Speaker 1: What is up? Pellisiccos it is part two of the
mailbag with Mort Jensen from the NBA podcast and you
offer sports and Forbes and of course only fans rolling
through a bunch of questions now before we get started,
more any thoughts, comments, concerns, announcements, life achievement awards that
you'd like to argue.
Speaker 2: No, no, I just want to say I'm so grateful
for the first question we got in the last mail bag,
which turned out to be an entire fucking episode that
was great. Did not anticipate that you and I were
planning to just go completely nuts with a bunch of questions,
and then we spoke an hour of one question, which
was that's the longest answer I've I think I've ever
given meilback question. So kudos to us.
Speaker 1: For yah, shout out to Utter again, and thank you
as always for everyone who's sent me questions. As a reminder,
if you're not already discord best place to find those
mailbag solicitations, I'll also throw them on Blue Sky if
you're there, at Msjamba for moret at dan Fa Valley
for myself. Let us waste no more time, though, because
we have many questions that we would like to get to. Let's,
as we say, mort belly flop into this mailbag. So
this first question I'll start us off here comes from
Gregor MBV. What's your perspective on how Bud is handling
the Suns right now? Playing Tias Jones even though he's terrible,
not playing rookies and therefore putting their development on hold,
playing both KD and Booker more than forty minutes in
so many games, even though there's no ambition left for
this season. How much should he be taken accountable for
what's going on in Phoenix more take it away.
Speaker 2: I'm very upset at the notion of Tias Jones being terrible.
Speaker 1: How dare you you claim that you can turn the
Kings into title contenders? So I understand why.
Speaker 2: Look, here's the thing we all expected by to come
in and turn everything around, and he didn't. I do
think he's overplayed both Booker and Durant. That is completely
fair criticism.
Speaker 1: Over the over thirty nine minutes per game for Durant
since February first, over thirty eight per game since Booker
during that span.
Speaker 2: That is, that is a ridiculously high minutes amount for both.
I think and also I think the the not playing
rookies part is super fair. Like Ryan Dunn, I want
to go get back to this because I was skeptical
of him coming into the NBA because it felt like
to me, he was going to have to be, you know,
a small ball four and five because the three pointer
wasn't really there whatsoever. The fact that he's I know,
he's only shooting thirty percent on the year, but like
that shot was again non existent in college. It was
like so bad. It was one of those things where
we questioned whether you know, he'd even hit a three
over the first couple of years in the NBA. For
him to actually turn into someone who can and hit
threes while giving you some rock solid defense, yeah all right,
Like it's not you know, all defensive yet quite yet. Well,
I do think he deserves the reps. And then you
have OsO obviously, who's one of the smartest dudes, who
just moves so well, who can play the four, who
can play the five. It's really a lob guy but
understands positioning so well. To not utilize those two guys more,
especially when you're giving Book and Kdi that many minutes, Yeah,
that's that's problematic. Absolutely, So Bud needs to get some criticism. Yeah,
he deserves some criticism. I'm not against that, but in
terms of how much should he be taken accountable, Like,
I don't know how to answer that. What are we
going off? Percentage? Like what what's the cry? Yeah? How much?
I don't know, sixteen I don't know the answer.
Speaker 1: He definitely feels more accountable than he should have been,
like three that we thought he would have been like
three months ago. For sure. You look at ESP I
mean the rookies point from Greg Gore, I think is
just the biggest one. You're like, these are guys that
if they're not you're they're not. You can't say you're there.
They're your entire future because Devin Booker is there. But
you should get a look at them when you know
this season's got because even if you make it to
the play in, you're not winning the title at this rate,
and you know you're trading Kevin Durant After the season,
I was listening to the Timeline podcast with Mike Vehill
and Sam Cooper. Those guys are great and they kind
of positive. That is Bud daring the organization to fire
him before the end of the season. But because that's
how egregious the rotations specifically have been, and I don't know,
like the most troubled. I think they should be better
on offense, Like they're eleventh since February first, and it's okay,
that's fine, but you have Kevin Durant and Devin Booker,
and I know Bradley Beal has been injured. I still
think I think a bulk of the blame still needs
to go up top. I don't know how good this
defense is supposed to be. When you look at the personnel,
even if you're playing Ryan Dunne, you're dead last in
point slot per possession over February first span. Their transition
defense now it's awful. I want to make that clear.
How much of that is on Bud because it's like, oh,
they're not back, even kind of back after they miss
a shot. So it does feel like a little bit
of okay if it was certainly if he was playing
Ryan Dunnosoa Gadara more, they might those are dudes that
would get back quicker. And did he lose the locker
room to any extent? We saw Kevin Durant compliment him
in that one post game interview following the the tiff
or the disagreement they had on the sidelines, where he
mentioned all of Coach Budd's adjustments. But when you watch
the Suns, when you look at the minist distribution, doesn't
feel like he's making a ton of adjustments. And if
you're saying that, because again, I think most of the
blame needs to fall up top. But if you're saying
that he needs like Brook Lopez or Chris stops porzingis
type center to make his defensive system work, that is
an indictment of him more than like at that point,
because those players are so few and far between. So
I think he deserves a ton of blame here. I
just if more if he's them, are you getting rid
of him? Like, are you rolling through another coach at
this point?
Speaker 2: I mean, if you're rebuilding like we in the last episode,
obviously we mentioned the Suns as a team that you
know probably should blow it up. If they blow it up, yeah,
you probably need to go into a new situation with
a new coach. But if you want to stick with
it one more year, you're gonna need some level of
sustainability up run in Like in terms of the coach.
It can't. It can't be a revolving tour. It just can't.
I don't think that is good for anyone, unless, of course,
the guy you get in is someone who is like
azar of you know, NBA coaching. Is that guy out there?
Is that guy available? I don't think so. So sticking
with Bud for now, but be very aware that he's
part of the problem right now, at least right now.
Speaker 1: And I do think though, if you're gonna keep him,
shouldn't you make every effort possible in as part of
the Kevin Durant trade or a subsequent move to put
then a center in there that you believe actualizes what
he wants to do defensively and believes that he can
maximize the defense with. So it's not you know, now
you have no excuses. But if you're gonna keep butt around,
then you are kind of a right, well, let's build
our defense in the image of how he likes to coach.
Speaker 2: It, right yeah, no, no, no, I mean you have
to give him a chance to succeed, right that that's
but but also at the same time, they when they
made the Nick Richards trade, you know, they got an
upgrade and everyone was like, oh yeah, like problem solved.
Now it turns out, no, you just found a very
good backup center like, he's clearly not the guy to
hellm Like, I've been very very impressed with it, don't
get me wrong, but it's still Nick Richards. How are
you going to go into next season and an upgrade
on the center spot like yeah, you We can almost
ask people to go back and listen to the episode
we did with the first question because we brought up
Rudy Gobert, like, but do we really want to go
that route? Do the Suns want to go that route?
I don't know. I will say this, if you're still
paying I say A Thomas to give you advice, then
I have very little faith in virtually everything that they do.
Speaker 1: Maybe they can Brook Lopez a free agent. Maybe they
can get actual Brook Lopez at the minimum.
Speaker 2: Who's going to be about seventy one thousand year or
sold at that point.
Speaker 1: If you're getting him at the minimum, it'll be fun.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Oh yeah, no, no, that's true. I just don't
think you're getting him at the No.
Speaker 1: I was being facetious. I know you want to take
us to our next question.
Speaker 2: Question, ain't at mort who would you rather build around
Sire or Lamello? And that's from Andreas. Yeah, I had
a feeling that that was good, because that is the
point of topic on my Danish podcast A lot. I
have a hard time seeing how you can effectively build
around these two, or rather you can build around Lamel
easier from like an excess to no perspective. But I
don't know whether I trust LaMelo to be the guy
to be built around. I know you disagree with that,
that's totally fair, but I'm not there. I'm not there yet.
As for Zion, there's the availability issue. There's also the
fact that he might be the most difficult archetype ever
to build around, which I also touched on in the
last In the last part, I'm gonna go I'm gonna
say Sion because I do at least trust that when
he's healthy, he's productive in the right way. Whereas LaMelo,
I'm not there yet. I'm still seeing a lot of
empty calories.
Speaker 1: I just the thing with Zion, and I'm LaMelo hasn't
necessarily been durable enough to just say, oh, Zion's to
injury prone exactly. But with Zion, if you have to
build a team under the threat of your best player
not always being available, wouldn't it be easier to build
said team around LaMelo than it would be Zion.
Speaker 2: I don't think I understood that question. Could you reword.
Speaker 1: It because LaMelo? Look, I think one of the problems
with the Pelicans, and I don't actually know how much
blame to assign to them for this because Zion has
not been available enough to counter it. But they built
their team as if we want him to be the
central focus, but we need it to exist without him. Yeah,
and if you have to approach it from the same
perspective with LaMelo, it feels easier to do that. Where
if you needed to move LaMelo to a secondary like
he's gonna scale down better than Zion.
Speaker 2: That's interesting. Yeah, that's actually a very fair point, Like
unless you get like the absolute right teammate alongside Zion,
which would have to be like Wemby or something. I
do agree that you're right, you can scale down LaMelo
at least you hope to. LaMelo might not degree that
could be a problem. Uh but but like, yeah, rhetically
you could. That doesn't make it, Like I'm that doesn't
make it easier on me to go with LaMelo though,
because his play as well is just it's all over
the floor, like it's it's all let's just go back
and watch Like his last eight games thirty point eight
percent from the field thirty point eight not thirty eight
thirty point eight percent from the field?
Speaker 1: Who are who are the Hornets that have played the
most time around him during that span.
Speaker 2: I don't have the numbers on that, but I don't
care thirty point eight No, no, no. But what I'm saying is,
even if you're if you're supposed to be the best
player on your team, even if you're playing with G leaguers,
thirty point eight percent efficiency. And it's it's not just
the lack of efficiency, it's the it's the fact that
I don't trust him in terms of his decision making.
I don't trust him yet to do something over a
sustained period of time where I can feel comfortable knowing that,
oh yeah, he's got it. Like if I'm a coach,
if I'm a general manager, if I'm looking at a
rough stretch in the season, I would have zero faith
in telling and basically saying, Okay, well I have LaMelo,
He'll carry me through this rough stretch, I have zero faith.
Speaker 1: I think that's fair. It really comes down to your
betting on a higher peak from Zion. I think that
you can bet on a more extended peak from LaMelo
Ball if and when he gets there, and that might
be sort of the two things that we're battling against
in that situation. Your answer did not surprise me, though,
On to the next question. This one comes from freaky
unk ass writing off a blockbuster Trey Young or LaMelo
Ball deal. What moves could Orlando make to better the offense?
