Speaker 1: What is up, Fellowsikos, I am Damn Valley coming.
Speaker 2: At you with the one, the only, no legendary This
certified Van Fabulo's co host of this very hardwood Os podcast.
Speaker 1: Mister Grant hughes Change of Pace today just to sort
of break up or you know, not watch changing around
me and there's some like seating races, but with all
the injuries, you figure it'd be a good time for
a news and rumor catch ups since some things have
have broken. Not really, I don't have anything to ask
you aside from how you're doing, Like, how do you
feel about this exercise?
Speaker 2: Grant reacting to the to the latest news and NBA rumors?
Speaker 3: No, yeah, I feel like it's necessary for a couple
of reasons. One, we haven't like these are kind of
a lot of them are bigger stories that we haven't
really talked about that much, so and so we should
hit them. But also, like I don't know, we talked
off air, like this point of the season for me
is just like can we fast forward like just three
you know what I mean? Like I shouldn't say that
because they're still we should still be watching. I don't know,
how do the Blazers, young guys look answer good, like
how do these other players developing? Or like, is the
Quinn Grimes thing real? We've kind of hit on all
that there's stuff to pay attention to, is the point.
But I'm just ready for, like, let's trim off these
teams that aren't trying anymore and let's see what the
playoff matchups are. I'm like, very ready for that to
be the focus.
Speaker 1: I don't mean to rehash this topic. I asked more
because I don't have a solution. But I don't know
if you saw that. John Hollinger had talked about how
everyone blames like the lottery system for why basketball, like
for tanking, why basketball gets so bad this time of year.
But his point was, if you remove the lottery system
as it is, these bad teams are still not going
to have anything to play for. So why would you
risk injury to some of your better players by having
them go all out? You would still see them sitting,
or you still see these teams enter full on developmental
mode that they know that they have nothing to play for.
And I thought about that, and I go, I don't
know how to make march basketball in the NBA more meaningful.
Speaker 3: That's so interesting. The the thing that I've read that too.
The thing that has stuck with me and I've been
thinking about a lot is is and he doesn't offer
like the mechanics for it. But Hollander's point is like,
it's not just that. So it's it's good that the
league has disincentivized losing by flattening the lottery odds and
all this stuff, and like the Hawks last year getting
the number one pick from the tenth best odds as
an example, that's that's like, that's good, but what really
needs to happen is winning needs to be incentivized. Like
it's so if you're the Wizards or the Jazz, there
needs in an ideal world, they're not just like, well,
looking at all these games as like we get nothing
if we win, Like there's nothing positive that comes from
us winning. And the reason I think he didn't offer like,
so here's what you do is that that's really complicated.
Like I've been racking my brain trying to think of
a clean solution for that. That's the that's one of
the most interesting, like just little buried in their points
in something I've read in a long time, it's like yeah, no,
of course, like incentive winning, like how do okay, how
do we do that? I don't know. I don't know
how how you make it so that, like the Wizards
just to continue using that example, are trying to win
as much as possible in March. I don't know how
you do that. But if you could do that, you'd
fix You'd fix the issue, You'd fix the problem.
Speaker 1: I almost think it would have to be a reverse
engineer situation where I keep going back to fewer games,
to where you need to increase the stakes, like at
the beginning of the year, so that there's less of
a window in which teams are at because in the
NFL is a good example, those teams still end up tanking,
but it's like you're playing out what seventy five percent
of your season before you get there, rather than sure
a third of it. But the NBA is never going
to go to fewer games, and even then if they do,
you would still need to change the lottery system, and
then you would have to operate under the assumption that
something could happen to a team early on and then
if their season goes off the walls, like it's not
necessarily going to change how they approach the end of
the season regardless of what your their draft pick situation.
So I don't know, because you could shorten the season,
but like if we get to March, like if the
season stays the same length but the games are sixty
six is the number everybody likes to throw out, they're
still gonna be tanking right in March. So I don't
I have zero, Well, not one of those I like
sometimes I like to throw out wrong answers that I
think might be Like, this is one of those situations
where I don't know how to incentivize late regular season winning.
Speaker 3: I mean, I don't know if this is exactly incentivizing winning,
but it definitely disincentivizes losing so strongly that like winning
is the obvious goal. Is like relegation accomplishes that. Like
that's which will never happen unless unless we expand like
ten more times than there is like a second tier
NBA where it's like if you fall down there, oh
my god, your revenue gets cut, you know, by eighty percent,
and yeah, all this terrible shit happens, like relegation would
do it. And I think that's the reason it exists
in sports that have had leagues around for way longer
than the NBA is like, yeah, it does, it does do.
It does achieve the goal, but like, one, that's never
going to happen. And two, like you butt up against
the idea of like, well, it is actually valuable for
a bad team to develop young players that might help
it be good next year. So like if if we
had massive incentives for winning, are like and it's just
say Brandon Miller was healthy or something, would Charlotte be
playing Brandon Miller? Like you know what I mean? Like,
it's just you do still want a team to develop
its youth, but like maybe the NBA is not the
place for that, and then you do need I don't know, again,
not an easy solution, not even like a remotely clear one.
Speaker 1: But you feel for the fans more than anything that
are paying the ticket prices to Well, you mentioned this
on the other one of our previous podcasts about how
the lottery system is important because it gives fans of
these teams, like a Wizards fan something to root for.
Speaker 2: But it's just like when you're paying, we're not paying.
