: just as a ball handler, like what he showed last year.
Speaker 1: So I think my guess would be that they probably
Speaker 1: would if he would sign a five year deal, wouldn't
Speaker 1: shock me if it was one hundred, Like maybe they
Speaker 1: want to get him for less than Christian Brown was.
Speaker 1: Sure they're trying to apply pressure the free agency. I
Speaker 1: think that was Watson's camp, which it seem pretty effective
Speaker 1: based on what my social media feeds look like of
Speaker 1: just let's really apply pressure the Nuggets or get the
Speaker 1: public sentiment going towards our direction, which it probably already
Speaker 1: was going towards their direction. I just can't envision him
Speaker 1: even if the offer is less than less than Christian Brown.
Speaker 1: So you gotta pass up that much guaranteed money.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't think you gotta be sitting here. Liked what
Speaker 2: did Like?
Speaker 1: I understand he's a different type of player, But the
Speaker 1: reward for Quentin Grimes signing his qualifying offer was he
Speaker 1: basically got a mid level type of contract. My guess
Speaker 1: would be there as a team just because of what
Speaker 1: Peyton Watson size, what he does defensively, but like Quentin
Speaker 1: Grimes is the better shooter, Quentin Grimes has a bigger
Speaker 1: track record of working with the ball in his hands.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think.
Speaker 2: I think.
Speaker 3: I think I'm going fiction too because Durn's out, he's
Speaker 3: not signing it and Watson though, like I really did
Speaker 3: think about it. That's why I wanted to get I
Speaker 3: was hoping would say fact because I would love the
Speaker 3: like do you think he should?
Speaker 2: So forget about what we'll actually do you think he should?
Speaker 3: Hmmm, I'm trying to think what I would do, and
Speaker 3: my like risk aversion is probably far great and level
Speaker 3: often it a little different than his.
Speaker 1: You wouldn't have been you wouldn't have made it to
Speaker 1: restricted free agency.
Speaker 2: You would have signed on the dotted line last October.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, no, yeah, I think should he? So there's
Speaker 3: a here's the case for and like maybe I'll talk
Speaker 3: myself into it in the process of making it, like, say,
Speaker 3: he so the worst, the worst possible outcome is he
Speaker 3: takes the qualifying offer, God forbid, knock on wood, torn
Speaker 3: acl right, And so he goes into free agency, certainly
Speaker 3: not having elevated his profile. But now is like, maybe
Speaker 3: not even in line to make as much as he
Speaker 3: that that insulting like five for seventy one offer. That's
Speaker 3: a possibility, but I I do think it's more likely
Speaker 3: that if he took the qualifying offer, he would be
Speaker 3: in line for more than we've seen the Nuggets have
Speaker 3: reportedly offered him. Don't don't you like, wouldn't you just
Speaker 3: assume next summer he has a season, Just say he
Speaker 3: has the exact same season. Again, don't you think just
Speaker 3: more suitors or whatever? It's just like the the door
Speaker 3: number two of it all seems like five more than
Speaker 3: five to seventy one would be out there.
Speaker 1: I want to say yes, but again, look at how
Speaker 1: many players who didn't sign with the Lakers struggled to
Speaker 1: get more than one guaranteed season.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was like and I mean also look at how.
Speaker 1: Much I think perceptions probably veered too far away from
Speaker 1: Christian Brown.
Speaker 2: Look at how much the feelings on that contract have changed.
Speaker 1: It's viewed as I would say, if if you made
Speaker 1: a and I might have, but.
Speaker 2: I might have reached one of the worst car Yeah,
Speaker 2: but that's what it is. You And that was when
Speaker 2: he signed it.
Speaker 1: We were just kind of like, yeah, all right, that's right,
Speaker 1: going is what it is. The perception is totally flip flop.
Speaker 1: So also with Denver, can you get like, part of
Speaker 1: the reason he had such he had a really good
Speaker 1: year overall, but part of the reason the ball was
Speaker 1: in his hands more was because Denver was so banged up.
Speaker 1: You can assume Denver's banged up again, But what if
Speaker 1: he just doesn't have the role.
Speaker 2: Or the usage.
Speaker 1: What if the three ball isn't falling and they feel
Speaker 1: like they can't play him in certain lineups and Cam
Speaker 1: Johnson's elevated above him if you sign the I think
Speaker 1: in this instance he I feel as if he.
Speaker 2: Should sign the qualifying offer.
Speaker 1: Because he's worth more to me as a player than
Speaker 1: five for seventy or even what Tari Easton got. That
Speaker 1: being said, the market dynamics right now, I know it's
Speaker 1: different when you get to unrestricted free agency. But man,
Speaker 1: that would be such a that'd be so tough for
Speaker 1: me to do, which is maybe why I can't endorse
Speaker 1: him to it. I also don't doing it. I also
Speaker 1: don't necessarily understand the logic other than Denver being so cheap.
Speaker 1: But if you've seen the take of they should like
Speaker 1: be crossing their fingers that he signs the qualifying offer,
Speaker 1: and my whole thing is, no, they shouldn't.
Speaker 3: No, that's not a good outcome for them. Yeah, that's
Speaker 3: a that's a terrible outcome for them. I think. I think.
Speaker 3: I think Denver's offer will come up and he will
Speaker 3: sign a deal and will not sign the qualifying offer.
Speaker 3: That said, if I'm him, I really do think hard
Speaker 3: about signing it the qualifying offer, because at the if
Speaker 3: you're just talking pure like upside, there's just so much
Speaker 3: more upside and signing the qualifying offer becoming unrestricted and
Speaker 3: like you know, I think, but it's a danger. It's
Speaker 3: a scary time to be thinking that way because it
Speaker 3: seems pretty clear that like team's appetites for paying players
Speaker 3: are changing, right like, so I can sit here and say, well,
Speaker 3: next summer he'll be unrestricted and there'll be this many
Speaker 3: more suitors, and they'll be this much more cap space
Speaker 3: than Like, I don't know is any of that true?
Speaker 3: Like I would have normally been a given in years past,
Speaker 3: but now it's it's unclear. It's I don't know for you.
Speaker 1: What's more likely he signs the qualifying offer or gets
Speaker 1: signed and traded.
Speaker 3: I just I don't know where. So the Calves are
Speaker 3: kind of looming as a sign trade team.
Speaker 1: I guess they're making like is James Harden signing for
Speaker 1: the minimum or they making them like a ton of
Speaker 1: salary dumps to get because they would be hard kept
Speaker 1: at the first apron.
Speaker 2: If they acquire someone to sign and trade. I guess
Speaker 2: I'm just not What's more, the Clippers are looming right there.
Speaker 2: Their rumors still have interest, so there are there are
Speaker 2: other teams. I'm gonna say I think it's more likely
Speaker 2: he gets signed and traded than signs the qualifying offer.
Speaker 3: I'll say it's more likely he signs the qualifying offer
Speaker 3: because I think it's about fifty to fifty, and it's
Speaker 3: more interesting if we have different answers.