Is there anything that moves the needle without getting an
offensive superstar on the roster. They look so good fighting
through injuries, but the offense looks untenable with this.
Speaker 2: Core I wrote about this. So yes, there is one
guy who can not necessarily solve anything or everything, but
he'll give you a boost Kobe White like because you
won't have to break the bank to get him. Is
also financially speaking, because he's going to be at like
twelve point three or twelve point six million next year,
So like just in terms of matching salary, that's not
going to be an issue whatsoever. There is it's the bulls,
So you can probably get away with offering them. I
don't know, ten massages, I don't know. Whatever you I
don't know, like a dinner date, I don't know. You
can probably get him for nothing. You can at least
squeeze them because it's the bulls, and like the last
time the Magic dealt with Chicago, it went pretty well
for Orlando. Let's just put it that way, so they
would have incentive to go back to that well. But
Kobe White is a guy who won't overpower you offensively,
like he won't take the ball out of Polo Benkaro
Franz Wagner's hands too much. But he will be able
to create off his own accord. He'll be able to
spot off off the attention given to those two. I
think he's a pretty clean fit on that roster.
Speaker 1: I would agree. I'm gonna throw some more names at
you again in the non blockbuster tier.
Speaker 2: Fred van Vliet very expensive. I you know what, I'm
actually gonna disagree with you on this because if there's
one thing I would worry about with Fred as well,
we know that this is a Magic team that's really
struggled with this efficiency this year. Fred Lean is not
an efficiency player. He's never been like, this is a
guy who shoots in the high thirties, very low forties frequently.
I know the vast majority of his shots are threes.
I get that, But even so, I would look at
guys who are going to be efficiency players, and especially
if they are attached to a forty million dollar price tech.
Speaker 1: To be clear, I'm not advocating for these names. I'm
just throwing them at you.
Speaker 2: Yesh, you are you just did absolutely?
Speaker 1: What about Malik Monk?
Speaker 2: I don't Yeah, like so he's gotten so much better
as a playmaker, but is he a guy who you
trust with the ball in his hands at a much
higher extent? Like I don't hate the fit, like the
scoring fit, I actually like a great deal. I don't
know if I trust the ball handling in that situation.
Speaker 1: Anthony Simons has been a very popular one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, look, I mean so andbuster right coming in
just playing off of everyone, he would what would he
step into like twenty five points per game on that
roster he would hit He would hit like four threes
per game on average for the year.
Speaker 1: That I mean you do a shot attempts go down
because defenses are like throwing two and three bodies at
him and like trying to defend Paolo and Franz straight
up at that point because they're worried about the three.
Speaker 2: I don't know, will have to find out. He does
seem like a guy who could end up there. What
about Colin Sexton, Yeah, I mean again, ball handling, playmaking,
like responsibilities. I don't know if they go hand in
hands the scoring touch does? I mean he remember the
knock on him coming into the league was that he
couldn't shoot. Yeah, I think he's proven pretty well that's
not a problem. He'll do fine. Yeah, I don't hate that.
Reasonable watch what he's on, like eighteen million.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and he'll be expiring. He feels pretty gettable in
some someone that they you know, would be more it
would be more up their alley when you're looking at
the opportunity cost. I just when I look at it,
I want them to get someone who can hit, like
like stretch the floor, hit shots off the dribble, but
like actually manage the game. He's not going to manage
the game a ton and like it's kind of the
same thing with Fred van Fleet. Actually think it's that
he's improved as a passer, but it's kind of the
same thing with Malik Monk. But I also think because
you have Fronz in Pallow that you can get someone
who's not necessarily a floor general type and that can
exponentially improve your offense. I would not. I mean, if
this was like a year and a half ago, Terry
Rozier might have been interesting. Yeah, somewhat ironically, you know,
if they decided to blow it up like Tyler, hero
would be really interesting in Orlando. Maybe that's two blockbustery
for this. He was just an All Star, so probably
too blockbustery.
Speaker 2: And also, again, like I may, I might be looking
too much of playmakers instead of just scorers. But Tyler
would just he would come in and give give them
what they needed in terms of the scoring.
Speaker 1: I think his playmaking is improved.
Speaker 2: It has, But is he a guy who you trust
to play like a pseudo point guard role.
Speaker 1: On this team? I mean, like when Palo and Franz
are kind of your other you have these two other
primary options. I think you could get away with that.
I have a couple other names. I have one more
trade candidate and then two free agents Lonzo Ball. Yeah, yes, automatic,
yess you think like because your Fronz and Polo kind
of do the half court stuff, and Lonzo Ball get.
Speaker 2: You moving up and down the He's ten million or
next year, which in the NBA terms, when the salary
or sorry with the cab increases, he's basically free.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I mean, you could just guarantee Gary Harris's
deal or like wan, it'd be easy to match the
money for them to.
Speaker 2: Scoring punch though, that's the thing. He will give you,
the playmaking, he'll give you some spot up three point ability,
that's fine. The volume is scoring he won't give you though,
So like it would have to be Lonzo Ball and
someone else.
Speaker 1: Like I'm elite. Beasley's a free agent type deal like
just it doesn't have to be another ball handler. So yeah, although.
Speaker 2: Elik Beasley's everything that KCP should have been for him, I.
Speaker 1: Mean the other thing though, so when the seven games
Lonzo's played since February first, he's shooting like six or
seven to three point attempts per game in under twenty
seven minutes. Oh that's enough volume scoring, I think, not
from scratch, which I think is what you're you're getting
at two free agents. This one's not gonna fit the
scoring thing. Well, I guess it could, but not to
a te Ti Jerome Tis Jones would work. I just
feel like, excuse me, they need someone who's more of
a score than Ty. What about Ty Jerome?
Speaker 2: Hm hmm. Yeah. Do we trust that what he does
in Cleveland is something he can duplicate on a different team.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's the bet you're making. I'd be intrigued
at the very least after watching him this year.
Speaker 2: No, I would too. Don't don't keep me wrong.
Speaker 1: Because he's not I wouldn't call him like a caps
loock good defender, but he's so active with his hands
that he's also someone that you could envision the Magic
liking because they love guys who at least do something
on defense.
Speaker 2: And he's as fuck though, as like as a one
as well. Yeah six five, so like defensively, even if
he isn't, you know, quote unquote great on that end
of the floor, his size alone will prevent guys from
getting to their spots occasionally here and there.
Speaker 1: Now, this player is wildly inconsistent, But would you take
a flyer in free agency? So we're probably talking maybe
mid level money on D'Angelo.
Speaker 2: Russell the for the So what the non taximile.
Speaker 1: So around fifteen a year. Let's say he would cost it.
Maybe it's a one plus like, maybe it's just a
two year deal, short.
Speaker 2: Term one plus one.
Speaker 1: Where yeah, the year two is a team two years,
thirty two years, and I don't know what the mid
level deal will be, like two years and thirty million
whatever it ends up being.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's short enough. Yeah, I'll do that. I won't.
Speaker 1: I won't.
Speaker 2: Like, it's not something I'm in love with.
Speaker 1: But no, I think if they're just refusing to do
a trade and they're gonna have enough room under the
tax like to use the full non tax payermid level,
I think it's at least like a somewhat interesting stop gap.
And then if the numbers, just if it's short term,
he becomes someone that you can use as a salary
matcher in a trade if you ever decide to take
a bigger swing. Any other names you'd like to nominate
before we move on to the next question.
Speaker 2: I already said Tys Jones, that's all the names I need.
Speaker 1: What is our next question? More?
Speaker 2: What do the thunder do with their six ers first
round draft pick? Please note that ok see owns Phillies
pick with top six protection, top four protection in twenty
six twenty seven, What do the Thunder do with their
six ers first round pick? I use it.
Speaker 1: I guess so's It's like, are they they don't necessarily
have the roster spot just to continue adding in all
these guys. Yeah, but they're also not a team that
I feel like if they're keeping the sixers pick and
it's like seven, if it's the top ten, let's say,
I have a tough time believing that they'll just trade it.
Speaker 2: I actually just wrote a piece over a Yahoo about
the Thunders, like the core outside of the Big three,
whether some names are you know, if you can pencil
them in for the future. I split it up into
like short term future and long term future, and the
short term future was like after Chet and Jalen like reups,
like that's that's the future the immediate short term, and
then the long term. There are a couple of guys
who aren't sure to stick around, like I say, a
Hardenstein might not be around down the line, Alex Crusoe
might have to get traded. So and then you're looking
at Kason Wallace, for example, is he going to be
so good coming off his rookie rookie deal that you're
looking at paying him in the late twenties early thirties,
because you know, I know that he's having a bit
of a down here this year offensively, but defensively, he's
right there. He had a great rookie season in terms
of offense as well. If he bridges that over the
course of the next two years and he gets a
bigger and big role and the numbers starts piling up,
then you have a real conversation there in regards to
ship with They stick with him, So I don't think
the thunder are done making draft picks. I know that.
I think they obviously know that they can save a
shit ton of money just basically drafting guys, keeping them
for four years on their rookie deals, and then when
those deals are up, that's when they had to make
some tough decisions. But it wouldn't surprise me if they
basically look at each window in the coming year says, oh, hey,
four years with a rookie or not rookie, but like
a rookie contract player earning what like forty to fifty
percent less of what he should compared to like production.
I think that's the route they're going. It's a great
way to save money.
Speaker 1: I would agree with you. Now you're going to get
into the point it's right, are you going to start
moving on from I guess there are some players right
now that you consider expendable, like maybe moving on from
Usman Jangs roster spot or big Jaylen Williams, maybe even
a Kendrick Williams. I did do because I have begun
my draft prep. I have three names that based off
the range that their sixers pick would be in, and
then just kind of trying to look at what the
thunderneed or how they draft Liam McNeely of Yukon to
get like a six seven shooter in there, who will
really get them up.
Speaker 2: As this question about like who they should pick though,
because then I just misinterpreted the question.
Speaker 1: I think it could be both. He could interpret anyway
you want. I just I went both ways with it.
I think, my my personal pinions, they will keep it
if they have the sixers pick, but they could they're
good enough where something arises in the playoffs and they say,
oh we need this, then an opportunity bubbles to the
service over the offseason. It's not like a picktation. I
bolted down. Two other names I'd consider con canoople of Duke,
like kind of getting another shooter type in there. Can
he I think like positionally on defense they can. Probably
he needs to get stronger, at least in better shape.