Speaker 1: The prices to go to these games that fans are,
and so you're doing that to see like a tank
off between whether it's like Toronto and Philly or like
Toronto and Washington. And but you know Scottie Barnes isn't
really going to play in the worth quarter, or that
none of these like their best players are going to
play period. You feel for that aspect of it, I
just don't. I don't have a solve. Even you could change.
Speaker 2: Someone pitched us.
Speaker 1: It was really funny saying what if you just at
once every thirty years, every team gets like ten first.
Speaker 2: Round picks and that's the only like first round.
Speaker 1: Picks that so you could do whatever extreme idea that
you want, and it just I don't know that it
would fully go away. Relegation would be and I've seen
some people mention it because we're not gonna talk about
this in depth anymore. We initially were going to before
the Damian Lillard injury, but like the EuroLeague stuff that
the NBA is trying to build that I know some
people like, oh, well, that could set.
Speaker 2: Up for relegation.
Speaker 1: I was just like, well, I guess not really, because
then he's not going to travel to Europe. That rent
like you're gonna promote a team from Europe and then
does that team have to then relocate? Does that just
become do you inherit a different franchise in a different
market in the United States if you don't want travel,
I don't see a pathway too again, unless you're gonna
make it fewer games that there's more travel time. I
don't know how a EuroLeague would effectively set up relegation
because okay, for one, like one season or whatever, like
our two teams that they're just moving to Europe.
Speaker 2: I just yeah, that would work.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think. Okay, here's the answer. You assemble a
panel we'll call it like the Spirit of Competitiveness conglomerate
or something, and they're all unaffiliated with the NBA, and
they just judge how the worst teams perform down the
stretch of the season. It's like, how how true to
the competitive spirit were you? And then they award the
first pick to the team that is bad but also
competed the most honorably. I can see no possible issues
with that solution.
Speaker 2: I see zero. Are you ready to talk about well this,
We're gonna start with some depressing news. Are you ready?
Are you ready to get to it?
Speaker 3: Can't wait?
Speaker 2: Oh boy?
Speaker 1: Damian Lillard he has been diagnosed with deep vein thrombosis,
which your blood clots in his right calf. He will
be out indefinitely. The Bucks announced that he is on
blood thinners. They say they're optimistic he could return this season,
and GM John Horse said doctors have indicated that his
situation is very unlikely to occur again, which I think,
first and foremost, that's if this isn't considered life threatening
or long term thing, that's immediately awesome. Does it feel
before we get to the basketball taming Lord of it
All Wemby a sard, like, doesn't it feel like we're
dealing with more of these blood caught situations? Or is
that just me kind of reading like having recency bias
over the past year?
Speaker 2: It does?
Speaker 3: And selfishly, Uh, first of all, we can sort of
speak sort of flippantly because it seems like the prognosis
is very good, you know, shouldn't be joking about it anyway,
But like, I really it's affecting me personally because every
time my CAF is sore, now I'm like, ah, great,
it's probably DVT. Like I told you, Like I had
like a after the Wemby, things like on my shoulders
a little sore. I think, oh, yeah, here, guess guess
this is it. I guess this is how it ends.
Like I just it definitely makes me I'm I guess
that's just a way to say, I'm a lot more
conscious of like blood clots now because we've had so
many instances of this in the NBA. It's it's a
weird thing. I mean, I wonder too if it's like
they're just catching this now and this was always an
issue and it's like, thank God that they're just getting
better at diagnosing this and then it's treatable and certainly
if it's in like a non critical area. But yeah,
scary stuff. Don't don't like it. Don't like that it's
prevalent now. Seemingly good news per Dame, I guess too,
Like you certainly don't always see the like very optimistic
comments from you know, people around the team that like
he might even be back this season. There's optimism, so
so that that's the positive. Yeah, terrible news for the Bucks, though,
who I think, like, really can't afford to lose a
player like Dame just over the dozen or ten or
however many games are left.
Speaker 2: I would.
Speaker 1: I do feel I'm not a doctor, as anyone who
listens to this knowes. I just just given how much
time we've seen players miss whenever blood clots are mentioned,
I don't. I you can't see him returning this season
like that would honestly shock me, just because Osar Thompson.
I know the Pistons weren't good last year, but he
missed the final nineteen games, missed the.
Speaker 2: Start of this year.
Speaker 1: I know everybody every case is going to be different,
but like something happens to Wemby and he shut down
for the rest of the year, I just don't. I'd
be curious what makes the Okay, this is his calf,
it's not his shoulder. I'd just be curious as to
what would make this any different. And then it got
me thinking sort of just like, okay, like we're gonna
see I mean, the Bucks had been derailed by injuries
in the postseason ever since they won the title. Middleton
once right the year after, than Yannis twice, and then
now this year maybe game. And then I had the thought,
and we'll talk more about the long.
Speaker 2: Term trajectory of the Bucks.
Speaker 1: It's just like, are we ever gonna see Damian Lord
and Giannis play? Together in the postseason because like last year,
Yiannis out, so it's it sucks. In the interim they
have been going I don't know how much you've seen
of like the Ryan Rollins kid. He's pretty feisty on
the defensive end, and that seems to be like that's
what they're gonna lean into in the absence of Dame,
which is probably smart. This clearly increases the importance of
Kevin Porter Junior to Milwaukee as well. But like even
with Damian Lillard, the Bucks have not had a banner
offense or fourth quarter offense, and this is gonna make it.
Speaker 2: They just don't have Chris Middleton's gone, and.
Speaker 1: You can talk about whether he was ever gonna be
healthy enough to be this player. Johannis can break down defenses,
but like there's no one else on this team that
you trust, like as an actual second in command to
do that, like even close without like Damian Lillarll was
probably your best option in those situations, and now it's
who's your second best option?