Speaker 2: So, ah, my turn, what do I want to go
Speaker 2: with here? Okay?
Speaker 1: Grant Factor Fiction, Detroit is having an underrated off season.
Speaker 1: We're operating under these The one assumption we have to
Speaker 1: make is that they're playing the jailen durant situation as
Speaker 1: they should and he will be back. So factor fiction
Speaker 1: Detroit is having an underrated off season.
Speaker 3: Underrated. Well, this is a tricky one because who's rating you?
Speaker 3: Would you say that most people think this offseason has
Speaker 3: like been disappointing, right, Like, I.
Speaker 2: Think they expected a bit.
Speaker 1: It's, oh, you got John Collins, but you dumped Isaiah
Speaker 1: Stewart and you brought in Isaiah Joe but.
Speaker 3: You didn't Harris.
Speaker 1: Like don't you don't have another ball handler other than
Speaker 1: Kate Cunningham and Donnis Jenkins. I'm looking at it from
Speaker 1: thee there's a fact for me, and I'm looking at
Speaker 1: it from the perspective of, yes, it would have been
Speaker 1: cool to see them go get Trey Murphy, which in
Speaker 1: theory they could still do. But I honestly do believe
Speaker 1: that surrounding Cad A Sar and again Duran with just
Speaker 1: more capable floor spacing, higher volume, capable force spacing, because
Speaker 1: Tobias Harris reluctant three point shooter, Isaiah Stewart stretch but
Speaker 1: low volume when he does it, I think that that
Speaker 1: space is just going to give so much oxygen. To
Speaker 1: overuse that word in this podcast to the offense that
Speaker 1: it's this team just won sixty games. There are at
Speaker 1: least between Ron Holland, Asar Thompson, Donnish Jenkins, Kate Cunningham himself,
Speaker 1: maybe even Duran. I know the last taste we have
Speaker 1: of Jaylen Durnay is the playoffs, and it wasn't good.
Speaker 1: Probably it probably cost him tens of millions of dollars.
Speaker 1: Quite frankly it a million percent, absolutely did. I just
Speaker 1: they have the chance to get better and they're with
Speaker 1: like if you trust John Collins and Isaiah Joe is
Speaker 1: putting pressure on defenses as floor spacing, which I do,
Speaker 1: I think it's going to make a magnitude of difference,
Speaker 1: and that to me, anecdotally doesn't feel as if it's
Speaker 1: been pointed out enough at I'm sure not to like
Speaker 1: what are Pistons fans saying? They might feel one type
Speaker 1: of way, but nationally I think the Pistons have either
Speaker 1: been overlooked or what you said, people believe they've had
Speaker 1: a disappointing or anti climactic offseason.
Speaker 3: Well, I get there a little differently than you do.
Speaker 3: So the way this is a fact for me has
Speaker 3: more to do with Duran because I get the theory
Speaker 3: of Collins and Joe and maybe an improved version of
Speaker 3: Kevin Herder being better than Harris and the space that
Speaker 3: they had last year.
Speaker 2: I could see Corey and Prince too. By the way,
Speaker 2: sorry interject, but like, yeah, you know you're Gary Harris
Speaker 2: is just oh, those are guys that can make open
Speaker 2: shots too.
Speaker 3: Right, there's more options whether any of those guys can
Speaker 3: be on the floor at the end of a playoff
Speaker 3: game what we'll see like because that you know that was.
Speaker 2: Well, Gary Harris was Do you remember when he was
Speaker 2: quad two point zero? Remember when that I remember when.
Speaker 3: It was like this guy hasn't He was the I'm
Speaker 3: sure I've said this before. He was the first guy
Speaker 3: that was like, you know, who really knows how to
Speaker 3: play with k Gary Harris? That guy just figures out
Speaker 3: where to cut and it turns out like no, no, no,
Speaker 3: everybody looks that good when they play with this guy.
Speaker 1: His extension, I don't remember what it was for. Was
Speaker 1: it like four or contract four and seventy two or eighty?
Speaker 3: It was like four for eighty in my head something
Speaker 3: like that.
Speaker 1: His extension was the first time that I recall like
Speaker 1: sermonizing people I know, like this is this is totally fine.
Speaker 2: You don't know what you're talking about.
Speaker 3: That was before we really truly understood the Yokich effect though.
Speaker 3: It was just like, no, this, it's how weird. CACP
Speaker 3: looks incredible with this guy. He's just like, yeah, okay,
Speaker 3: well it's because he does that. But so I could
Speaker 3: go one way or the other on the sort of
Speaker 3: broader roster improvements. I think you're probably right that, at
Speaker 3: least as a regular season proposition, there's just more spacing here,
Speaker 3: Like they really do have more this the Durhan thing, though, man,
Speaker 3: it would have been easy to just like not, I
Speaker 3: don't think going the full thirty percent or what you know,
Speaker 3: the crazy number two seventy seven to eighty seven, I'm
Speaker 3: never going to get it right. Uh, that would have
Speaker 3: been nuts. But I again, this is purely from a
Speaker 3: team perspective, because this sucks for Jalen Duran And why
Speaker 3: are we on the sides of teams, I don't know,
Speaker 3: but we always view contracts this way, like this is
Speaker 3: being masterfully handled by the Pistons because they're just they're
Speaker 3: recognizing the landscape. There's no threats, They're in total control.
Speaker 3: Duran is someone who it's much harder for him to
Speaker 3: take the qualifying offer just because a low ball for
Speaker 3: him is way more money than a low ball for
Speaker 3: Peyton Watson, right, so like he has more to lose
Speaker 3: by taking qualifying offer. He's just like it would be
Speaker 3: insane if you did that. And the Pistons are just
Speaker 3: like the hardened thing, like comfortable being uncomfortable, like this
Speaker 3: is they're fine with this and that's like that's not
Speaker 3: easy to do. I mean, it should be easy for teams,
Speaker 3: but most teams don't operate that way. So I think
Speaker 3: that aspect is underrated because I I think maybe most
Speaker 3: of most people's unhappiness with what the Pistons have done
Speaker 3: over the offseason has more to do with like the
Speaker 3: players they didn't go get. But I also think there's
Speaker 3: some level of unhappiness for like can't we just get
Speaker 3: a Durham deal done? And it's like no, no, like
Speaker 3: you there's no rush for the Pistons, like this is you.
Speaker 3: You hold all the cards here, and so I appreciate
Speaker 3: that part of their offseason. I can say it's underrated
Speaker 3: for that reason.
Speaker 2: So we're well, call on fact. What's next?
Speaker 3: Hmmm, what do I want to know? You're no, Oh,
Speaker 3: here we go. H I want to hear you just
Speaker 3: your take on this factor fiction. The Hornets trading LaMelo
Speaker 3: ball makes way more sense post free agency. Explain yourself.
Speaker 3: I assume you're saying.
Speaker 2: Fact, it's a fact. Here's the thing.