He's gonna have athletic limitations. But the Thunder they're just
built to insulate a bunch of different guys. And then
the other one. And I can't tell if this is
a spot on thunder pick or if it's this guy
might be too Julius randall ish for them. But Colin
Murray Boyle of South Carolina potentially a limited shooter. But
if you kind of believe in the shooting and you
view his defensive tweenerness like is he a big? Is
he a wing? If you view that as versatility and
malleability rather than a limitation, that could be someone who's
like sort of an interesting project for them. And he's
shown that he can kind of put the ball on
the deck. Two. So those are just three names early
on set that if they were on the board like
seven to ten, which it seems like that's.
Speaker 2: Where Johnson though, what's that? No, Trey Johnston.
Speaker 1: Have not dug into Trey just yet.
Speaker 2: No, So this is more of a neat thing for
me because last summer, you know, don't get me wrong,
I don't I didn't hate, I say, a Hartenstein acquisition,
but I did think they would go in a different direction.
I thought they would go shooter, because that's probably the
one thing if you can. I don't think the Thunder
have a particular weakness, but if they had one volume
three point shooting would probably the one to like, look at,
Trey Johnston should definitely solve that. Like, he would be
a guy I would be interested in.
Speaker 1: Where's he projected to go?
Speaker 2: Uh, top five off tankathon right now though, But.
Speaker 1: I didn't even dig into anyone who's in the top
five or six because Philly would be keeping that pick.
But obviously that's not a hard and past.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I really drop down because he's not he's not
an all around guy. But that's a I honestly think
that might be an asset to the Thunder because you
know how they chose Dylan Jones last year. Obviously you
know at Weaver State, huge.
Speaker 1: Permanent sub Dylan Jones, thank you very much.
Speaker 2: But he was so good and he was all around.
But like those roles don't really like translates to the
same extent at the NBA. I think a guy like
Trey Jones will have like a straight line two minutes
when he reaches the NBA, because it's like, no, I
don't really read on a whole bunch, No, I don't
really play make a whole lot. What I do is
I get buggets and I shoot a shit ton from
the outside. That to me just kind of makes sense
for a thunder team that could use a guy like that,
especially if they end up pivoting off of like someone
like I said, Joe for example, who might down the
line prove a little bit too expensive.
Speaker 1: They can also, I don't want to say they can.
I mean they can't afford to be riskier. But Nicolo
Topa is gonna be a rookie next year and they're
very high on him, and so if you're gonna try
and integrate him, or you're focused more on him, you
can take a bigger swing with a six or thick
and just know like, we're gonna bring them along slowly
so they can do all sorts of things. I think
that they will keep it, And if I was drafting,
I probably would look at someone who's either like you
said it like kind of the higher volume shooting. I
don't think you're gonna find someone who's maybe they need
other Shock creator, but we don't really know for sure.
Just with you know, all right, Hartenstein might not, might
be more temporary, but between Chet and j dubb and
and even Aaron Wiggins, they could be set there.
Speaker 2: Our next question, damn it, you just you beat me
to it, like I just because here's the thing, just
to wrap up the last one here. If we assume
that heart and Stein is gonna move on after his contract,
would you actually consider going the route of a big
man with the thunder you.
Speaker 1: I mean, they could, they could do whatever the hell
they want.
Speaker 2: More No, I was thinking of Kamon Malaus, especially like
for the Duke Center.
Speaker 1: Can he play next to Chet?
Speaker 2: I would think so, yes, then I'd consider it.
Speaker 1: I just it's I would love to know Shock. I'd
love to know where that pick is gonna end up,
because like what if it's and if they don't, I
would argue they're definitely I'll say this, I think they're
more likely to trade it if they keep If they
keep it, if they get it this year rather than
next year, because like next year there's looser protection, and
now you've kind of you've put an like Isaia Heart
psychotechically be a free agent in twenty twenty six because
of that team option. So that'll be interesting to see
if they if you're the thunder, would you prefer to
get it this year or next year? I probably this
year because the Sixers are bad, right, so you know
it's going to be in the.
Speaker 2: Tele So you know, from this draft seems to be
pretty solid. I do think there are some specific archetypes
that would fit them pretty well.
Speaker 1: Next question, this one comes from NBA casual. Can anyone
step up and make a strong Rookie of the year
case with sub twenty games to go? And I'm assuming
we're just someone other than Stefan Castle or Jalen Wells,
which they seem like the two that are featuring heavily
the most. I have three.
Speaker 2: Names, Oh, okay, okay.
Speaker 1: For your consideration. Zachary Resiche number one. He's been shooting
the shit out of the ball, or shooting the hell
out of the ball. He's not shooting like shit since
he came back from injury, and he's been pretty good.
They vote he's opened, he's gotten more minutes since the
DeAndre hu trade, which I assume was part of that logic.
I like him as an off ball mover. I think
he's I don't trust him one on one defensively, but
I think he moves around defensively enough. And I do
believe a lot of voters might gravitate towards all right,
minutes played and so you're looking at the volume he shouldering,
could end up mattering this is someone it's a put like,
this is definitely a stretch, but he has come on.
Kyle Philipowski is doing things in Utah, especially on the
offensive end, just like basically like putting the ball on
the floor. Better screener than I thought he'd be, and
been able to finish at the basket a little bit
better than I thought he was going to and then
of course the shooting, and finally, I think you can
guess where this is going if you're watching on YouTube.
If Donovan Clinton just had more minutes, he might be
the rookie of the year. He's already one of the
most impactful rim protectors in the game. Pretty good screener,
definitely limited offensively. You worry about kind of the touch
around the basket, but for the things that he's able
to do, just defensively for Poland Trailblazers team again that
is I don't know if you would call them outright good,
but they're contending for a playing spot. I think if
he had more minutes under his belt, he would be
someone that would get more consideration, right.
Speaker 2: I only agree with one of those names, and that's
Lisa Shit, that's it. Basically, I don't think the rest
have a chance in hell, and I even still don't
really I think this is all down to Castle Lonstly.
I know Wells is a guy who's talked about like
Sam Masini, a man I greatly respect in terms of
his draft rep preparation, has Wells as his favorite rookie
of the year pick. I'm not there. I think the
offense is a little bit too streaky, a little bit
too not just inefficient because he's he's more efficient than
Castle on the season, but at least Castle asserts himself
in different ways where I think well is a little
bit more too reliant on who else is on the
floor with him. So to me, it's a one man race.
I have Stefan Castle pretty comfortably ahead.
Speaker 1: Honestly, that seems way too dismissive of what John Wells
has done for.
Speaker 2: The God I didn't get into the defense, but like
offensively speaking right, but like defensively he's rock solid, but
so is Castle. I kind of think defensively both of
them are pretty equal in that regard. Hell I might
even give Castle the not there. I'm not trying to
be dismissive of Wells. I'm definitely not. I think what
he's done over the course of this entire season is tremendous.
I just don't think he's got the consistency level the
volume behind him. I think Castle is carrying a larger
responsibility when he's on the floor. So it's again, love
Jay Wells, huge get for the Grizzlies, absolutely long term
starting wing. Don't have him close to Castle on.
Speaker 1: This There was khalil Ware was the betting favorite at
one point. Zach Dye is the advanced metrics love eating
more than I think probably anyone in the draft class
right now. You don't think that any By the way,
I think it's gonna between Castle and Wells. I want
to make that clear. I'm just trying to think of
players that could like emerge is because that third third
spot still feels pretty open, Like it looked like it
was gonna be a three player race at one point
between McCain, Castle and Wells, But now that McCain's out
of the fold, it's you could just go in like
a ton of different directions.
Speaker 2: Well, wouldn't it be at three?
Speaker 1: I don't think he's a no brainer three. Like I
do sometimes wonder if, like recency bias, it really impacts
us here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, maybe, I don't know. I like I do think
when it comes to rook of the year, that means
we only have one year to evaluate. So yeah, we
can definitely talk about recency bias, but we also have
to conclude the games even late in the season. If
they're playing well, I mean, we can't ignore that. And
if his efficiency, which you're absolutely right, is coming along nicely,
that sort of matters. I also think he defensively, he's
a bit underrated. I think he's very mistake free. He's
I think if I would rank it, I would go Castle, Wells,
Lisa's shit, and then there'll probably be a pretty huge gap, a.
Speaker 1: Huge gap between that that feels like way too far
for me. With Resa Scha and others. I don't know.
If you're waiting, I guess just like in terms of
minutes played, I don't even know where he ranks in
that now because I know he did miss some time,
but he is, Oh, he's no longer even he's seventh
in total minutes Blake, he's played. He's gonna play over
fifteen hundred minutes, which some of these rookies might not.
I just feel like, if you're looking at like, I
don't know, just like even Eves MESI like just say
that the zacharyche right now in world ahead of him.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So again it's it might be because of the
restricted nature of you know, is a rim running, defensive
minded center, where I think, you know, that's obviously important.
I'm not trying to diminish what he's done this year.
He's been outstanding, but I do think being a multi
purpose wing comes with more areas of expertise orry responsibilities,
and I think, especially in the second half of the season,
Ship has kind of lived up to that. But again,
like I'm just gonna reiterate myself, I think the clear
favorite here should be Stefan Castle.
Speaker 1: Take us to our next question, sir.
Speaker 2: Which non Calves Celtics team in the East is most
likely to make it to the Eastern Conference Finals. And
the guy who's asked the question is someone we just
shouldn't acknowledge doesn't exist. What the hell?
Speaker 1: Yeah, who even is Brian? To poor ek? This so I.
Speaker 2: Actually beats Pork, I don't even know if his name
is Brian's. That's a pretty big assumption on you. It
could be Bitch to Borick, We don't know.
Speaker 1: I think my answer here is going to be unpopular.
It probably should be the Knicks. I think it's the Pacers.
I think that they have more lineup levers to pull
in playoff series than either the Bucks or the Knicks
at this point. Maybe Jayalen Brunson missing time ends up
being a boon just for what he looks like come
the postseason. But I know Indy, there's definitely a there's
a very low floor on their defense, and it's probably
the success of it. It's probably more matchup dependent, but
the things that they can technically do with Siakam and
Turner and Nemhard specifically, and now that Knie Smith is back,
I just feel like in a playoff series where you're
gonna have time to more time to study the other team, Uh,
the fact that Indy has been what do they like,
league average in point slot per possession since February first,
and like they've kind of navigated this. It's an awkward
stretch from what I've seen of them, where they're racking
up losses, but yet they're still picking up wins that
maybe they shouldn't. So I think that just with the
depth and the talent and the versatility of that team,
I trust them to beat the Celtics or Calves more
than any of these other teams, which is all to
say I would be pretty shocked at this point if
we don't have Cave Celtics in the Eastern Conference Finals.