Speaker 2: Is it KPJ? Or is it who's my Like is
it Gary Trent Junior? Who is it?
Speaker 3: Can we this is I mean it's probably even like
too late to relitigate this. But I was just having
the thought the other day, like because thinking about Drew
Holliday and like he hasn't shot it well from three
at all, Like he is now someone that if you're
putting like poking holes in the Celtics, you say, like,
I don't know, defenses might just leave Drew and that
might be a real you know, if you're looking for
weak spots, that might be one of the only ones
the Celtics have. But related to the Dame thing, like
don't you think would would would the Bucks do the
trade over again? Do you think now having seen like
here's here's how good we are with Dame, Like there's
a bunch of variables, the doc rivers of it, all
the coaching changes, you know, every Chris Middleton not staying healthy.
I was kind of leaning towards like I think I'd
just rather have run it back with Drew and and
tried to build around the edges. But maybe that's reactionary
now that Dame's hurt and like the results haven't been
that good.
Speaker 2: I think it'd be.
Speaker 1: More we have if if this postseason becomes a wash
because Damien Lower is not available, that's where you just said.
I think I would skew towards what you're saying. But
I also the other thing is too, did they give
up I mean they did give up pick equity? Like,
did they give up enough pick equity to just like
could they have re not reinvented, but retooled enough on
the fly around Drew Middleton and maybe still would have
been dealing with the Middleton health issues?
Speaker 2: Of course, it just I was a fan. I don't
remember where you were.
Speaker 1: I mean, this was how like two years ago now
at the point I was pretty in favor of the
trade at the time, I thought, and then I was,
you know, we saw last season played out like some
of the struggles, and then this season it just hasn't
been picture perfect.
Speaker 2: So that that'll be.
Speaker 1: One of the interesting, more interesting trades to relitigate, like
a couple of years even from now.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean that that that might give us a
little uh in road to talking about the honest item
that we have here, because I've been thinking, too, as
great as he's been, do you start having thoughts of
like this was complicated by the fact that the Bucks
did win a title with Giannis as their best player.
But I'm starting, like he's been phenomenal like this year
and last year, and it's just like it never stops.
But like, have you been having the thought of is
he really that easy to build a good offense around,
Like you know what I mean, Like he it seems like,
you know, Lillard. We like that fit because like, oh,
Lillard will solve the late game offense stuff that's plagued
the Bucks. And and and that's an issue because Jiannis
for whatever reason, like hasn't been effective as a late
game postseason guy. Like it's just you know, you just
think about it, zoomed out. You know you're making short
mid rangers now great, still doesn't space, Like I just
doesn't have a ton of off ball value, has never
been like a super high volume roll guy like Jannis
is like low key tricky to build like a normal
offense around. And I feel like some of that is
what we're seeing here, you know lately with the Bucks too.
But anyway, this is an MVP discussion about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's an interesting point because even Dame
who he I think I pretty much an intuitive fit.
But like, because of what Johannis does best on the
offensive end, it's if you're not going to predominantly use
him as sort of a screener or play finisher away
from the ball, and you want to put the ball
in his hands. The ideal offense around him then is
do you have more movement or is it just guys
who work exclusively off the ball? But if you have
got or not, I shouldn't say exclusively. But aside from
let's Steph Curry is the example, like who is the
superstar that works so much away from the ball, But like,
then you can give them the rock and they can
break down defenses. In those situations, you're always gonna tilt,
I would say heavily towards one like Kevin Durant would
be another great example of someone who would fit. Like Okay,
now we're just talking about two of the ten greatest
basketball players.
Speaker 3: Like Halliburton. Halliburton is the guy I would think of
where he's got such off ball value And but you each, yeah, yeah,
of course I thought we said him first.
Speaker 1: Did you want to take us through what Johanna has
told Sam Amick?
Speaker 3: Yeah, so this this just I mean, kind of the
heavy bucks news stretch here, But so Yanna said to
they're talking about the MVP and Yanna said, Listen, the
MVP discussion is great. I've been in the MVP discussion
what like the last seven years, accurate. I think he's
like top five basically the whole decade more or less.
Speaker 2: I still don't think.
Speaker 1: We talk enough that he won DPOI and MVP in
the same right, freaking wild.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's like the Bucks needed another finals trip maybe,
or like another couple and then it's just like Jonathan's
joanness is just like a antheon Alzheimer. That's not fair
because he's the same player. It's just I don't know,
we need these little benchmarks. Yeah, probably last seven years,
top three, top four, top three, top four. It's good,
it's a great compliment. But the end of the day,
winning's a different feeling. I was able to live at
once with the twenty twenty one title. Then I don't
know if people feel like a councer doesn't count while
he's getting ahead of me or whatever it is. But
winning's winning, so so has the NBA Cup's gone too far?
Speaker 1: There?
Speaker 2: It was like.
Speaker 3: It was like, wow, this feeling, man, It's like it's
better than intimacy. Laughs. That's the feeling I'm chasing. Yeah,
I mean, he's not wrong, like there is just some
we just illustrated it, like we sort of gloss over.
Maybe if Jokic doesn't emerge as like, oh my god,
this is the greatest thing we've ever seen right after
Giannis is the MVP, maybe maybe then we think of
him differently. I don't know, that's interesting. What do you
think about that? Those comments?