Speaker 1: I still don't like what they got, and I wouldn't
Speaker 1: have made the move, and maybe time will tell that
Speaker 1: I'm going to be wrong. When you look at how
Speaker 1: the East has just reloaded, what is the move that
Speaker 1: Charlotte could have made to be on the level Kawhi
Speaker 1: to Toronto. We're assuming that goes through the Knicks just
Speaker 1: winning the title, the Sixers getting Lebron and Jalen Brown
Speaker 1: in the same offseason, and by the way, still having
Speaker 1: first round picks left over. If they need to make
Speaker 1: trades in the middle of the season to get better,
Speaker 1: you're then dealing with this like the East we're talking about,
Speaker 1: like Jiannis to Miami. You and I aren't particularly high
Speaker 1: on the Heat as they currently stand, But if Yannis
Speaker 1: is healthy and Bam is healthy, that team is going
Speaker 1: to be terrifying on the defense.
Speaker 3: E end yep. The floor's high.
Speaker 1: So there's just if you were the Hornets and you
Speaker 1: wanted to make a massive step forward, it would have
Speaker 1: probably come at this stark opportunity cost. And you also
Speaker 1: would have been rushing into something that wasn't actually gonna
Speaker 1: get you where you were gonna go, because who would
Speaker 1: What could they have done if all these other moves
Speaker 1: are happening, what could they have done to meaningfully improve
Speaker 1: their position in the East. And the argument would be, well,
Speaker 1: you just need to let it ride. Joanna Steinbach, they
Speaker 1: draft him, Christian Anderson, and you just move you move forward.
Speaker 1: I now understand them taking the longer view, especially when
Speaker 1: you're looking at the Celtics. I still don't buy this
Speaker 1: as an explanation, but them being afraid of having to
Speaker 1: extend Jail and Brownie his three years left on his contract,
Speaker 1: them thinking about LaMelo Ball's next deal and Brendon Miller
Speaker 1: being extension eligible, and Conkin it Will being right behind them,
Speaker 1: and trying to understand their long term salary structure. I
Speaker 1: now get it more. I don't love the return because
Speaker 1: I think LaMelo Ball is a transcendent offensive player. But
Speaker 1: I'm looking at it and saying the optics of this trade,
Speaker 1: And by the way, I don't think from what I saw,
Speaker 1: read and listened to it, it felt as if most
Speaker 1: people liked the return they got. And so maybe I'm
Speaker 1: in the minority here. So if you liked the trade,
Speaker 1: I think it got better. If you disliked the trade
Speaker 1: as I did, I think you understand where they're coming
Speaker 1: from even more, and that was they traded Myles Bridges
Speaker 1: as well, and so that starts to make more sense too,
Speaker 1: especially when you're when Phoenix gave up to get him.
Speaker 3: I mean, I guess I would join you in calling
Speaker 3: this a fact, but I have to admit that, like
Speaker 3: my more positive stance on Charlotte's end of the ball trade,
Speaker 3: actually like I wasn't like considering because what you're talking
Speaker 3: about is these other teams in the East at least
Speaker 3: and are it would have been hard for Charlotte to
Speaker 3: view itself as on par or better than those teams, right,
Speaker 3: like thinking like comparatively, And I never really thought of
Speaker 3: the Hornet's side of the ball trade in those terms,
Speaker 3: like saying I just viewed it as we won forty
Speaker 3: four games. We don't view that as good enough. We
Speaker 3: want to be a different kind of team, built around
Speaker 3: other types of players. And I, to me, I was
Speaker 3: just like, that's kind of cool, Like I think, I
Speaker 3: think that's ballsy. I think like, because there's a good
Speaker 3: chance they'll be wrong, I think it's more likely they'll
Speaker 3: be right. But I you know, it's sixty forty or whatever.
Speaker 3: And I liked it just viewing Charlotte like as an
Speaker 3: organization in isolation, not compared to not in the sense
Speaker 3: of like, well, how can we how can we say,
Speaker 3: going forward with this same team, where any better than
Speaker 3: the Knicks or the Celtics or all the other teams
Speaker 3: you listed. That just add that's just another component I
Speaker 3: didn't really think about that does to me make the
Speaker 3: trade look better. And I liked it to to start with,
Speaker 3: certainly more more than you liked it. So yeah, I
Speaker 3: think it's fact. But I just wanted to get to
Speaker 3: that one because it was interesting to me to think
Speaker 3: of it in those terms, because in general, like I
Speaker 3: feel like like there's another version of this conversation we
Speaker 3: have sometimes where it's like you can't look at the
Speaker 3: thunder being so great and say we gotta like the
Speaker 3: powder dry because we can't beat them, Like there's no
Speaker 3: point in trying to play at the level of that team.
Speaker 3: Like the Warriors in the mid teams were, oh, they're
Speaker 3: prohibitively good, Like what's the point in The Rockets were
Speaker 3: like fuck that, Like we're gonna try, you know, and
Speaker 3: they almost beat them. I don't think it's smart to
Speaker 3: think of to view yourself comparatively that way. It's like, well,
Speaker 3: we'll just wait out this window because we can't beat
Speaker 3: that team. Like that's dumb because one windows are six
Speaker 3: weeks long in the NBA now, and like it's just
Speaker 3: you never know what's going to happen to that seemingly
Speaker 3: unbeatable team. But this particular line of it, like where
Speaker 3: you're just looking at the entire conference and saying like, well, man,
Speaker 3: like what even are we compared to these teams, that
Speaker 3: feels a little more justifiable in terms of like logic
Speaker 3: for a reset or like a like a change like this,
Speaker 3: Does that make sense that distinction I'm trying to draw.
Speaker 1: I think it does. But when you mentioned that you
Speaker 1: think they wanted to be different. Do you think they
Speaker 1: were hoping different meant better or do you believe that
Speaker 1: they were making this trade let's undo everything that we've
Speaker 1: witness sensed.
Speaker 2: Do you believe they were making this trade knowing that
Speaker 2: they were probably going to take steps back in the
Speaker 2: coming year, or do you think they did it saying
Speaker 2: we could be different and different might make us better.
Speaker 1: I never viewed it as that. I viewed it as
Speaker 1: getting out of the mellow ball business and kind of
Speaker 1: reorienting their direction. That's how I in a way that
Speaker 1: would make them immediately worse.
Speaker 3: That's it's kind of all the above, Like I would
Speaker 3: say that the way I looked at it, if I'm
Speaker 3: just if I'm trying to like understand the Hornets thinking
Speaker 3: on it. I looked at it at it as them
Speaker 3: saying we we were pretty good and and and and
Speaker 3: better than that for good stretches of last season with
Speaker 3: LaMelo Ball paid at this rate in this role, we
Speaker 3: think we can be at least as good without him,
Speaker 3: like oriented differently. And then maybe like it's kind of
Speaker 3: I don't think you're saying it's like it's an easy
Speaker 3: either or justification. I think there's elements of all that
Speaker 3: stuff involved, like the the the the phrase step back
Speaker 3: like I I don't think Charlotte views trading LaMelo Ball
Speaker 3: for this return as necessarily taking a step back. I
Speaker 3: think I think they coued yeah, you know, I don't
Speaker 3: think they looked at it as we are taking a
Speaker 3: conscious like we're gonna take a breath, We're gonna we're
Speaker 3: gonna like, you know, aut a year or two two,
Speaker 3: or like we're trying to peek at this certain time.