Speaker 2: Right. I go back and forth on the Pacers and
the Knicks, but you and I seem to be agreement
that if there is a team out there non Cave Celtics,
it's between those two. You know. I obviously trust the
top tier talent of New York far more than I
do the Pacers. But depth seems to be a recurring
theme for these guys, the Pacers, and they have more
of it. So that's a major boon. Now, would I
feel far more comfortable with the Pacers if tyres Halburton
went back to playing like he did in the first
half of the season last year. Yes, absolutely absolutely. I
still think he's I don't know if he's just saving
himself with the playoffs, but you know, when I watch
him play now, there's a part of me that's just
kind of waiting endlessly on him turning on the jets
and becoming you know, the version that we saw last year.
Speaker 1: What is it that you're I'm just curious, Yeah, playing
like really well for a few months now, he's.
Speaker 2: Saying, well, it's look, it's it's it's the volume. It's
the volume. Like last season, remember he was averaging twenty
six and twelve, and he was like setting the tone.
I think it led to a lot of other players
on the roster kind of falling in line, you know,
in terms of the hierarchy, to a point where it
was good for them to have these more established roles,
Like I do think now with tyresee, he's a little
bit too hesitant times. He's a little bit too not
reluctant to shoot. I don't want to say reluctant, because
he's not turning down open shots necessarily, but he's also
not forcing the issue as much as he should once
in a while where I think they There have been
games where I've been wondering at the end of them,
like what they've had a better chance of actually pulling
out a W if he'd been more assertive. So I
am missing something a little bit more. Can I hate
this word, but aggressive. I'm missing some aggressiveness from him.
I want to see him, you know, at least crack
seventeen shots per game, like just get up on the volume.
I think he's the best score of the team has.
I think he's the best player of the team has,
and I think they need to utilize it.
Speaker 1: I think that's probably fair. But I do think a
lot of the shot depression from him there could be
some hesitance caked in there. I feel like I don't
see it as much now maybe I haven't seen enough
of him. Would be more so just looking at the
offensive ecosystem of those around him, like the guys who
can eat up shots right now and you have a
healthy mathren nem Hard Siakam. And the other thing too
is sometimes they have to work so hard just to
get him the ball and shots because of how keyten
defenses are on him.
Speaker 2: But though that that faults on Carl. They need to
do it, though, because I would rather have and this
is I'm not trying to be harsh on Beneedic mathe
In here, but I would rather relinquish like two or
three shots per game from him and and like funnel
that towards Halle if I could. I understand your point though,
that it is so tough for him to get the
ball and actually be put in those places. But you know,
there's also that part of me that just goes, all right,
tough shit. You're a Mexican of guy, you have.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think when he's starting possessions, like when he's
bringing the ball up the court, Yeah, there are probably
just situations a bunch of them where he could be
more arrestive. I think that's fair to say. On the
Knicks front, I mean the Bucks that they have Giannis
and Dame, I just I haven't seen that can hit
them like seen them hit like this consistent enough peak
for me to believe in them. And with the Knicks,
I know, the stat going around is that they're third
in points lot per possession since Mitchell Robinson rejoined the lineup.
They're also twenty fifth in points scored per possession. During
that time. I know Jalen bruns And has missed some games,
Kat missed a little bit of time there too, But
those are all things because I just don't. I ultimately
feel like the Knicks's best lineup is still going to
lack like either like something major where it's oh, did
they wind up with a real number two score in
a playoff series?
Speaker 2: If it?
Speaker 1: Do you trust Towns for Michel Bridges to do that?
Does the math work out in their favor? O they're
taking enough threes? And then if that stuff works out,
it almost feels like it has to come at the
expense of the defense, which I don't know, Like I
just don't. I don't know if Mitchell Robinson is to
solve there for them, but that's they. I will say
they belong in the discussion, but I think because of
the personnel optionality that Indy has, I still tilt towards
them a little bit.
Speaker 2: Can I ask you a question about annobe Sure, do
you think given the contract that he's on, given what
the Knicks relinquished to get him everything of that nature,
do you think you're getting enough out of him as
currently constructed? Like defensively, I think he's there, But offensively,
do you think you're getting enough out of him?
Speaker 1: I think you're getting, for the most part, as much
much offensively out of O g Anobi as you ever
could have hoped to get. And by that, I mean
like you don't want him doing more stuff off the
dribble than he is right now, because sometimes it works out,
but there's not like a ton of feel there, and
so you don't. I think the bigger myss would be
if we look back and say, are you getting enough
offensively out of player X? It winds up being a
town's or h mckel mchel bridge's situation. And like you know,
mchaal hits a game winner against Portland the other night,
and when he gets to like those sort of fading
mid rangers like he can look really good. But there
are also times where it feels like he's the number
five option on the team, and that seems like the
bigger problem.
Speaker 2: Yeah, So to clarify, I don't want Annobe to do
more off the bouts, No, not at all. But I
am wondering if there are sets or plays that could
be implemented where the target is to get him more threes,
because I feel as though the Knicks are not a
strong enough three point shooting team. And given that Josh
Hart is you know, the weakest shooter in the in
the starting five and Mikhale is kind of all over
the map this year with the three ball, you sort
of need that third reliant shooter because I trust Jalen,
I trust Towns obviously, and Nobe is the guy who's
like third in line there of someone who I want
to see take more shots three specifically.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I guess it's I'm probably viewing it too much
through the lens of I think o Jannobe is maybe
the only player, aside from just knowing who Jalen Brunson is,
that's held up their end of sort of the three
point bargain. Like he's at six point one attempts per
game for the year and he's actually ratcheted that up
over the past you know, month and a half to
over seven and McHale Bridges meanwhile, is dipped below four.
But I think like, if you're looking at players to
take more, I honestly think it needs to start with
Towns or Bridges, And it's like in Towns, exchange of
those drives for just shooting those threes because I look
getting downhill like the Cornley Towns. Like, I understand the appeal.
I understand the appeal Michael getting to the spots, but
the math a lot of the times doesn't feel like
necessarily working out in New York's favor in some of
these games. Next question is more from Andreas. If you
were the Rockets, would you rather trade salary plus a
young player and two first round picks for Kevin Durant
or salary plus one to two young players and three
to four first round picks for Devin Booker.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So we've talked about this before, just in terms
of who, if anyone, the Rocket should go after. And
like I was always against like the Jimmy Butler Kevin
Durantz of the world because I thought they were too old.
I love what they've done in Houston. So Booker seems
to be like the reasonable aged star. Then they go
out and get who will still fit the timeline. Who
you know, you can relinquish some of the young guys
and you can still, you know, retain the vast majority
of the core. Yeah, you'd have to give up the
picks I would. I would go Booker because of the
age thing.
Speaker 1: I think it's Booker as well. And I've seen a
lot of sort of this hypothetical floating around of well,
I'd rather like keep Jalen Green in my three to
four first round picks than have Devin Booker, and there's
there's a real discussion to be had there. But I
do still think despite what we've seen this season in Phoenix,
where I don't believe that this is the best version
of Devin Booker. To me, that's part of the appeal
is that this hasn't been the best version of Devin Booker.
But he's not at an age where you could you
should expect Devin Booker, the top ten or fifteen player,
to have sort of dissipated from the discourse. Jalen Green
is still just one of those players who are Sam
Passini said this the other day on their pod, where
it's like he's the king of the last X Games,
split jail, that's Jalen Green, and like that's true. I mean,
maybe they get to the playoffs this year and he's
just lights out and he's an absolute killer. But I
think I lean the Devin Booker route because you're giving
up more picks, but you're like significantly lengthening your window.
Where with Kevin Durant, forget about the contract situation. How
many years are you buying yourself too? Like guarantee years.
I mean Kevin Durant's to fied age and injury. Let
me be clear. But that's just I'm always gonna pick,
not always, but in this case, I'm definitely picking. I'm
not a big that you know, the timelines need to
align guy necessarily when it's a team that's in the
rocket situation. But I'm gonna go with the younger booker
in this instance. And also I think he also provides
more of what they need when you look at the
half court playmaking. You want to take us to our
next question, is.
Speaker 2: There any player in the league you guys believe can
become a high level role player slash all start if
given more minutes, I have.
Speaker 1: Three my all start pick, to the surprise of no
one would be read Shepherd. I think if he had
more minutes. I'm not saying he would have been an
All Star this year. I think there's a chance if
they let him work through growing pains, like we might
be talking about him in the Rookie of the Year
conversation or the top three, so long term him for sure.
So I tried to like journey off the like these
are players that I really like. This This next one's injured.
He's been out since January fifth with I think it's
a toe injury. Aj Mitchell. That man can defend his
ass off. He can get into the lane with the ball.
He's excellent at moving away from the ball, and if
you can trust him to kind of hit stan still threes.
That's like a rotation player on a really good team.
And do you know how we know this? Mort He
was in the rotation for the Oklahoma City Thunder. I
know they were dealing with injuries, but that's absurd as
a two way player on the Oklahoma City Thunder and
my final one. He is pictured for those watching on YouTube.
I'm a Bobby Clintman guy. We have not seen much
of him this year's rookie year with Detroit. I think
he's shooting like sub twenty eight percent from three. I
do trust that he will provide some stretch eventually. He
can do. He moves really well defensively, and I think
he could be disruptive, not just as just like being
all over the place. But this is a dude that
will block jump shots, and so I think that he
can turn into like a real NBA player. So those
are like my three levels. As Shepherd is the guy.
If he gets more minutes, I think he's the star.
AJ Mitchell is kind of the star role player guy.
This would be Bobby Clinton would be Oh. I think
that he can be an NBA player if he if
he gets minutes.
Speaker 2: He grew up about twenty kilometers for me. So yeah,
I support it.
Speaker 1: That's the That's that's why I chose him, obviously.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, no, that's interesting. Look, I don't have that upside
for Clinton. I like him, but I I hope you're
right because that would put Scandon even more on the
basketball map. So I don't hate it. I absolutely don't don't.
Speaker 1: Why don't you feel that way about him?
Speaker 2: Well, first and foremost, I need more data before i'm Secondarily,
he seems like a bit of a I know we
shouldn't use this word in twenty twenty five in the
NBA because when we say sweener that's almost a compliment nowadays.
But I don't know whether his role is something that
is going to be properly streamlined. I don't necessarily trust
a jump shot, yet I hope that it comes along.
He says, what is he like? Twenty one, twenty two?
Twenty one?
Speaker 1: Somewhere I think he's twenty one twenty one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, like we're I'm not at that point where I'm like,
I'm ruling him out, but I don't think I have
that upside yet too.
Speaker 1: He's twenty two apparently, so excuse me.
Speaker 2: I look.