Speaker 1: I think they're candid and they're just, but they're also
they're a little bit cookie cutter, where it's just Okay,
MVPs are cool, but I want to win. Even Joelle
Embiid reached that point of his career after he got
his MVP, and I don't it's I actually haven't.
Speaker 2: I mean, I'm so I notice more and more how isolated.
Speaker 1: I am from what I considered the toxic discourse to
where I don't know if this has been spun into
like what, well is Johannis want out of Milwaukee?
Speaker 2: Like how is this being framed?
Speaker 1: But it does feel like when he reiterates these things,
and based off how he's acted when they've made moved
and he assigned extensions, it does seem as if to
me that Johannis is going to look for every single
way to stay in Milwaukee and that they're gonna need
to actively give him.
Speaker 2: Reasons to leave, which I don't know that, Dave.
Speaker 1: You can pan how they've retooled this team following the
Damian Liller trade, but like they haven't necessarily given him
Like maybe now you're reaching more of a high leverage
inflection point, but like they've done a good job.
Speaker 2: Of giving him.
Speaker 1: It's not even giving him reasons to stay. It's not
giving him reasons to leave.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, do you do wonder what would have happened
if brook Lopez had just not renegged on the deal
with the Rockets. I mean there's a lot that's like
a big like who knows how things change for multiple
teams in that hypothetical, But like the Bucks have tried,
like the Middleton trade was like not an easy trade
to make. The Dame trade was not an easy trade
to make. They've they're pulling in guys like Kevin Porter
Junior like that obviously come with like do you really
want this guy? And they're like, yes, we need them
because we gotta have talent. Like they really are making
an effort. So I think I agree with you until
until it changes, because if you're gonna give me the
option of Giannis is gonna play forever in Milwaukee or
he's gonna change teams, like literally, you know, everyone else
except for a couple guys at his level have I'm
gonna pick He's gonna leave at some point. But yeah,
like the fact that it's extended this long. We're going
on like close to a half decade post championship, which
is usually like that's that's surprising that he's still there
if you're just like objectively looking at how the Bucks
have done since the title and how well he's continued
to play, like usually that like you know, augurs towards
an exit. But yeah, I do think it's gonna take
I don't know, maybe another like if Dame's not healthy
and they flame out first round again, like maybe we
finally do see some change. I don't know, but all
indications are that, like, yeah, he's gonna need something pretty
significant to leave.
Speaker 1: Well, and their off season situation is fairly interesting. If
they have brook Lopez headed into free agency and if
you don't include him on the books, they are going
to have room beneath the tacks. It's close to fifteen million.
That's like a fourteen player calculation. It's based on Pat Conton,
Bobby Portis, and Kevin Porter Junior exercising player options. I
wonder if Kevin Porter Junior has played well enough that
he would decline it, or if he still has so
much baggage from the domestic violence allegations that he'll pick
it up.
Speaker 2: That'll be.
Speaker 1: But like if he opts out of that, that's another
player that you could use. Who how do we replace him?
Are we going to be able to keep him? But
that number doesn't include Brook Lopez, who I imagine just
eats up like at least that fifteen million, right, Yeah,
Damian Lillard can sign an extension, but he has a
twenty twenty six twenty seven player option. Giannis his player
options a year further so he has two guaranteed years
of let's call a team control left on his contract,
and the Bucks in terms of assets aside from players,
they can trade their twenty thirty one or twenty thirty
two first as of now, because they did duck the
second apron, which that kind of looms large now that
you're when you're looking, we're gonna talk a little bit
about the second apron In.
Speaker 2: A bit, I just don't know what is the.
Speaker 1: I guess because you have expiring contracts and can aggregate
so of Portis and Coneton, let's say, pick up their
player options. It's like twenty plus million dollars in expiring
salary that you're can attach to.
Speaker 2: A first for who.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And it's just these these distant first are so
tough to value. We saw it was kind of interesting
that Charlotte, Like you don't that Mark Williams trade that
got rescinded, But they were even getting Austin Reeves as
part of that. Not Austin Reeves Dalton connect is part
of that deal. So it's just you very rarely see
these teams like we're just gonna accept this distant first
round pick as the primary form of compensation without anything
else in return. So my point is like they're pretty
limited in what they could do, right, And this is
that's without even guaranteeing that Bropez.
Speaker 3: Comes back, right, Yeah, I mean framed this way, and
this has been the case for a little while, Like
it's it's it's been true for a long time that
it's like really hard for the Bucks to get better,
like I think, and to use the Liller trade as
an example, they got different, but like I don't know
that they got they actually got better, And I think
that's kind of the same outlook now where it's like
you said, if they if they Bobby Portis and Connisan
together with a pick or whatever, like, are you gonna
get something back that's actually better than what you would
have gotten from Portis and content like Portis still matters
or will it just be like a different type of
player that changes how the team looks, but maybe like
doesn't affect the bottom line in a hugely positive way
like that Again, I just think, like what would you
agree that, Like we are getting pretty close to midnight
on on like the Bucks run in its current iteration
just because like it can't get how do they improve?
Like I just I don't know what the path is?
And then other than like you can't you can't trade
Dame for positive value, can you? Like I mean, especially
with he's basically an expiring contract next year.
Speaker 1: And it's just even if let's just say you attached
a first round pick to Damian Lillard, who is the
as the Bucks, who is the player that you or
the type of player that you want to target from
there as part of that move.
Speaker 2: I mean it.
Speaker 3: Would be a similar type of player.