Speaker 3: I don't. I don't think they viewed it that way.
Speaker 3: I think they viewed it as this is as good
Speaker 3: as we can be with LaMelo Ball, given his injury history,
Speaker 3: given just unseeriousness, all that stuff, with him in a
Speaker 3: lead role, all those things, and we don't think there's
Speaker 3: a higher ceiling if we stay the same oriented around
Speaker 3: this guy. Maybe that and then maybe that's just the
Speaker 3: health thing. If you want to ditch the off court stuff,
Speaker 3: in the play style stuff.
Speaker 1: I guess I had with the caveat if we don't
Speaker 1: know what Conkin Epple and Brandon Miller are going to
Speaker 1: look like as they continue to increase their on ball usage.
Speaker 1: I just struggle to see how trading someone who's been
Speaker 1: for the past half decade in the ninetieth percentile or
Speaker 1: higher of offensive on off like splits like value as
Speaker 1: we might be better or the same. I guess if
Speaker 1: the bar is forty four wins and you could say, well,
Speaker 1: look what we needed to do to get to forty four,
Speaker 1: I kind of understand what you're saying. At that time,
Speaker 1: I only would have listened to and I probably still
Speaker 1: only will listen to that they made this thinking about
Speaker 1: the bigger picture rather than we're we're juggling both like immediately,
Speaker 1: we're gonna be just as good, if not a little better,
Speaker 1: but we're more set up to if we want to
Speaker 1: make a gamble long term, or we're just leaner long
Speaker 1: term and we're gonna be able to make more agile
Speaker 1: decisions or more investments in other guys, or pay both
Speaker 1: Canipple and Miller where not that they couldn't have paid everybody,
Speaker 1: but we know that teams won't do that.
Speaker 3: Would you be surprised if they won forty five games
Speaker 3: this year?
Speaker 2: Shocked?
Speaker 1: I really, I honestly, And maybe I'm just LaMelo ballpilled,
Speaker 1: and that's I think Brandon Miller is excellent when he's
Speaker 1: hell konk nipple was my Rookie of the Year pick
Speaker 1: last season.
Speaker 2: I just I really don't and the team has to know.
Speaker 1: I really don't think people appreciate how much of an
Speaker 1: impact of LaMelo has on the offense. And we don't
Speaker 1: have the sample of what is it with Kobe White,
Speaker 1: Brandon Miller and Kanka Niple. Sure, but like LaMelo Ball
Speaker 1: is an offensive player? Is it's he's more complete than
Speaker 1: Kobe White? Just because of the pat they don't have.
Speaker 1: Who is the best passer on this roster right now?
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's not anyone who you'd say as a stand like,
Speaker 3: you're right, like, is it White? Is it Canipple? Is it?
Speaker 2: Like?
Speaker 3: Is Brandon Miller gonna add some new dimension?
Speaker 2: And who's the one? Who's the one that is?
Speaker 1: Like defenses are gonna feel inclined or want to throw
Speaker 1: two at the ball as soon as they're crossing the timeline.
Speaker 3: I'll bet you they hope it's Miller. I think I
Speaker 3: think that's implicit in this move.
Speaker 1: If this is if trading LaMelo unlocks Paul George three
Speaker 1: point zero and Brandon Miller, then I'll gladly admit I'm wrong,
Speaker 1: but I will be taking probably for the first time
Speaker 1: in a while. I'm kind of a sh Charlotte over guy.
Speaker 1: So I'll take I'm gonna continue to becausist. I'll take
Speaker 1: Minnesota over, just to keep riding with Lamello, just to
Speaker 1: stay on brand.
Speaker 3: It's gonna be fascinating. I mean, like, I totally see
Speaker 3: your eye. This is this is like so typical of us,
Speaker 3: where it's like we feel very differently about it, but
Speaker 3: we're sitting here being like, you.
Speaker 1: Know what, you might be right, but we need to
Speaker 1: I want neither of us, but you certainly wouldn't remember.
Speaker 1: I wonder what the most like heated disagreement we've ever
Speaker 1: had by our standards would be.
Speaker 3: It's it's probably some version of me defending the Warriors
Speaker 3: for not making a trade and.
Speaker 2: You're a professional. Here we go. That What a segue.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna be able to dip into the nuclear
Speaker 1: section now for the first time all podcast by going here.
Speaker 1: But we're gonna start with basic This is topical Grant
Speaker 1: factor fiction. The Golden State Warriors are catching too much
Speaker 1: flak for not making bigger trades, for the report coming
Speaker 1: out that they only wanted to give up all their
Speaker 1: picks for Giannis. They wouldn't give up two picks for Kawhi.
Speaker 1: They're they're receiving too much black. This is the natural
Speaker 1: course of an extended title contention window, of a dynastic window.
Speaker 2: They are not doing wrong. By Steph Curry.
Speaker 1: This is how every legend who wants to spend his
Speaker 1: entire career with one team goes out.
Speaker 2: Factor of fiction.
Speaker 1: The Golden State Warriors are receiving too much flack. Let
Speaker 1: me ask you a preliminary question because this interesting. This
Speaker 1: came up in a text thread with some Warriors fan
Speaker 1: friends and one of the guys said, like, I kind
Speaker 1: of love it that I'm paraphrasing that. It makes me
Speaker 1: like Lake of Moore that everybody's mad at him and
Speaker 1: he's like holding firm or whatever. And I said, like,
Speaker 1: is everybody mad at him? And it was like a
Speaker 1: sincere question because it's like what is that? This is
Speaker 1: like a social media amplification problem. Like, so I'm asking you, like,
Speaker 1: do you think it is true that some majority, maybe
Speaker 1: an overwhelming majority, are looking at the Warriors like you're
Speaker 1: handling this wrong.
Speaker 3: You're like this steff stuff and like the roster. Do
Speaker 3: you do you think that's true to say that yeah,
Speaker 3: like that's the majority opinion, like considerable majority.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 3: I wasn't then like two or three people can say it,
Speaker 3: and like Kendrick Perkins can say whatever he says, but like, I'm.
Speaker 2: Actually that interested.
Speaker 1: I'm actually more interested in one how you feel, but
Speaker 1: the sentiment, and you would be more plugged into this. Now,
Speaker 1: what's the sentiment among Warriors fans? Because nationally, I think
Speaker 1: you could probably find a ton of people.
Speaker 2: I think Zach Lowe.
Speaker 1: Even just did a like a long, longer monologue on
Speaker 1: why he thinks that the Warriors are catching too much black.