Speaker 1: I also I'm just kind of like a sucker for
someone who might have some passing feel too. And the
tweeter stuff is interesting because I kind of thought, defensively
if he wasn't so like, it looks like he's really
good on the perimeter, but I wonder how he would
handle against like more athletic wings and forwards, And then
you get into the conversation of, oh, should he technically
be a big but he's what is he? Six nine?
That's not really center material. So that's but as someone
who sticks on an NBA roster, that's that's who I'm
going with. That's the I don't think Detroit has a
reason to give him more minutes, but I'd like to
see him get more minutes.
Speaker 2: So one of the names that I would have brought
up and it's it's it's interesting because he's starting to
like prove it now. And that's Quintin Grimes. He's a
guy who ever since I started the season for the Mavericks,
I was like, yep, this guy's got another level. He's
living up to that right now. So very happy to
see that. That's a feather in my cap, something that's
not been a feather in my cap. And I'm still
I'm sticking on this island. It's Trenton Watford, damn it,
give me some more Trenton Watford minutes Brooklyn Nets. Here's
the thing, because now I'm gonna actually take a page
off of your book. He can grab and go, he
can pass on the move like there is something there.
There's some on ball juice that I think is interesting.
He also does big man things. He rebounds, he scores inside.
He also shoots from the outside, by the way, so
that's like it's not just big man things. I would
be curious to see him in a bigger role or
on a better team. I'm not saying he's going to
be like an All Star, but I do think he
could become a high level role player. I think there's
some juice there.
Speaker 1: He's probably first team All eye Test, and then the
numbers almost never match up with it, like he's for sure,
Like he's for sure that time. Because I'm with you,
I like Trendon Watford too. I also will say he
should not be in this discussion. And it's only his
first year, so you shouldn't necessarily be selling stock. I
will remain a believer in Cody Williams for at least
the next year or two.
Speaker 2: So I actually have one that's really really sicko.
Speaker 1: Is it more get more sicko than Bobby Clintman?
Speaker 2: That's the real Yeah, I think so, Marshaun Bochamp, it's not.
Is he even in the NBA right now?
Speaker 1: Didn't did the Clippers waive him? I can't remember. I don't.
Speaker 2: I don't. I don't remember if he's even on a
roster right now. I don't think the walk it gave
him a fair shake. I think he's got an NBA
ready body. I think he's got NBA athleticism.
Speaker 1: A two way for the next I do.
Speaker 2: I yeah, I forgot about that. I think his I
don't think his jump shot is I actually think his
jumper is kind of pretty and symmetrical. I think there's
something there. I would love to see him, but like
go to a team and get a substantial role. The
problem with the challenge is he's what twenty I've already
h twenty four, twenty four, Okay, like it's up there,
right so, but it's just if that's the same with
Trenton Wott for two, like twenty four, it's like you're
on that, You're on that age like where it's like, oh,
it's getting dicey. It has to be within the like
the next like eighteen months, and if it doesn't shake out,
that's that's all she wrote, right So, But I actually
am still a believer in Marsha and Poachin.
Speaker 1: This is another name too that I considered. He's getting
like he gets some minutes, but his role has been
so inconsistent, and I think he would I think he
can really help like an actually good basketball team, Vic Crachie.
It's just like someone that I think should be if
he like, if he's on your team, give him the
consistent and he's getting that like in his most recent run,
but like give him the consistent twenty plus minutes per game.
I think he sort of helps you and I will
say the way that Eric Collins announces him. I'm inclined
to just say Damian Ba in Charlotte. It's just like
a name that I should believe in is becoming that
he gets Eric Collins, I need him to narrate my life.
Man just hypes me up no matter who he's talking about,
and add some flavor to Charlotte Hornet's basketball, which at
this point is tough to do. Anybody else you'd like
to nominate before we.
Speaker 2: Move on, I think we're good.
Speaker 1: Next up, who was the superior former Sixers mascot? Big
Shot or hip hop? That comes from the lotus.
Speaker 2: That hip hop? Come on? Of course it's hip hop?
What are we doing here?
Speaker 1: It's just was big Shot named after Chauncey Billips, head
coach of the Detroit Pistons.
Speaker 2: I don't know, but Big Sean's wearing a fucking diaper.
I'm not with that. Hip hop was like the Allan
Irison era backy clothing, like leaned up against the identity
of their superstar. It's hip hop, man.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, I think aesthetically I agree with you for shure.
Speaker 2: He's a bunny though, because he's himming and hopping shore
but like, that's he looks like.
Speaker 1: Have you seen any of like the Blink on eighty
two cover albums that have the drug Bunny on it?
That's what that's what hip hop looks like. Is if
he's wearing sunglasses. To me, look, I would hear.
Speaker 2: You that hip hop is cleaning up in the clubs.
Speaker 1: Most important question we've received so far. Thank you for that,
but hello, what's this next question?
Speaker 2: More? What's your issue with the Kate Cunningham Most Improved
Player case? Mort Denmark is your future state OnlyFans sixty
nine xoxo. That's great, that's a fantastic question. All right.
My issue is not with Kate Cunningham in particular, because
I love Kate Cunningham. My issue is that the Most
Improved Player award has become the next Star Award instead,
Like Kate Cunningham averaged twenty two point seven points last
year and seven and a half assists. I'm sorry, Like,
when you're averaging roughly twenty three to eight, I just
cannot in good conscience look at that as an MIP
player the year after Because the MIP Award used to
be given to guys who kind of came out of nowhere.
So I'm in favor of splitting the award, like you
can have your Jam Moran types and Kate Cunningham's and
then just call it the Next Star Award, but give
me the most Improved Player Award to like Christian Brown.
Like I on the NBA podcast, I had this thing
with Brian for years where I had a criteria myself.
I said, no lottery picks and no second year guys,
like if a guy had been a lottery pick, no,
this for me disqualified with the notion, of course, that
if Anthony Bennett suddenly comes back into the league and
starts averaging eighteen and eight, yeah, I'm gonna waive that
rule for that year because that's that's in the spirit
of the award, where it's it's a surprise, it's something nice,
it's something that came out of left field, Like I
didn't I didn't know. Nobody knew that Christian Brown would
be dis efficient, Like did you know that he'd be
shooting in the mid fifties all year long? I didn't know, Like,
did you know he'd be that consistent all year long?
I didn't know. I think that is in the spirit
of the award, So I have no issue with Kate
cunning him. I have the issue of the award being
a you know, estaplished star popularity contest.
Speaker 1: My first instinct is to say that it feels like
unfair to say that because you were a lottery pick,
you can't be the most improved player in the NBA.
But I've gone back and forth on the second year
criteria because I say you're supposed to make a huge
jump from year one to year two, you're kind of
expounding upon that and applying it to the entire lottery.
So I think it would make me a hypocrite to
dismiss it. I think it's absolutely possible for bigger names
to be the most improved players in the NBA. I like,
and I don't know that disqualifying people because they're support
like year one to year two feels different because that's
it's not just oh, you're supposed to get better, that's
when you would make the mega leap. But like, are
you how do you differentiate between Like Christian Brown is
a good example because he's not working off this sort
of non existent or low baseline, whereas Ti Jerome as
an example who's received some love here too. Yeah, just
compared to his former self, he's one of the most
improved players in the NBA. Right, how do you differentiate
between opportunity and actual improvement for you then? And why
does that differentiation then just qualify someone like Kid cunning
Like I'm not saying Kay cunninghamserifically this season, but someone
who's in Kid's Cunningham spot, where he's already an established
name or was drafted with a high pick.
Speaker 2: I hear you. So here's the thing. If you're given
more minutes and you're given a bigger role, I don't
think we can sit there and assume that the player
was just as talented the year before, because we have
to make the assumption that the player would probably have
played otherwise if he'd been that good. Now, is that
flawed logic? Because there are stupid coaches out there who
won't play certain players. Absolutely, But we're not privy to that.
Like we're not privy to what goes on in the
locker room. We have no idea if ty Jerome was
actually ready to play at that level last year. We
have no clue. The only thing we can go off
is the data we're given year to year. So while
I hear you on the you know, given more of
an opportunity, more minutes, you know, bigger role. We can't
sit there and say, oh, this guy was just as
good last year. We just we cannot say it if
we didn't see it, because then we're just kind of guessing.
I'm not saying that Kate isn't improved. I'm not saying
that jam Moran back in the day wasn't improved. But
what I'm saying is that when you're giving these like
when you want to give this award to guys who
were like, you know, a formal Rookie of the Year
or you know, put in Kate's case, like top three
Rookie of the Year voter, it's like no, Like I'm sorry,
but being drafted high comes with a certain level of expectation.
If you also win the freaking Rookie of the Year, yeah,
you're sort of solidified. Like again, we're gonna assume you're
gonna get better in year two, year three, moving onwards,
and there's just you know what it is, Dan, I'm
gonna just gonna boil town to something else. And this
is very unlike me because I'm a I'm a hold
bastard I'm a robot, but this is about feelings. This
is about seeing a nice story as well. This is
very much also narrative driven, and we can call it
something else if we want to, like stick the label
with the most improved to Kate and John. Those guys fine,
But there needs to be an award that encapsulates the
feeling of seeing someone take this dramatic leap that we
can celebrate that where we can say, oh, this guy
sort of came out of nothing, or he sort of
came out of left field. He defied expectations. Like Kate
Cunningham right now is not defying expectations for me. He
is realizing his potential as I figured he would, as
did millions of other NBA fans. Christian Brown is a surprise.
Tied to Rome is a surprise. Dyson Daniels is a surprise.
Those guys I feel are far more deserving in the
spirit of the award then guys who we already know
are good and who will get plenty of awards or
All Star Games or whatever. So I feel like that
award deserves to go to someone who isn't going to
be handed medals and awards for years on end.
Speaker 1: I think that makes some sense. It would be and
I'm always a like defined criteria would be nice because
then it makes it easier to pick from the pool
of players, and right now it's sort of undefined. So
when the year that Larry marketed won it and it
was between him and SGA, you were a Larry Marketing guy,
then I was not.
Speaker 2: No. I mean again, a former lottery pick. He'd done
pretty well for the Bulls before that. He had a
year where he was averaging like nineteen to nine, so
I was very much against that. I thought that was ridiculous.
Speaker 1: So you thought both him and SGA being involved in
it was ridiculous.
Speaker 2: So I have to remember the SGA year specifically. That
was the year he came off of the nineteen point
year in Okay, see you right, I believe.
Speaker 1: So I'll double check though.
Speaker 2: Because at that point, again it was a known commodity.
I think all of us were like, oh, this dude
is really good, this dude is like right up there.
So again it had to be yeah, I guess in
that instance.