Speaker 1: Right, and I'm just throwing names out there, but like,
are you gonna do that to bring in Kevin Durant
just as an example. I mean it'd be I guess
it'd be interesting. But now you've gotten older and Kevin
Durant yet still better. But does that now you don't
like in terms of playmaking, like you're definitely at a
deficit from there? It's it does You're right to call
it like it does feel like they're facing midnight. They
need to pull I would say, like you need to
figure out a way, Like the Brook Lopez thing is
like that that's huge because it's okay if he's back,
all right, we at least know you can kind of
run back this core and then you do have if
you're willing to mortgage what's left of your future, like
you can just attach that pick to salary and get
presumably I would say, at least a rotation player, not
gonna get a star, but like, can you get another
wing type player in here? But then as I'm saying that, yeah,
they could figure it out, like who's Who's just the
guy that you're gonna see them get with that, and
then it has to be someone who's worth Like, as
an example, would you have given like expiring money plus
that distant first for DeAndre Hunter? Like if that was
a move that was available to you this offseason if
he wasn't on the Cavs.
Speaker 3: Yeah, probably, but but I mean or maybe I should say, yeah,
I would definitely consider it, But like what does that?
What's that? Do you know? What what does that really
do for the Bucks bottom line? I don't know. I
mean they're better, I guess, but like maybe maybe not. Yeah,
this is this is we're gonna we're stepping on something
we're gonna do later, but I'm starting to think is
gonna leave soon.
Speaker 1: Well, my whole thing is, if I had to ask
you right now, do you think that all three of
Damian Lillard, Jannis and Brook Lopez or Milwaukee next season?
Speaker 2: What would your answer be?
Speaker 3: I think it would be yes, mostly because like I
don't think Dames are tradable. I don't think Giannis is
quite ready to ask out, and and Lopez is so
like he's still so singularly important to like making the
whole thing work with Giannis that like you can't you
just if you're gonna if Yannis is still there, I
think you kind of just like you're committed to brook
Lopez like that. That feels like it's a It's very
much connected.
Speaker 2: I also wonder too, would they explore a path?
Speaker 1: But I don't know because if Content and Portis are expiring,
I don't know what type of equity it takes to
just send them into I mean, like those both those players,
I think maybe not Portus. I'll have to look at
the size of his player option. They can fit into
teams as non tax payermid level exceptions. Is there an
area where, okay, brook Lopez kind of cancels out your
room beneath the tax but then you make it up
by dumping one of them and you can use your
Does your non tax payermid level get you somebody that
like it?
Speaker 2: Okay?
Speaker 1: And is what is this team's biggest need? I feel
like we could come up with three off rip and
one of them is gonna be a Tory in princes
replacement probably Well.
Speaker 3: I just wonder, like Bucks fans way in, like what
would you like, are you satisfied like with the twenty
one title and this great run from Giannis and like
are you looking at the next five to ten years
and thinking let's keep going, let's run it into the ground,
Like I'm already leading with the question, but like, or
are you thinking maybe let's get like a real kickstart
here with a Yannis trade and like a reset. I
wonder what Bucks fans would actually want, because I don't
feel like Bucks fans would like with their heads on straight,
are looking at this team saying like we just need
like a break and then we or two and we
can win the title. Like I don't feel like that's
the common sense.
Speaker 2: Certainly not post dame injury.
Speaker 3: Yeah no, yeah, but even with him, I maybe maybe
I don't know. It's hard to be like, find me
like the straw man rational fan of T Max. It's like, well,
it's there's no such thing. Everybody's different. But like, if
I'm a Bucks fan, I'm looking at this like, I
think we kind of had our moment and I would
like to not have the next decade really suck, So
let's let's like get out ahead of it. But that's
easier said than done.
Speaker 2: Tough for them, though, is how do you make that?
Speaker 1: Because their picks are it's not a situation where Phoenix
is Okay, we need.
Speaker 2: To go talk to Houston.
Speaker 1: We'll get multiple of our own picks back. Their picks
are more spread out, and so you are trading, you
honest knowing that what at most you get back one
of your future selections, if even that, when you're looking at.
Speaker 2: The teams that control them. And so I think that
makes it tougher.
Speaker 1: And I just I mentioned Torriyan Prince before, like you
don't have Gary Trent Junior's bird rights either, Like this
is it's gonna be tough for them.
Speaker 2: I don't.
Speaker 1: I hate going from the day injury to that, but
I'm this is We kind of knew that they were
entering the eleventh hour, but it feels like, oh, or
that is it?
Speaker 2: Just like this is it now?
Speaker 3: I think it's starting to feel like it to me.
Speaker 1: We are finally going to get to the sale of
the Boston Celtics. Did you, mister Hughes, want to take us.
Speaker 2: Through the details of what is the richest sale in
NBA history?
Speaker 3: As wasn't it like pro sports history too? Because they
beat the Commander's valuation of of like six point oh
five billion. So the buyer or I mean it's led
by bil chishm who is from symphony technology. It's like
a I don't know, private equity, venture capital something or
other that is a I don't know that that seems
to be like kind of the norm is these these
these types of outfits are getting stakes in NBA teams increasingly,
although there's a limit I guess on how much like
a private equity can hold, like the share of an
NBA team that it's allowed to hold. But anyway, so
this is six point one billion dollars getting fifty one
percent at that valuation. The tricky thing is this is
going to be like a tiered sale sort of or
like a weird like gradual transition, So like it does
seem like that valuation could go up and this could
be like a seven plus billion dollar transaction. Ultimately, is
that your understanding?
Speaker 1: I guess it depends on just what is the latter
forty nine percent actually evaluated.