Speaker 2: I'm curious.
Speaker 1: It's to like, what what is the sentiment among Dubbs
Speaker 1: fans with this?
Speaker 3: Honestly, like, I think like our media culture is so
Speaker 3: ruined that I don't know what the answer to that is.
Speaker 2: Well, you'll tell you how the sment in your text.
Speaker 3: I don't think that a consensus arose out of that.
Speaker 3: The discussion didn't go far.
Speaker 2: They're Hardwood not subscribers, aren't they?
Speaker 3: No, YU some of them are actually I don't know,
Speaker 3: I don't know how many patreons there are. Bill's on
Speaker 3: It builds Patreons shout out Bill Patrons scriber turns up
Speaker 3: yellow in the discord. That's how you know. Uh, I'll
Speaker 3: tell you how I feel about it. I I I
Speaker 3: would need you to point me to the trade that
Speaker 3: they should have made that they didn't that would have
Speaker 3: given them a championship roster. And like I guess, it's
Speaker 3: y honest, but apparently everything was on the table for
Speaker 3: Y honest. And even that I think we talked about
Speaker 3: it was like, I don't know, it's like they're really good.
Speaker 3: That's probably as close as it gets. But like the
Speaker 3: Jalen Brown trade, absolutely not. You don't do that for
Speaker 3: that price. Like they the what was it, four picks
Speaker 3: in a swap or something it was.
Speaker 1: They gave up, they gave up, they ended up accepting less.
Speaker 1: So it's why isn't there were there known to go
Speaker 1: they just it sounds like we don't know what happens
Speaker 1: behind the scenes. But if Boston asked for four first
Speaker 1: round picks, that doesn't have to be the end of
Speaker 1: the discussion.
Speaker 3: I know, but I can't. You can't speculate on what
Speaker 3: like I mean.
Speaker 1: Either moves or I guess, and I won't even belong
Speaker 1: about it. My issue is is that whenever they've been
Speaker 1: linked to anyone. Kawhi would be a perfect example. Larry
Speaker 1: Markin is a perfect example. Giannis is the only one
Speaker 1: that you can say they actually put enough on the
Speaker 1: table for it would not have cost you everything to
Speaker 1: get If it cost you everything, if the Jazz said
Speaker 1: every first round pick you could trade.
Speaker 2: For Larry market In, I get not doing it.
Speaker 1: But where they've aired I think is Pascal Siakam would
Speaker 1: have made sense. Ojiannaobi would have made sense. And it's
Speaker 1: an extension of yes, we know about their draft misses,
Speaker 1: but as soon as it became clear even when they
Speaker 1: were still a sheene on the James Wiseman or I think,
Speaker 1: more pointedly Jonathan Kaminga. You held onto them too long anyway,
Speaker 1: And my biggest issue with them is my two biggest
Speaker 1: issues is the people missing the draft.
Speaker 2: But is you is this organization has acted like they.
Speaker 1: Are the reason the Warriors are as good as they are,
Speaker 1: like Joe Lakeuping Crew. Great Stephen Curry is the reason
Speaker 1: that this team became what it was, right down to
Speaker 1: the contract that he's signed four years forty four nol
Speaker 1: we called it in overpay in the moment because of
Speaker 1: his ankles. My other issue is is that they have
Speaker 1: done a great job to me controlling the narrative of
Speaker 1: saying we're in on this guy. We just we didn't
Speaker 1: want to give up everything to get him. And it's
Speaker 1: there's a difference between giving up everything and not offering enough.
Speaker 1: And it's if you're telling me that you have Steph
Speaker 1: Curry at least one of the picks that you're trading
Speaker 1: for Kawhi Leonard as an example, Now the whole aspiration
Speaker 1: thing needs to be factored in. But if you're telling
Speaker 1: me that you won't give up, you're only giving up
Speaker 1: two picks and dead salary. And I hate calling anyone dead, Sally,
Speaker 1: but Jimmy Butler for that, and that's too much. Here's
Speaker 1: final thing I'll say is the reason you're in this
Speaker 1: position is because you have no one on the roster
Speaker 1: of value to including these trades, because you either held
Speaker 1: on to them too long and now they're gone and
Speaker 1: or Jimmy Butler's injured. Like this is that you waited
Speaker 1: for a discounted star and Jimmy Butler, who made such
Speaker 1: a stink in Miami that you were able to get
Speaker 1: him for Andrew Wiggins and a f pick and so, yeah,
Speaker 1: that seemed like good value at the time. But this hedging,
Speaker 1: you get to hedge if you are the reason that
Speaker 1: this title window or era existed. Nobody, nobody, not Draymond,
Speaker 1: nobody in that building is more responsible for what's happened
Speaker 1: in Golden State than Steph. And so that's why I
Speaker 1: view this as if he's still playing at the level
Speaker 1: he was, I've viewed as an obligation to make the
Speaker 1: most of all left because guess what, you know what
Speaker 1: happens after he leaves. Anyway, who should trust you to
Speaker 1: find the next face that you don't think they could
Speaker 1: carry the franchise? John Brown is more likely to carry
Speaker 1: the Warrior based on drafting track record, John Brown is
Speaker 1: more likely to carry the Warriors than whoever the Warriors
Speaker 1: decide is suited to carry the Warriors post Steph.
Speaker 3: Yeah, then I hear all that, like, and I will
Speaker 3: admit that, like sometimes I do really feel the argument
Speaker 3: that like you are and if you're giving them flack,
Speaker 3: it's because you believe they are doing a disservice to Steph,
Speaker 3: who they owe, to whom they owe everything. Like, can't
Speaker 3: really argue with that. All I can say, is like
Speaker 3: my personal feeling on it is I can understand the
Speaker 3: hesitations they've shown to put everything on the table in
Speaker 3: the past, and I don't personally feel like like I
Speaker 3: don't have any ill will or like even really like
Speaker 3: frustration with the front office or ownership. And I don't
Speaker 3: know if I can explain that. I think a lot
Speaker 3: of that probably comes from, like personally, I'm satisfied I
Speaker 3: got four championships, you know, like I just and and
Speaker 3: like I guess maybe built into that is like I
Speaker 3: like the idea of them having just a full war
Speaker 3: chest for the post Steph era, and I'm okay with that.
Speaker 3: And I think, again a piece of another piece of
Speaker 3: it is I don't think there's a player out there,
Speaker 3: Like I don't know that Steph is currently a player
Speaker 3: who can be the best player on championship team. And
Speaker 3: that's now got more to do with potentially durability than
Speaker 3: anything else. Like the runners kne thing last year really
Speaker 3: scares me. That's a degenerative condition. He's got so many miles.
Speaker 3: He's a small guard. Like I just you know that,
Speaker 3: I just don't think it's realistic. I think they need
Speaker 3: someone better than him, and I don't know how you
Speaker 3: do that without mortgaging everything and probably still coming up
Speaker 3: short and then having really nothing when he's gone. I also,
Speaker 3: the last thing I'd say is if he requested a
Speaker 3: trade tomorrow, there would not be a single like I would.