Speaker 1: Though, what's interesting is this is someone who so twenty
twenty two, twenty twenty three is the year I'm talking
about where he went from twenty four and a half
points per game the year before and then was over thirty.
This is someone who went from being like an All
Star or a fringe All Star to entering the MVP discussion.
Speaker 2: Right then call it and make another award that's called
the Next Star Award for that for that type of
that would.
Speaker 1: Be fair, like that would be then you just have
two separate winners. I think that would be but as
but as long as it's set up this way, I
feel that it would be unfair to exclude those types
of jumps because I think you can make the case
that going from what Christian Brown did and maybe even
the way you're looking at it like you're rewarding their improvement,
You're like in net where it's like you're looking at
from when he was a rookie to now, so you're
looking at most improved like during a span.
Speaker 2: Whereas absolutely year to year for sure, don't worry that
year to year.
Speaker 1: Let's say Christian Brown last year to this year, Like
that's a really tough leap to make, and he deserves
most improved player consideration. But it couldn't you argue that
if you're already at such a high level. Making the
leap to that even higher from All Star to m
VP candidate is the harder leap to make. So as
as it's defined now or set up now, shouldn't that
then be considered. I know you're not for it, but like,
just given the lay of the land at this moment
is where I.
Speaker 2: Understand what you're saying. I think for me, I'm kind
of baking that in. You know, like Shae for example,
I think it's a good example of that. Like Shaye
was since his rookie See's and honestly, for people who
paid attention to the Clippers that year, and there weren't
a lot of people who did, so, it was pretty
clear that this guy was an insane fun.
Speaker 1: To Bays Harris and Neil gallinaries.
Speaker 2: I mean a lot of people would disagree with you,
but yes, I for for usos it was fun when
he made it to Okay see even that first year
when he was like at nineteen point that was with
Schroeder and CP three. I believe right that was like
the trio.
Speaker 1: It was pretty evident, Yeah, was the Bubble Trio the.
Speaker 2: Bub I think it was pretty evident that all right,
there's a future all star here, like pretty substantially, you
know a guy who would would absolutely rise in the rings.
I understand your point of like going from All Star
to MVP. I get that, but again then it's another tier.
It's a different case because it just becomes so elitist
if we only look at it through that prison him. Again,
there has to be and a place for role players
to get some shine on the national scene. In regards
to awards, I don't give a flying fuck if you
then call the most improved player like the next like
if you hand that to the next Star and then
you give another moniker to like the Christian Brown, Dyson
Danielschot Tide Robes of the world, I don't give a fuck.
I just think those guys who come sort of out
of left field deserve their shine, and I think right now,
the most Improved Player award is the best way to
do that.
Speaker 1: Who's your most improved player? Where do you land on
the lake career stuff? Like Norm Powell before he was
he's going to be ineligible.
Speaker 2: So it's interesting with Norm right because he did something
that we haven't seen before in terms of the volume.
We have seen him be you very good before, like
He's had years of averaging nineteen points per game eighteen
and a half points per game, so we know that
he's had the talent to be there before. But given
his particular leap and the fact that he could remain
so efficient considering, you know that the Clippers weren't exactly
expected to be a great offense. Not that they're like,
but you know what I mean. So I think he's
certainly up there. My biggest gribe is when guys come
back from injury, it's like where it should be, like
the Comeback Player of the Year.
Speaker 1: We should have. That would be a fun award too.
Speaker 2: I would be a fun award. I would, but that's fun,
Like I don't want Like, remember when grand Hill came
back after a year off and he was getting MIP consideration, Like,
what the fuck are we doing? Grand Hill who was
like a superstar averaging twenty five points per game in
his last year in Detroit, like all NBA first team,
like Michael Jordan Air before he went down with injuries,
and you're like, oh, most improved player, What the fuck? Man?
That was the dumbest shit ever. You didn't get it, fortunately,
So but that like that one, I'm very much against
you should have a comeback player for the your award
that should basically named the Grand Hill Award for what
he did because those injuries were gone awful.
Speaker 1: Yeah, would you shift your stance if it was something wholesale?
And by this I mean I'm trying to what would
be a good example. Let's just say like next year
Zion wins Defensive Player of the Year doing something like that.
Do you think that fits? Like, oh, he's Zion Williamson,
but he was never expected to be this and he
just became the best defensive player in the end, Like,
how do you wait that I'm being I'm just playing
Devil's advocate.
Speaker 2: I'm not That's that's interesting. Okay. I will say this
if Sion Williamson or someone of his ilk, someone tre
Young makes all defense next because Zion has improved defensively.
Speaker 1: That's what and he he has in theory the tools. Yeah,
and Trey Young has gotten better defensively, but nowhere near
all defense level.
Speaker 2: Yeah right, Okay, So who's actually like, let's actually find
the worst defender in the NBA, Like, who is that?
Is that? Trey Young?
Speaker 1: I think you can probably like, who's the most picked
on defender in the NBA. But like, I don't there's
just pick a bad defender. I don't like the worst
defender in the NBA is such a subjective like that's whatever.
Speaker 2: All right, okay, but if Trey Young, but like, if
Trey Young comes back next year, wins Defensive Player of
the Year and he becomes I don't even know that's
going to materialize.
Speaker 1: So we could do this like it would be but
this is like, that's a player who fits the bill.
So I'll go by dumpson threes defensive EPM. Just like,
who's the big name that ranks the lowest? Because the
worst defender by the air metric is Corey Kissburg. But
he's someone who in theory could win Defensive Player of
the Year by your criteria. Uh, there's not like a
ton of big names.
Speaker 2: You mean most improved player by Mike.
Speaker 1: So I get like, so Jalen Green he's the lowest,
like of like of a big name. There we go, yes,
all right, he's an all defense level defender next year.
Speaker 2: No, no, no, he if he wins Defensive Player of
the Year, that's that's right here. If Jane Green suddenly
interests next year or it comes in next year and
he averages like three steals per game at block. That's
just the raw stats because you have to back that up.
And his defensive influence is ridiculous, like he's switching everything
and he's just like hounding guys understanding, like you know,
kyp fully, like he's just he's he's got this esp
on the basketball court. Yes, all right, I'll bet my
fucking rules, Okay, shifted.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to know where the line was.
Speaker 2: We found it. That's where we are, Like again, like
that's that's where we are. That's where we are. That's
it would have to be such a wild situation for me,
Like you know who I picked going into this year,
Trenton Watford, and I have egg on my face, which
is fair enough, but at least I'm sticking to the
guys who I think is in the spirit of the award.
And by the way, I was so fucking close on
Christian Wood back in the day, who I called before this.
I also called Jalen Johnson before last season, so close.
I've got a pretty good track record with these guys.
Speaker 1: My most improved player has been a disaster ever since
I picked Precious to Chewa coming in a few years ago.
Fits the spirit of your award though, and he actually improved,
which he did not. Let's get to this next question.
It comes from Andreas another kind of Pistons focused one
three straight Detroit or Pistons ones. Should Detroit stay patient
with their core or should they trade for a genuine
number two this offseason?
Speaker 2: Are we sure they don't have a genuine number two?
We just haven't seen Jade and Ivy more than thirty
games this year.
Speaker 1: Well, I think that would fall under the patients.
Speaker 2: Yeah right, yeah, sure, But like the word genuine implies
that they don't have a number two, right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I guess I don't know where the land on
j and Ivy. I know a lot of Pistons fans
are think that you should kind of throw out his
rookie year because of Moni Williams, and then now we're
gonna have to throw out another year because of his injury.
I just don't know where the line is on that
I would probably do something. So I want to make
it clear I'm not going all in to go get
a number two. Where we mentioned remember we mentioned Zion
as like a like a as a Detroit Pistons trade option.
Just throwing ideas around. I would probably try, and this
is such a cop out, straddle that middle ground to
where it's can I get somebody who might fit the
bill of a stop gap number two while we figure
it out with whether it's Jay and Ivy or if
you think it's Ron Holland or Asar Thompson for some reason,
like CJ. McCollum would be a good example. Can you
just get him for nothing but like outgoing money? All right,
I'm just I'm just throwing a name out there where
it's you want, like I mean, especially with I mean
Malik Beasley and Tim Hardaway Junior are free agents and
they're both not going to be back getting someone who's
better at creating off the dribble and theory conceptually, at
least CJ. McCollum, like just doing something like that where it's, oh,
I'll make a trade for someone who could be a
stop gap number two, but I'm not trading future first
round picks.
Speaker 2: Yeah that makes sense, that makes sense. Yeah, I probably
do that. Not CJ specifically, you know, doesn't fit the
timeline either to too expensive too, Like I just don't
I don't see the point really in getting a guy
like that in there and taking away shots from guys
who he.
Speaker 1: Doesn't take that. He doesn't take away shots though, because
he fits into larger ecosystems.
Speaker 2: We've seen that in New Orlands shots away from Jayden.
Speaker 1: Why if if Jaden's the one operating on ball or
you're running you, I guess if you're your concern is
just are they gonna be inclined to run CJ independent
of Kid more so than Jayden at that point or something.
So I just don't view I mean, especially this year
in Detroit, I don't know how you could look at
the like the players they've played and think that some
of the veterans are going to infringe upon development. Would
I guess just be my stance.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean I'm looking at guys, so first and
foremost Kate is putting up twenty shots per game. I'm
assuming that we're gonna see improvements also to Duran, to
Ron holland like there are also Tooms for example, Like
I'm going to assume that those guys are gonna get
big roles, Like if CJ comes in and it's sort
of like playing off of all those sure, as long
as it's not everyone else playing off of CJ. Yeah,
I'm cool with it.
Speaker 1: I would say, though, what the Pistons have done this year,
I think it like invites patients because I think one
of the worst things.
Speaker 2: What's that most improved team? Yeah?
Speaker 1: They I mean they are the most improved team. But
I also think you see some teams get in this
situation and they they over index. I'm trying to win
even more now, and progression is just not linear. So
I would like if we had to pick, if this
is binary of it, it has to be you trade
for a number two or you wait. I'm like without
doing anything. I'm waiting without doing anything because I think
that in the long run, if it doesn't work out,
is less damaging than the former.
Speaker 2: Is that how we give Kaid a most improved award
just by making a most improved team award?
Speaker 1: Well, you should all thought, because there's actually a question
on something like that coming up. What's our next question?
Speaker 2: More any thoughts on Shack's recent comments about the Pistons
being boring and getting both their record and head coach wrong. Well,
my thoughts would probably require that I hire a lawyer first, So.