Speaker 3: And when, like, because as the franchise valuation goes up,
are we paying based on those terms? Like it's the
point is six point one two seven point something maybe
depending on how.
Speaker 1: I actually ask you a question before we even get
get to some of the additional stuff.
Speaker 2: If you were like the.
Speaker 1: Framing of it wouldn't you typically then have seen the
seven point three billion number first, which is the max.
I guess like the agreement is the next part of
the franchise can't be bought at evaluation that exceeds seven
point three billion. Are we just so used to the
way that contracts are announced that this it doesn't really
serve like maybe this makes uh what is the Chris
gives it?
Speaker 2: How are we pronouncing it?
Speaker 1: Bill Chisholm, Bill Chisholm, Is this just like does this
make it actually look more favorable? Because no, he didn't
pay seven point three billion, like he paid six point
one for a majority at of valuation for majority of
the franchise. It's very I'm just curious as to why
we would normally see the bigger number. I feel like
listed first and the seven point three billion came out
after the fact.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, that is weird. I mean the six point
one seems pretty obvious. You know that it's like trying
to exceed the previous record for a sports franchise purchase
by the like one of the smallest amounts possible. But yeah,
usually the whatever the biggest possible number is is what
gets released because it's like it looks better for everybody,
I guess, but yeah, I don't. I don't know what
to make of that.
Speaker 2: So that's all we need to Like that's the biggest thing.
Speaker 3: So he's still searching for additional funding. Uh, and the
border governors is not going to vote on this until June. So, like,
this doesn't feel like a wolve situation where it's like
you're gonna have two separate ownership groups like figuring things
out one because this doesn't seem to be contentious, like
like it is between Glenn Taylor and a Rod and
Mark Glory. But still so a couple of things to
get into the fallout of this purchase, because like this
was like a threshold issue that seemed like needed to
be resolved before the NBA got onto some other business
like spansion and other stuff. But kind of keeping it
local for the moment. So the Celtics are not just
the business. They're a basketball team and they're really good
and it was always going to be hard to keep
them together. What does this mean for the team's ability
to stay together and be extremely costly Just a couple
details of note, and we can discuss this a little
bit more at length. So they're twenty thirty two because
they are so far into the second Apron, their twenty
thirty two draft pick is going to be frozen. They
finish over the second Apron more than once between next
year and twenty eight twenty nine. That pick also goes
to the end of the first round.
Speaker 1: I did clarify this with Keith, like that cycle continues, right,
so they don't get out. Yeah, like there their twenty
thirty three draft pick is about to be frozen. If
they stayed, well, you're gonna get to that. Sorry, but yeah,
I know, did you give that much thought? I asked
Keith about it because I just I only focused on
the initially frozen pick and then like how do you
get it unfrozen or how long? And then I asked
him it was just like mid podcast is like, so wait,
you could just have like all these picks just like
frozen at once.
Speaker 2: He was like yeah, it's like oh god.
Speaker 3: Right, so that's one. I mean, we thought the second
Apron had teeth. It's like no, there's like several rows
of teeth like behind the real pointy ones that we
didn't know about, or that we just hadn't focused on
because they hadn't like the issue hadn't arisen yet, and
now here we kind of are. So but by the way,
the Celtics are profiling as a second Apron team next year.
They are about twenty two million into this or twenty
two point eight almost twenty three into the second Apron
with their team salary plus the repeater tax, assuming fourteen
roster spots, they're gonna be five hundred and thirteen million
dollar operation next year. And that's without like perennially integral
Al Horford, who is an unrestricted free agent. I don't
know what he's worth, but like they need that dude.
Speaker 1: At ken million, he's still a bargain, right, Yes, yeah,
he's still a bargain.
Speaker 3: But then like where they're at with the tax and
the aprons and the penalties, and it's like, if you
sign him to like a twelve million dollar a year deal,
it's like, wow, that's one hundred and fifty million. You know,
It's just that's not right. But it's like the the
the add ons are really going to make that painful. So,
I mean, the question is, and we've sort of thought
about this for a while, the cell the sale really
pulls it into focuses like how long can they keep
this team together? And and his new ownerships like I
don't know, willingness to do this different from previous ownerships.
Is it greater? Is it lesser? Like you don't typically
buy things like this to lose money, So like, I
don't know. It just introduces a new variable into a
situation that was already kind of headed for, like like
not a Cristis point, but like a decision point.
Speaker 1: Certainly, Yeah, it's it's it's fascinating because I think you
gravitate towards that half a billion dollar number. That's a
lot of money, and you have to wonder, like the
new ownership resim, what's their stomach for footing this bill?
But I'm increasingly and I was pretty hard the nuggets
of the team. I was probably and even the Clippers.
I was the artist on of being cowards against the
second aprin the Clippers.
Speaker 2: It worked out really well for them, right.
Speaker 1: The limitations, I just clearly, as teams were figuring it out,
I didn't give it enough forethought.
Speaker 2: I was wrong. I apologize or maybe I'm not sorry,
who knows, But like.
Speaker 1: The limitations here of just if you the Celtics are
gonna be an excellent litmus test. I think for how
long teams are willing to pay because it's not just
about paying. You're paying for this roster while working within
these insane limitations. When it comes to bettering, you're like,
they could keep Al Horford, just continue to pay this, Okay,
you're fine through next season. But now it's christophs Porzingis
is going to the final year of his contract and
has banged up a lot. Drew Holliday has not looked
so great here. I wanted to ask you, that's twenty
two point eight million. It's a big number in a vacuum.