Speaker 3: I would understand it, I would, I I wouldn't welcome it.
Speaker 3: I want him to play his whole career with the Warriors.
Speaker 3: But like he has agency here too, and and he
Speaker 3: frankly seems okay with this, and maybe that's all that
Speaker 3: should matter. So like that that like goes a long
Speaker 3: way for me. Like he it's not like he's being
Speaker 3: held hostage.
Speaker 2: He can.
Speaker 3: No one on planet Earth would be upset with him
Speaker 3: if he just full on demanded a trade. And he's
Speaker 3: not doing that, And I think that's because he's okay
Speaker 3: with what's happening here on at least to at least
Speaker 3: a significant enough degree to to stay, you know, and
Speaker 3: that counts for something to me. I don't know again
Speaker 3: full you know, perennial caveat. I only kind of think
Speaker 3: about the Warriors emotionally, so like I can imagine if
Speaker 3: you have no skin in the game, I get the
Speaker 3: take of, like what are they doing? Because like we'll
Speaker 3: talk about Jokic maybe in a second here, and it's
Speaker 3: like should the Nuggets trade Jokic? And I'm way more
Speaker 3: comfortable saying like, yeah, man, he's not going to resign
Speaker 3: do it? And I bet there's a bunch of Nuggets
Speaker 3: fans that are like, no, under no circumstances.
Speaker 1: I guess what I find funny is I feel as
Speaker 1: if I'm looking at this more emotionally than you are,
Speaker 1: because who I feel for. That's a great point about
Speaker 1: Steph Curry having agency and by the way, extension eligible
Speaker 1: in all we're gonna find out, I think how he
Speaker 1: really feels about.
Speaker 3: The planet one sorry before where you move on? He
Speaker 3: could take less? You know, like like that's he could
Speaker 3: do that too, That's.
Speaker 2: That's the possiblity. Why should he take less? When what
Speaker 2: have they done? Draymond Greene opted out to what did
Speaker 2: they do?
Speaker 3: I mean they tried to get Lebron and they just
Speaker 3: didn't have enough. I am saying he could. I'm saying
Speaker 3: he could, like that that's a possibility.
Speaker 1: To oh he could, And I think most people would
Speaker 1: argue that you should. Now like that's become the whole
Speaker 1: thing is you need to take less for these team
Speaker 1: to build winners. The Warriors have not done anything to
Speaker 1: earn the benefit of the doubt of Steph since the
Speaker 1: even like like just post twenty twenty two title, I
Speaker 1: think it's been an it kind of even started before then.
Speaker 1: When you're looking at the opportunities and the emphasis on
Speaker 1: the two timelines, it's to me, yes, it is about
Speaker 1: an obligation to Steph. But what I feel like we
Speaker 1: haven't talked enough about, and why I think I'm looking
Speaker 1: at it more emotionally than you, is the fans. Like
Speaker 1: I feel as if I were a fan, this would
Speaker 1: bug the hell out of me because I don't care
Speaker 1: about the post Steph era because this is so special
Speaker 1: and what the franchise has shown me is that independent
Speaker 1: of Steph, they're not equipped not Yeah, And so I'm
Speaker 1: looking at this and saying I'm rooting for this team.
Speaker 1: I find it disrespectful that maybe disrespectful was too strong
Speaker 1: for word, but it seems overly manipulative to say, like, well,
Speaker 1: we were linked to these guys, we didn't really go
Speaker 1: in for them. There's no one who's there's no one
Speaker 1: who's worth going all in for except for Yanna's so
Speaker 1: your bar for improving is we need one of the
Speaker 1: five best players alive or bust for improving.
Speaker 3: And my issue there is you're not just improving, it's
Speaker 3: like improving past a certain point. I think is they
Speaker 3: have like a obviously a ridiculously high standard for like
Speaker 3: like getting Butler when he kind of steered himself to
Speaker 3: you a little bit and only would have cost him
Speaker 3: one first and like I forget so like they've been
Speaker 3: I think a fair criticism is they've been like way
Speaker 3: too measured and honestly, like this is just all of
Speaker 3: a piece with the two timeline thinking. They want to
Speaker 3: have it both ways. They want to have Steph and
Speaker 3: a bunch of vets and stuff, and they'd also don't
Speaker 3: want to give away future assets they're trying. If anything
Speaker 3: has been consistent about this, seems that they've tried to
Speaker 3: have it both ways the whole time and that cost
Speaker 3: him a little bit. But again, maybe every fan doesn't
Speaker 3: feel this way, but I'm like, I got everything and
Speaker 3: more I could have possibly wanted out of this core.
Speaker 3: I just think it's cool that they still have Steph,
Speaker 3: and I understand why they don't want to just throw
Speaker 3: money down the well for no return, for a return
Speaker 3: that was good enough.
Speaker 1: I think that is a rational way of looking at it,
Speaker 1: and I think that I think I'm coming at it
Speaker 1: from more of an emotional perspective than you. I don't
Speaker 1: even mean that as an insult either, just I would
Speaker 1: expect a fan to be why don't you want to
Speaker 1: see them? I get what you're saying about having the
Speaker 1: bar so that you can sustain being great. I'm more
Speaker 1: of the mind I would rather the five percent chance
Speaker 1: of catching lightning in a bottle again, and they have
Speaker 1: sufficiently even done that. And by the way, with Steph,
Speaker 1: have as many miles or as much wear and tear
Speaker 1: on him. Had you gone back through over the court,
Speaker 1: hit on your draft picks, traded these guys for a
Speaker 1: Pascal Siaka, and we certainly could have handled the ball.
Speaker 2: I just think the draft is.
Speaker 1: And it's also just I don't understand necessarily the comparisons
Speaker 1: to like Kobe and the Lakers, because when Kobe signed
Speaker 1: that two year extension, and it was the Lakers are
Speaker 1: doing right by Kobe, Kobe was very clearly not a
Speaker 1: top ten player in the.
Speaker 3: NBA at that point.
Speaker 1: Ste Steph on any given night still is and so
Speaker 1: but to your point, and this is the spicier factor
Speaker 1: fiction portion of this grant factor fiction, Steph should not
Speaker 1: sign an extension this summer with the Warriors. Keep the
Speaker 1: pressure on the front office to get better. Insofar as
Speaker 1: there's anyone under the sun who might you know, pass
Speaker 1: their bar for improvement.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna say fiction, and that is because I think
Speaker 3: he specifically would not want or benefit from a full
Speaker 3: year of like that would sort it wouldn't make him
Speaker 3: the this is a weird thing. I feel like that
Speaker 3: would make him like, would get him the kind of
Speaker 3: a ten he doesn't want, more so than requesting a trade,
Speaker 3: you know what I mean, because because that introduces all
Speaker 3: this uncertainty and questions every night about like you know,
Speaker 3: what's your future, And he would just like I don't
Speaker 3: think he wants that at all, right, Like that that
Speaker 3: a huge distraction. This guy is just like he doesn't
Speaker 3: want any part of that kind of thing affecting the team,
Speaker 3: and that would be bad for him, bad for the team.