Speaker 1: I mean it has to be tiresome. There's just no
I don't. I don't even know what normal fan I'm like,
and I don't maybe I don't follow MLB or NFL
or n HL closely enough to just be like, actually
has to care about the people who are covering the
sport actively hating the sport on these major platforms like
this shouldn't even have to be a question, honestly, like
if we and if you thought it was a bit,
but like even if it's a bit, it's tired, and
so my thoughts on it is that it's just not cool.
I'm not saying they have to hero worship the game,
but like actually cover it, actually watch it, know who's
like at least don't pretend to not know who the
coach of the Pistons is because it's just like you're
supposed to be an authority on this and it's it's honestly,
it's embarrassing, and it's just so I don't know what
it is about the NBA, and maybe it just is
the coverage, but where fans are have to sit through
you and I talk about ratings and is the game
covered properly enough? And does one of the broadcast partners
with primary employees like of the studio show know who's
coaching a team that they're supposed to be watching. Do
they consider certain teams boring even though they're good. I
just it's it should be embarrassing. And I don't know,
I do view like the TNT and even I mean,
I don't view Espan as entertainment, but like when you're
looking at the TNT guys they are trying to enter,
there's like a showmanships there that's on purpose where sometimes
it feels like they're in on the joke. But stuff
like this that's not like if it ever was funny,
it's not funny anymore. And if it's authentic to where
you don't know that doesn't have to know their exact record,
but to not even like to think that Chauncey Billups
is coaching them, like my god, and to sit through
the podcast of not just forget about former players even
who are gonna be conditioned to think their error was better,
I'm sure, but like the current players who will like
say things along those lines are just like dismissed teams
like okay, se hasn't done it yet, or pretending I
know things, or just say even if you think there's
too many threes to just go into it and say
the three point shot has ruined the game and uses
a blanket statement without providing like any additional like context
or reasoning behind it. I just don't. I don't are
any other is any other sports coverage or consumption like this?
And I guess you and I are complicit in making
it like this because we're responding to it. I don't know.
It's just it's so wacky to me.
Speaker 2: You just did the PG version of what I wanted
to say, which is why I made the lawyer joke initially,
because I cannot talk about this unless I or rather
without getting enraged. That's where I am. This is one
of those things that just strikes me at the I
need to shut up because I can sense that rage
building inside of me. You basically said everything that needed
to be said. I shouldn't add my two cents because
I'm going to say something that I'm gonna regret. I
I but just know that everything you just said I'm fully,
fully in agreement.
Speaker 1: The next question comes from Matti L. This is a
run of three questions just for you. You're entering the
pressure cooker. Okay, I'm the current Bulls fan name your
all time starting five.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm not a current Bulls fan.
Speaker 1: Name your Bulls all time starting five.
Speaker 2: Umm, Joe Qiem Noah, Well all right, we have to go. Yeah,
so Joe Kim Noah for sure? Who's the four. That's
a good question, Todd Gibson, that those two had in
fantastic chemistry. Yeah, it's no, it's it's probably Dennis was
in the light later prime, of the latter stages of
his prime. I'm actually gonna say, Horace, I think Patrick,
I know, I know obviously, Scotty at the three, Mike
at the two, I don't know. Derek. The spacing issues
there are just gonna be grotesque. Lonzo Ball at the one,
the thirty five game version of Lonzo Ball that we
got before his injury. Absolutely, now I see. I think
at the point you need someone who's like a playmaker
and who's like a shooter. But the posters just don't
have shooters, like is it, Kirk Heinrich.
Speaker 1: I think all time starting fives, I feel like are
often built in the vein of not caring about fit,
in which if it's.
Speaker 2: If it's only tail, yeah, I gotta I gotta go. Derek,
then even though, I'm yeah, I have some reservations about
that guy.
Speaker 1: From Matti L Name your favorite Bulls front office of
all time.
Speaker 2: That's a tough one. I mean, Jerry Krause has to
be the one because he ultimately helped build the championship teams.
It's definitely not guard Packs, It's definitely not ak so
like by default, Jerry his team. Finally, God, what are
we doing here?
Speaker 1: There's a different structure. There's different structures that you can
try to get your championship. There are two or three
star players and a lot of role players, or you
can build it as not nine or ten very good players.
I think now we're leaning towards having a lot of
solid good players nine or ten. My question is how
many of the current Bulls players would, if the statement
was true, be a part of that team.
Speaker 2: Oh see, now, okay, that's actually a very good question.
That could be a podcast in and of itself. Obviously,
he's alluding to what our chorist Cardne Show was sent,
which was can we just talk about that for a second?
How dumb was that? How dumb was hold on?
Speaker 1: Which thing that he said?
Speaker 2: Oh the ten good places? You didn't see this after
the traded line.
Speaker 1: No I did. I saw the thing about him not
knowing what, which basically we have the concepts of a plan.
Speaker 2: That was I saw that one of the things. So
he kind of elaborated what he said was that he
actually thought you could win a championship with nine or
ten very good players without them being stars necessarily. Like
he basically described a lesser version of the two thousand
and four Detroit Pistons as a means of we can
win with nine or ten good players, which is obviously
acidine because in recent history showed me a team that's
one without a superstar, right, Like, that's just not a thing.
So that's that's the thing that Maddie Ella is referencing,
which is just egregeous, like management and an egregious perspective
from a manager. So nine or ten good players, well.
Speaker 1: Let's come we can we can reframe it to how
many current Bowls players could be a part of the
like the top eight of a championship rotation championship.
Speaker 2: That's a good one. Kobe White, I guess as a
six man on a good team, I think that I
would buy that, right, Yeah, for sure?
Speaker 1: What about ioh.
Speaker 2: Top eight? He'd be eight. Okay, if anything, and that's
top seven, hass to be slapping?
Speaker 1: What about Londo?
Speaker 2: I want like the thirty five gamer a couple of
years ago. Sure, the current version? Nah?
Speaker 1: Maddy did say current? Okay? What all right?
Speaker 2: This is?
Speaker 1: This might be a tough one. What about Julian Phillips.
Speaker 2: I actually like Julian Phillips. He surprised me a little
bit this year. But no, no, not not the current
Julian Phillips. Julian Phillips in like three years. Maybe we
have a conversation.
Speaker 1: So you're not prepared to like Vooch or Herd or like,
you're only prepared to guarantee that Kobe White could be
a top eight.
Speaker 2: Absolutely.
Speaker 1: I might throw Io in there, but I might kind
of smitten by Io, so I recognize.
Speaker 2: Like I said, I like I would be eighth, but
like distant eighth, right, like the guy you bring in
after you have gone tips on everyone and playing like
your top seven guys forty plus minutes.
Speaker 1: Then I mean, I guess the way. But this might
be unfair because Cleveland's like the pinnacle of depth. But
it's like if Io was on the Cavaliers, would he play.
Speaker 2: That's a good question. Would he I don't know.
Speaker 1: He would for sure play in Boston, Okay, so he
found a way to give aj Mitchell minutes. He'd probably playing. Okay,
see so he played.
Speaker 2: You're right, he'd playing in Boston. I don't know what
the hell's up with honestly.
Speaker 1: To be fair, Io would play on the Nuggets, he'd
play on the Knicks, he'd play on the Bucks. So like,
if you go through the second tierenders like he would,
that's fair.
Speaker 2: All right, let's sen Kobe White and Io. That's those
are probably the two ones that I I'd So.
Speaker 1: If we gave you the over under of two and
a half, you'd take the under.
Speaker 2: I would, yes, all right. Notice, however, by the way
that Josh Ginty did not feature, I just don't.
Speaker 1: I mean he to be fair, he played like some
of his better basketball of his career. But I think
thunder fans recently, I mean, I think thunder fans have
to be watching that like Bulls fans or Bulls media
talking about it and sort of like, oh first time.
Speaker 2: Like let's just good.
Speaker 1: Look he's peaking at the right time for his next contract.
So I mean, kudos to his wallet. I guess. I guess, yes,
all right, more this one you can read it.
Speaker 2: I feel like it'd be fun to award more team
level stuff in the regular season, like best O, d Stocks,
most improve et cetera. Not that it stand for much
in real life, just a curiosity mactin for folks to
want to learn about how cool shit it is growth chain, drivers, tactics,
coorse gelling or blossoming together, fans to take pride in
something anything besides the title from think shink.
Speaker 1: That was when you were talking about most Improved Team award.
This is the question alluding to I would hate that,
Like I.
Speaker 2: Generally more awards, especially team oriented awards. I love that,
Like if we also apply it to like coaching staffs
and managerial teams, like you know, instead of Executive the
Year or coach of the year, coaching staff of the
year or maybe not maybe not even replace it, just
add to it, or managerial team of the year, like
front office of the year.
Speaker 1: That's a front office of the year. That should be
executive of the year. If you're only looking at it
as like a one person thing, I'm not saying you do.
But that's not a one person thing. So I like
the idea of most improved team. But even if you
did that or most surprising team like pleasantly surprising team,
it'd be funny if they had a most Disappointing Team award.
Speaker 2: I would love that. I would love that you should
call the Feenix Suns Award. Yes, my one.
Speaker 1: Concern, and it's not so much a concern. I just
wonder if we had a most surprising or most improved team,
what do you think would be the correlation between that
team and then Coach of the Year, Because doesn't it
feel like a lot of the times, like Coach of
the Year goes to that team.
Speaker 2: It does. Yes, that's a very good point, Like we'd
have to differentiate somehow.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so I don't know, like, but I would be
all for like some type of a team where I
think most improved team is kind of the the easiest
way to go. Best offense and defense kind of feels.
I know we have scoring title and stuff, but that
feels just a little too easy. Where it's okay, this
team was first in offensive rating, they had the best.
Speaker 2: It's just super specific, like the best team in stocks
just as an that's a sickle award for sure. I'm
not sure the broader public would even understand it. Stock
what the best Stock team of the year? What the fuck?
Speaker 1: Maybe like the most Aggressive Defense award or something. Yeah,
where it's like it's a it's a subset of a
larger categor like the best shooting team and then like
the like the most aggressive defensive team or something.
Speaker 2: I don't know, I'm honestly I'm all for it. And
here's the thing we talk about wanting to add these awards.
I fucking forget who wins the day after. So it's
like it's not even something that I'm like remembering, but
I just think it'd be fun in the moment.
Speaker 1: It's hashtag content for in the moment. Yeah, I'm with
you on that one. Our next question, Oh, it's a
super important one from Lucas Kaplan. What's the best cheesecake topping? Oh,
I will let you know there's a backstory here. I
have a friend and she owns a dessert shop near me,
and she doesn't have cheesecakes on her menu, and I'll
never I won't even name drop the store on this
podcast in case people try to order stuff and she
gets mad at me because she has like a pretty
big social media following. She makes me custom cheesecakes, Like
I come up with flavors and she'll make me custom cheesecakes.