Could you see a scenario in which they try to
get out of the second apron this offseason and the
two players I look at, I know a lot of
people will gravitate towards Jalen Brown. It's kind of a
Drew Holliday or christophsports a situation where can you trade
those that one player for someone who is making you know,
less than half of.
Speaker 3: That I mean, I don't. I immediately jumped to like, well, okay,
so if it's Pritchard and I was trying to do
it like a different way to just how can we
sneak under I don't think you can really without Pritchard.
Speaker 1: You still fall fall short, right like ducking it, and
then it's well, now we've obliterated, like two of the
top eight spots in our rotation are just gone.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's it's like, I don't know. I I think
if it's if I'm a fan, I'm just like, yeah,
it's let's continue, please, I don't care, like, just spend
the money you just bought this thing. But but yeah,
like so I don't know the answer to that. If
if you're asking me to choose, like do they dump
Porzingis or Holiday or Brown? It's like, I think you
can make a case for all those guys. Brown obviously
offers by far the most potential savings, and I guess
you you could make the case that like you still
have Tatum, and like if you lose Holiday or Porzingis,
you lose these different dimensions. I don't know. I I
think like the boldest move would be to make Brown
the guy, just.
Speaker 1: Try and sort of divest him into like two or
three players that make yeah thirty, yeah you.
Speaker 3: Get maybe you know you're not better, but you're maybe
deeper and you add some flexibility that you wouldn't that
you would have lost by continuing to pay as much
as they were and in salary attacks, But like, yeah,
I just I don't know. Maybe maybe the decision gets
simpler if like Holiday slips again next year, or if
like he has a terrible playoffs, then it's like, well, okay,
so we're kind of at the end of the road
on this. But even if it's Holiday or Porzingis, the
savings does not. It doesn't seem like that would like
offset how much you're losing from like a competitiveness perspective,
because like both those guys matter so much, and like
maybe not holidays so much, but poor Zingus's deal is
like it feels like undermarket, you know, or like close
to it for what he provides in the games that
they really need. So yeah, I don't know, I would
say before I throw it back to you, Like the
last CBA, you know, didn't include a hard cap. But
what we're seeing, I think now with the severity of
these upcoming penalties specifically, is like the effect is really similar,
Like there isn't a true hard cap, but it's like
the deterrent factor is so strong that it's like about
as close as and like owners did this I think
to like police themselves, you know, like, let's so like
kind of mission accomplished on that front. Because if a
team as good as Boston is, like we're discussing, well,
how are they gonna get cheaper? Which is nuts like
right now, but like that's what we're doing. So the
second Apron and all this other stuff has like clearly
had the desired effect. I think from as far as
ownership protecting itself from spending a lot.
Speaker 1: I will say, and I'm not even looking We're looking
at it through the lens of how do they get
cheaper because they want to unlock these limitations that are
on them. I am curious, though, when does this start
really materially affecting how much players are being paid? The
superstars are the superstars, But like, I don't think we've
seen the We've already seen like some of the the
mid run guys get squeezed. I think that's gonna still
get worse and worse. That was one of my concerns
at the outset of all this. We just haven't seen
it fully bear out. I will say my expectation for
the Celtics you don't want to see kind of what
Minnesota did where it was you stayed in the second
apron and got worse type deal, like because that screams
just like, Okay, well they were planning I guess around
sort of the long term, longer term viability. I'm gonna
follow I actually very quickly. How much do you think
these playoffs will inform how they might approach the offseason,
because that might you know, what would need to happen
for them to look at I'm approaching this from saying
I think they are not going to reconcile with this,
the second apron of it all until next summer stops
porzingis comes off the books. Maybe Al Horford will have
been on a one plus one at that point, or
just a one year deal. You'll have Drew Holliday's deal
will be shorter, and you just sort of reevaluate from there.
You've now gone two seasons into the second apron. That's
always the pivot point that I've assumed they would allow them,
like you're That's why I think they're gonna be a
good gauge is because you can just keep this core
together White Brown and Tatum, and if people stay relatively healthy,
you have to like change out some depth pieces around them,
like this team will be an Eastern Conference contender for
a while, but like if what needs to happen in
the playoffs or maybe them to accelerate that timeline from again,
I'll say purely a competitive The money matters here and
that's what you don't want to see with any new
ownership is you don't want to see this this sale,
like the Celtics change hands and they're looking to cut costs,
and that's this just becomes a casualty of that. If
you're looking at this from a logistical perspective of being
able to stay good for as long as possible, but
still maintaining the tools to make change as you need,
is there any reasonable outcome in the playoffs that would
convince you the Celtics have to accelerate the dissolution of
this exact core.
Speaker 3: I don't think you. I really don't think you're gonna
be able to do both of the things you're talking about. Like,
I just I don't think the system is set up
that way. So to answer the specific question, I would
you you'd certainly if they win the title. It's like,
you can't, you can't break this team up. You you
would think, like, although I think the twenty eleven MAVs
kind of just like let Tyson Chandler go and like,
so we there's some precedent for for winning teams to
now the circumstances were very different then, but like it
doesn't guarantee. Sometimes in a weird way, winning a title
can like provide some cover for like, all right, we
got that, so now we have to like come back
to reality. I think if they win it, you just
you don't touch it. You just paying what it costs.