Speaker 3: If anything could make him look like a villain, it
Speaker 3: might be a full year of like doing like wielding
Speaker 3: this kind of leverage. Does that make sense? Like I
Speaker 3: just it's hard for me to imagine it. But you're
Speaker 3: asking should he because because that would apply leverage. I
Speaker 3: just think there's other ways for him to do that
Speaker 3: without having to make it. And like and again, just
Speaker 3: like he's why would he pass up? They'll give him
Speaker 3: whatever he wants, you know.
Speaker 1: Right, I'm gonna say fact because I think one if
Speaker 1: he doesn't, it will make him kind of a cult
Speaker 1: hero among fans, Whereas what you said earlier, if he requestitrate,
Speaker 1: I think everyone would understand, but they're not go and
Speaker 1: that there might be people who turn on him. I
Speaker 1: don't think anyone's gonna turn him for not signing extension
Speaker 1: because he can play it. I'm just keeping my options open.
Speaker 1: Maybe he'd be want to take less next summer if
Speaker 1: they can prove that they are gonna put talent in
Speaker 1: place at this year's trade deadliner. Beyond, he could also
Speaker 1: I'm thinking from Steph Curry's perspective, yes, you want to
Speaker 1: stay with the Warriors your entire career, but if you
Speaker 1: actually still want to compete for championships and go after
Speaker 1: ring number five, which, by the way, imagine Steph Curry
Speaker 1: ends up with a fifth ring, Like what those all time,
Speaker 1: just like he has to care about that at least
Speaker 1: a little bit. Yeah, this that keeps your options open
Speaker 1: without divorcing yourself from the Warriors just yet. And then
Speaker 1: it's it's just easier if you're a free agent and
Speaker 1: decide to go to the Lebron route and take a
Speaker 1: massive pay, Cutch. You know who comes off looking the
Speaker 1: worst in that, the Warriors, because well, why weren't you
Speaker 1: the team Steph was willing to take the minimum for
Speaker 1: I think the Lakers should be asking themselves the same
Speaker 1: question about Lebron is why couldn't that have been a
Speaker 1: situation where he took This is different because the Lakers
Speaker 1: are not It wasn't a one team situation with Lebron.
Speaker 1: So I don't think he should sign an extension. But
Speaker 1: we're again, we're clearly coming at this from two ends
Speaker 1: of the different ends of the spectrum.
Speaker 3: I wonder if, like, could he could he sign an
Speaker 3: extension that's like ten million dollars a year? Like he
Speaker 3: could he sign like a two for twenty or something like?
Speaker 3: Could that happen?
Speaker 2: Right? But right? Like, I don't. Again, I'm not doing
Speaker 2: that at this point.
Speaker 1: Had he had they gone out and got even got
Speaker 1: lebron Or did something this summer that would make me
Speaker 1: want to do that as stuff.
Speaker 2: I'm not doing that before they showed me that I
Speaker 2: should do that.
Speaker 3: Well, you know what, now that we're talking about it,
Speaker 3: more like the argument would be that that him not
Speaker 3: signing an extension gives the Warriors like crazy flexibility, right, like, yeah,
Speaker 3: next summer. So if he's so insane to be like
Speaker 3: we're trying to time it up, you're thirty eight, we're
Speaker 3: trying to time it up. Let's have a gap year
Speaker 3: and then we'll really go after next season. Like that's insane.
Speaker 3: But that would be the biggest reason to not sign
Speaker 3: an extension is so you don't have this like seventy
Speaker 3: million dollars or whatever it is on the books. Right.
Speaker 2: No, yeah, I'm with you there. So did I just
Speaker 2: get you to say fact?
Speaker 3: I think so sure, you've you've convinced me. I've come
Speaker 3: around on that one. So how much time?
Speaker 2: Let's do it? Let's do you want to do the
Speaker 2: Nuggets ones that we have really quick?
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, factor of fiction. The Nuggets should trade Nikola
Speaker 3: Jokic if he doesn't sign an extension.
Speaker 2: I was going to start with I.
Speaker 3: Went big, I'm big fish. Let's either way we could
Speaker 3: do yeah, stay in.
Speaker 1: The yeah so well so the Jokic one is they
Speaker 1: should trade factor fiction. The nugget should trade in a
Speaker 1: cool Yokic if he doesn't sign an extension factor fiction.
Speaker 2: Where are you at at that? As I fixed my
Speaker 2: light live broadcasting right.
Speaker 3: Now, Oh man, I just said that I would come
Speaker 3: down a certain way on this. I mean, I think
Speaker 3: they should right like it because the risk of well,
Speaker 3: I guess we need to first answer, like, because what
Speaker 3: the reason you do this is you think he might
Speaker 3: leave for nothing and it's not because he wants a
Speaker 3: bigger number or or whatever. And like, as I was
Speaker 3: thinking about this earlier today, do you find it kind
Speaker 3: of hard to try to guess what Nicole Jokic actually wants,
Speaker 3: you know, or actually cares about, because normally you'd say
Speaker 3: he'll just stay in Denver. He said, I will take
Speaker 3: him at his word. He seems like a this is
Speaker 3: a compliment, like a fairly simple guy like he you know,
Speaker 3: he doesn't need a big market or whatever, and he
Speaker 3: likes it there. But it's like, are we sure, like
Speaker 3: do we really know? Like that that's how he would
Speaker 3: think about it. Might he just leave because he wants
Speaker 3: to go win and you can't do that in Denver
Speaker 3: anymore because they got no picks and assets and they're
Speaker 3: too expensive and all this other stuff. So let's let's
Speaker 3: first discuss do you think there's a risk he will
Speaker 3: leave for nothing?
Speaker 1: I feel as if people don't look at him as
Speaker 1: a competitor, they think he just wants to race horses
Speaker 1: and he'll stay.
Speaker 3: What I mean, it's hard, right, It's hard to be sure.
Speaker 1: I don't if he's not signing an extension. I know
Speaker 1: the rationale is that next year he could sign, he
Speaker 1: could accline his player off and let's say and sign
Speaker 1: a five year deal. I think that'd be projected to
Speaker 1: be worth three hundred and fifty three zero point two million,
Speaker 1: and so you lock in that rather than locking in
Speaker 1: two hundred and seventy two point eight like the Donovan
Speaker 1: Mitchell deal. Essentially, I kind of just not that. I
Speaker 1: don't know that he would ever lead them along to
Speaker 1: that much. But he's also not the type of person
Speaker 1: that I think would say I want out. They need
Speaker 1: to do this. If I'm the Nuggets and he's not
Speaker 1: signing an extension, is he just so good that you
Speaker 1: roll the dice anyway and if he leaves for nothing,
Speaker 1: then so be it. Or maybe you hope you could
Speaker 1: work out a sign in trade because of how the
Speaker 1: cap space climate has pronominally been. Because I've said this before,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna alarm us by trade if he's not. He's
Speaker 1: had two opportunities to sign an extension the past two summers.