The best one I've ever had is she makes me
a cinnamon bun cheesecake that is so good. So I
would say that like cinnamon bun filling as a topping.
Or she's also made me cookie dough cheesecake and then
she'll put cookie dough balls on top of the cheesecake
in addition to like baking in or infusing it with
cookie dough.
Speaker 2: So what's what's the Yeah, what do you call the crumble? Like?
What is that?
Speaker 1: Is that?
Speaker 2: Is that from like crackers? Or is it like sponge cake?
Like what's the bottom?
Speaker 1: The bottom of which one? Like any of the cakes?
Speaker 2: What does she uses space for the cheesecake? Does she
use like crumple or like you know, cracker crumples or
like sponge cake or like what what does she use?
Speaker 1: And for the crust? Is that what you're saying?
Speaker 2: Yeah, crust?
Speaker 1: I think that's like like crumbs, like or like the
like Graham cracker type stuff, or sometimes it's oreos or
like the crust. Yeah, oh nice, So it's like a
cookie crust would be the best I think is the
best way. I'm not I'm not a like a dessert
tear like a dessert expert. I just know what I
like to eat.
Speaker 2: So so my wife is a big cheesecake a ficionado
as well, and she like, if I buy one ever
that's like, you know, pre made, She's just like, I'm
not gonna eat any of that. Fuck that, Like she
wants to make her own. And she came up with
because look the one you just presented, it sounds delicious,
sounds a little too sweet for my taste, Like I
love something again, I'm Scandinavian. We eat liquorices and all that,
like we look like something that's not like too too
like sweet on sweet.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I want my desserts because I don't have desserts often.
I want my desserts to be on pedes.
Speaker 2: Right, And that's totally fair. So my wife made one
with like I don't even know what you call it
in English. It's not a gel, but it was it's
like a mang I'm gonna call it gel even though
it's not like a mango gel on top.
Speaker 1: And like a jelly is that where you're.
Speaker 2: Not even a jelly is I'm kind of I don't like,
I'm never spoken about pastries in to this extended English,
so I don't have the woods for it, Like I
just flat out don't know. But that was still is
shoes and it wasn't like she she didn't use like
store bought mangio pure ors like she bought mango. She
did the whole things herself. Like she's really good at
making cakes. I've shown this on social media as well.
She's made like like cars like cake, you know, out
of cake and whatnot to to to our kids and whatnot.
She's great. That's the best cheesecake I've ever had, Like that,
you know, the mangl thing where she added just the
right amount of like lemon juice for like the savory
a little bit what do you call that, like the nuts,
the sourness of it, and then just the right amount
of shorts balance it. And it was great. It was great.
Like that's that was to me, is the best cheesecake topic,
Like if you do the mangle thing right to each.
Speaker 1: Their own, but get fruit all the way from I dessert.
Really I'm just not I'm like not that again, I
guess because I don't have it enough off, So I
really want to feel like I'm doing something wrong right
Maybe is that like mentally is what it is. I
will also say, perhaps the most underrated topping is cookie butter,
like a cookie butter frosting and like covering around the cheesecakes.
She's made me before to die for. Okay again, deck
it in as hell, but it's to die for, and
I'll nominate. You have to do this yourself. Is you
put the cheesecake, the entire throat in a bowl, then
go get chocolate chip cookies, heat them up and throw
them onto the cheesecake and that's the best. That's another
good cheesecake tops.
Speaker 2: Oh damn, that's diabetes in the cake. Okay, cool?
Speaker 1: Yes, but if you only do it once in a while, yeah,
it's diabetes in a cup but less often?
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, no, for sure. I mean look that that
is fine. You yet I fuck with that, Like I
will say with the fruit thing to each of their own.
For sure, if I get like a fruits sort of
like a fruit based asert, which could be like a
bunch of different fruits cut up and then with a
little bit of whipped cream on it, and where the
fruit combination makes sense that to me is better than cake,
ice cream, cookies, chocolate, whatever like that gave me something
that's fruit based, and I'm there, man, you.
Speaker 1: Know what I think it is. I've never been like
a bit I like watermelon, I like grape, so I've
never been like a big fruit person. Like I'm not
a strawberries guy or a cherries guy. I've had good
like I had these. They were these like cupcake cheesecakes,
so they were just cheesecakes, many many cheesecakes, and they
were blueberry and strawberry, and I think there might have
been like some BlackBerry and they were good. But I
fuck with vegetables before fruit, and like, you're not gonna
find vegetables and dessert at least I don't.
Speaker 2: No, no, yeah, you have that for dinner though. That's
the thing, right, you have all the veggies for dinner,
and then you kind of you know you've done your
job there and then it's off to the fruit.
Speaker 1: In theory s. But the reason I take greens, which
I know is a supplement and doesn't substitute, but it
has like servings of fruit and vegetables in it. I'm
so bad, like I have to remember to have like
if it's broccoli or green beans or lettuce or something like,
I prefer green, like actual greens vegetables. I'm just not
good about like cooking them myself. So but I've never
been a big fruit person and that might be why
I'm not like a fruit on dessert person in.
Speaker 2: Terms of veggies. By the way, this is not we've
gone completely off.
Speaker 1: People are gonna be mad they don't want small talk
on podcasts because we're not.
Speaker 2: It's true, Josh Everley, thank you for just putting us
on blast like that. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 1: No, we don't have to twenty minutes of small talk.
It's like five and we talk time stamp it.
Speaker 2: So you're well, you should know we're actually friends with Josh.
So this is friendly fire. But like, yeah, I I
I can't. I just I'm just gonna ignore what he
said about that. Can I ask you a question about
brocoli though, because here's the thing, there's a lot of people,
there's a lot there are a lot of people that
hate on broccoli. To me, that's one of the most
delicious veggies out there.
Speaker 1: It's honestly, and you know what, it's one of the
we talk about scaleability. Let's let's bring it back. We
talk about scalability with NBA players. Broccoli scales to all.
Like if I like carrots, I like them cold, I
don't like them warm. Like I'll eat raw broccoli, I'll
eat steamed broccoli. I'll eat like pan fried broccoli. I'll
eat all. I'll eat broccoli with stuff on it, I'll
eat it plain broccoli. I funck with broccoli for sure.
Speaker 2: I can't do the raw. I can't do that. That's
really yeah, I don't know what it is. It's that's
too big of a crunch.
Speaker 1: Like I like, even with green beans, I'll eat like
cold green beans work for me too.
Speaker 2: Oh nice, Yeah, I mean look, I so, I I like,
I can I can do the crunch. If they've been
in the oven because it's a different country, they've kind
of been softened by the heat as well a little bit,
but like it's still it's still got a little bit
of a crunch to it. Like that's cool. Yeah, especially
with pepri and and like freshly chrimed pepper as well.
Like that's then it's it's good not.
Speaker 1: Only think about it. I'm actually not big on like
warm vegetables overall, but like string beans, green beans, whatever
you call them, plus like broccoli, like those I'll eat
warm or cold for the most part. That I prefer,
like the celery, cucumbers, cold carrots type do you like?
I don't like my veggies cooked.
Speaker 2: I was the same way until actually recently because I
started putting like carrots in the oven and started spicing
them up with like chili and I'm forgetting what it was,
lemon pepper, lemon pepper and that was lovely. And then
of course olive oil oil on top, right to give
it a little bit of a vege butter and some
crisco and no, no, no, no, just a little bit
of olive oil. That's it. That's not hey, that's not unhealthy.
But I I I'm staying away from salt. I'm trying
to put everything on you know, veggies. That's that's not
like a lot of spice, that to me is like
vet you and good like what do you call it that? Condiments?
What do you call it?
Speaker 1: Like condiments? Dressing?
Speaker 2: That stuff that's dressing. That's not what it is, like Jesus,
just by yeah, seasoning spices.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I will say, before we get out of here,
there is relatability with the cheesecake in the NBA. There
was apparently a big story. I didn't read it when
I was looking around, like for a picture to use
on this part of the podcast. Apparently NBA players as
of twenty eighteen nineteen loved the cheesecake Factory. I don't.
I don't know why. So if you read that piece,
let us know why.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I do know that NBA guys also loved
Chipotle and were willing to live with diarrhea.
Speaker 1: Well, that can go hand in hand with some of
your food choices.
Speaker 2: So I'm just saying that's the thing that has to
be good. Like I look, I have occasionally visited Chipotle myself.
I've never experienced that part of it, but like to
imagine having that type of experience as an NBA player
and just deciding, fuck it, it's worth it. Let's go back.
Speaker 1: See I didn't see the diarrhea thing, but like Chipotle
and even like a what's like the other big one?
I'm forgetting Chipotle. What's the other big Mexican chain here?
Not Cabo Fresh?
Speaker 2: What was that Taco Bell?
Speaker 1: Not Taco Bell?
Speaker 2: All right?
Speaker 1: Like like Moe's. I don't know how national that, but
when you go to the like the Mexican cuisine, it
is easier to eat cleaner if you're not going to
douse it. Now, if you get like all the topics
that it's like, will douse this in caso and like
for some people might just be simple like oh, veggies, meat, rice,
move on. Mm hmm. That's why that's why I think
so many people do love like the Chipotle type stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we make it our own because we don't have
a Chipotle here in Denmark. And I actually reached out
to him at one point and they gave me an
answer where he said we would look we'd look into
it because Denmark is like a huge Mexican eating place,
like weise.
Speaker 1: You should open one yourself.
Speaker 2: Yes, right, that would be. I don't have time, Dan,
I'm running my only fans.
Speaker 1: Oh could be to only fans of you franchising Chipotle.
Speaker 2: Yes, dear Chipottele, I have an interesting.
Speaker 1: Shout out to anyone who made it through this entire question. More,
are you able to tell our listeners, subscribers, watchers where
they can find you and all your fantastic work?
Speaker 2: Yes, I do, And before I do, though, because we
just talked about food. If you go to HelloFresh dot
com and actually use my promo code bus or fifty
it's a different code word. Now you get a bunch
of percentages off your first and I even think like
not just your first, but like second and third purchases
as well. So go in and get like a meal box.
It'll be sent right to your doors so you don't
have to go grocery shopping. I have two kids. It's
been so nice for me to just get that box
delivered so I can just make food right off the back.
Ye Busser fifty is the promo code, and you can
find my work to answer your question, sir on blue
Sky at MSJA NBA, where I share all of my
links to Yahoo Sports, to Forbes, to my podcast on
the NBA Podcast, as well as my Danish one buzzer
beater if you're of course speaking Danish.
Speaker 1: Until next time, and as always, shout out to Frank
Nailatina