Speaker 1: Last year it was yeah, makes sense, Like just wait now,
Speaker 1: I'm sort of just like, well, if he wanted to,
Speaker 1: if he was concerned about maximizing his earning potential, he
Speaker 1: would have extended and then like you extend again. Like so,
Speaker 1: I just if he doesn't sign an extension, which by
Speaker 1: the way, I've said this many times, I don't think
Speaker 1: he should. I don't think they've done anything that if
Speaker 1: I'm Nikola jokicch just as I was with Steph Curry,
Speaker 1: will least hopefully be consistent about it. I'm not over
Speaker 1: the moon about anything, especially if if Peyton Watson is
Speaker 1: gone or if you get Peyton Watson back, but it
Speaker 1: cause you, Cam Johnson, how is this team better if
Speaker 1: they duck the second apron without getting better?
Speaker 2: So I I'm gonna say they should.
Speaker 1: Will they the answers probably know because are we in
Speaker 1: Kevin Durant with the thunder territory where it is, even
Speaker 1: if you have no idea, you have to see it through.
Speaker 1: That's what I would ask you if you're the Nuggets,
Speaker 1: is that how you would view this situation is let's
Speaker 1: say they really don't know if he would leave for
Speaker 1: nothing or not. Do you have to see it through anyway?
Speaker 1: Because it's Nikola jokicch.
Speaker 3: Right, Like it's different than the Steph comparison, right because
Speaker 3: he's not an undisputed like top five player like night tonight,
Speaker 3: but Jokic is and Yokicic really in terms of like
Speaker 3: placing the franchise, it's pretty similar. My first instinct was,
Speaker 3: and I said this earlier, they probably should trade him. Man,
Speaker 3: I want to say they should just chance it and
Speaker 3: keep him because he's that great, but like he's thirty one,
Speaker 3: Like how much there were tiny signs of decline, Like
Speaker 3: I if a computer were making this decision, the computer
Speaker 3: would have traded him, I think, right because given his age,
Speaker 3: given like the types of teams that are rising in
Speaker 3: the league, like he is not equipped to play against
Speaker 3: like the hyper athletic monsters that are growing in San Antonio.
Speaker 2: In particular, Nuggets played San Antonio pretty well last year.
Speaker 3: They they did, but like I just now he's a
Speaker 3: year older and Aaron Gordon's a year older, and like
Speaker 3: this current core if you're if you're the Nuggets, like
Speaker 3: if you're the computer running the Nuggets, you're looking at
Speaker 3: this and you're saying, like our windows not really like
Speaker 3: we're not a top tier contender anymore. I don't think
Speaker 3: may prove me wrong, but I don't think so, like
Speaker 3: totally cold calculated rational, like yeah you should. I I
Speaker 3: still think you just you kind of can't. I think
Speaker 3: you kind of can't trade him even does that, So
Speaker 3: I'll say it's fiction. He should be traded if he
Speaker 3: won't sign an extension, while saying like if I could
Speaker 3: divorce emotion from it and just you know, if if
Speaker 3: whatever AI client runs the Nuggets in this hypothetical, he's
Speaker 3: gone because you could just get Imagine the hall, Imagine
Speaker 3: what you could get for nicoleie K.
Speaker 1: Do you believe him when he says that, because it
Speaker 1: was basically in the interview, at least when it was translated,
Speaker 1: he essentially said, I'm going to resign next summer. Do
Speaker 1: you just take him? I think that's the where it's not.
Speaker 1: It's not just him saying he wants to retire in Denver.
Speaker 1: Everyone Kyrie said he wanted to retire in Boston.
Speaker 3: Just want This is a very direct yeah, like affirmation,
Speaker 3: even though we started with like. I kind of think
Speaker 3: he's more inscrutable than it seems. I think that's direct
Speaker 3: enough that you probably take him at his word. But again,
Speaker 3: the computer is like, what are words? Look at this
Speaker 3: asset we could trade for a million things.
Speaker 1: I looking at just what the Nuggets have done over
Speaker 1: the years, especially post title. If he doesn't sign an extension,
Speaker 1: I'm trading him. It's which is not I wouldn't want to,
Speaker 1: And I understand where you're coming from, But if you
Speaker 1: see it through.
Speaker 2: Any leaves, what are you left with A like you?
Speaker 1: The reason you can't improve right now where it feels
Speaker 1: as if you can't improve is you just don't have
Speaker 1: any You can't trade a single first round pick, and
Speaker 1: so what are you supposed to do? And it's even
Speaker 1: an ironclad guarantee from him without something on the dot
Speaker 1: and line, you really got to sit here and think, Okay, well, we're.
Speaker 2: Gonna be that.
Speaker 1: Do you even want to give him a five year deal?
Speaker 1: Going to as like? If if the AI is making
Speaker 1: that decision, do you want to.
Speaker 3: Get like based on aging curves, We're we're thinking in
Speaker 3: the like three for one hundred range.
Speaker 2: Right, So I'm trading him.
Speaker 1: If he doesn't sign, I'm gonna say fact they won't though,
Speaker 1: I think we won't get yeah, Eve anything else?
Speaker 2: Are you ready take us out of here?
Speaker 3: I think that's gonna do it. Thanks everybody for listening
Speaker 3: for happy to from you, great solid, solid episode. Uh,
Speaker 3: I just you know, being rusty not you?
Speaker 2: You?
Speaker 3: You wake up in pod? What do I say? Now? Dan?
Speaker 3: This is the part I can't remember. If you'd like
Speaker 3: to support the podcast, you probably already are because this
Speaker 3: is a is this our Patreon No, that's coming later.
Speaker 3: This is a regular pod trade. If you want to
Speaker 3: hear additional content, join our Patreon. Support us to our
Speaker 3: patreon dot com slash Hardwood Knocks NBA.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 3: You get all the episodes out free, you get the
Speaker 3: extra stuff, You get access to our discord. You get
Speaker 3: discounts on merch all kinds of cool things, and boy
Speaker 3: do we have some merch Dan's wearing some of it
Speaker 3: right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Uh, it's pretty it's like unbiased, it's pretty awesome.
Speaker 1: We've now we've now debuted or unveiled two of them,
Speaker 1: and there's just there's thirty three.
Speaker 2: Of them for something different designs, and I'm still FLABBERGASTI
Speaker 2: at one sending each other like.
Speaker 1: We get test first obviously, and one of the ones
Speaker 1: that draft pickups don't just like so off brand, but.
Speaker 3: Where when I get it, I'm very excited for that.
Speaker 3: I think I think that's everything. Remember to rate, review
Speaker 3: and subscribe, Tell your friends selling emy shouts Franklin Kane apologies,
Speaker 3: Jared Allen