If like if you get now Cleveland's look shakier, but
like if you get smoked by the Calves in the
conference finals, I don't know, you might and like Holiday
looks old or Porzingis doesn't stay healthy, like then maybe
you really maybe that's all it would take. I think
if you make the finals, unless like say the thunder
just absolutely blow your doors off and it's clear, like oh,
these are teams on two different levels. Like even that
even making the finals like should be enough, I would,
I would think, but like those are high bars, like
crazy shit can happen. You might lose in the second
round because I don't know, Tatum goes cold and like
Brown gets sprains an ankle or whatever. Like's not it's
not out of the realm of possibility, I would say,
but but it's just just like a reasonably expected amount
of success should insulate the Celtics from, you know, stripping
parts off.
Speaker 1: And I don't think that really changes, Like, I don't
know that this sale changes anything other than the fact
that it's just maybe an additional unknown or curveball. It
does feel like it it maybe increases the uncertainty of
the off season a little bit more.
Speaker 2: I just don't I wouldn't expect it to be seismic.
Speaker 1: Another like sort of aspect of this though, is Wick
Grousebeck is expected to stay on as team governor through
twenty twenty seven twenty twenty eight. How much of an influence, though,
does Chisholm have over the organization if they're looking to
cut like he I'm sorry, I know he's a lifelong
Celtics Sam. We didn't mention that you have private equity background.
I'm just gonna assume you're in the business of like
slashing operational calls.
Speaker 3: Right right, that's the and like wanting a strong say
in like what happens with the thing you just bought what.
Speaker 2: I found fascinating.
Speaker 1: I think this was from the Business Journal that grouse
Beck it was initially a mandate that he was going
to stay on his team governor through twenty twenty seven
twenty twenty eight. Then it no longer was, but then
Billy Boy decided that it was important, so he is
going to stay on his team governor. I just want
to know, and I'm asking for Mark Cuban basically does
this mean it's in writing or is this or is
this another handshake agreement where okay, he does like if
you're gonna control fifty one percent of the team, like
you're gonna have that say, and we see grouseback kind
of he gets the demotion where it's like, oh, he's
like serving in like a like a consultation capacity is
like the second like team governor, but like there can
only be one managing governor, Like that's how this stuff
is set up. And I'm just curious to see. I
think maybe this could inform like the stuff we were
just talking about with the team. But whenever I see, okay,
this the quote unquote like now who's going to be
the minority owner? For lack of better phrasing, is the
governor for the next couple of years. I think that
makes a lot of sense in theory. And am I
just reading into too much how things played out with
the Mavericks. I just I want to know if this
is in writing, Is this part of the physical agreement.
Speaker 2: Of the sale of the team.
Speaker 3: I just think even if it, well, if it is,
then then that solidifies a few things. But it's it
is just always gonna be a weird dynamic when like
essentially a holdover who is like dive investing his interest
in this thing is still like somehow has a greater
say or an equal say to the party that has
just spent a ton of money and is heavily invested.
Like it just I guess like as a steward, Like
maybe everybody's on great terms with each other, with the
new ownership group and the previous one, and it's just like,
let's work together. We all care about the Celtics. I
guess it benefits all of us if things continue to
go smoothly, although like the people that are selling, like
I don't know why, but it just the dynamic is strange,
Like that's a weird setup and like you can see
the fault like Cubans out like Cuban's got no say
over anything, and he won't stop talking about how what
would have happened or not happened if he did have
a say, and so like that seemed to me like
an extreme circumstance. We kind of have different takes on it,
I guess, but like, I don't imagine that the same
thing will happen like fool me twice. If the Celtics
thing goes just like the Map thing did, then I
think you will just see everything have to be in
writing and or previous owners never ever again, assuming they're
going to continue to have a say once things change hands.
Speaker 1: And I I would become worried if this becomes a
detail that's just sort of threw like, oh, Bill has
more of a say or he's making a lot of decisions,
and then that's what I would brace for. Okay, if
that part of the agreement has already kind of followed
by the wayside break up the Celtics by the twenty
twenty six trade deadline, as far as like, that's what
I'll be expecting if we hear prumblings of that over
the offseason. But I will say if this is if
if Grousebeck is the like the on paper, like he
is contractually the team governor through twenty twenty seven, twenty
twenty eight, I do think it bodes well for Celtics
fans that this team stays together through at least next
season and maybe even like further than that, because I
know it's still his money. Like, isn't like the managing
team govern would be the one that's like kind of
writing the luxury tax checks at the end of the year.
So maybe it makes it a little easier for Wick
to kind of like gloss over.
Speaker 3: That, Yeah, maybe they can add let's see what, let's
get more expensive? Who cares.
Speaker 1: The final element of this isn't really Celtics related for me,
but I was curious as to what you thought that
this might mean for the expansion discussion. And I don't
know if you want to take us through like some
of the bullet points that we have on expansion.
Speaker 3: So just some things to kind of chew on, because
this very much was I don't know it was even
explicit in a couple reports over the last year or
so or even longer than that, where it's like, yeah,
expansion is maybe on. It's not like a front burner thing.
We've got a prominent team for sale now in the Celtics.
Let's get through that, and then that will inform on
several fronts, like the franchise valuations and just like all
kinds of things, Like let's get that done first. So
that's I mean done ish because it's it is going
to be like a multi year process. But like, so,
does this mean expansion is like somehow likelier or as
likely if teams are selling you know, minority shares more frequently.
You've got reports suggesting expansion fees could rise up to
like five billion dollars a team. That's from ESPN late
last year, So that's ten billion bucks for new franchises.
That's three hundred and thirty three million per existing team.
Speaker 2: Like is that math right? That seems wrong? That's my math?
I apologize, M.
Speaker 3: Three thirty three. I don't know. It seems like it
seems like a lot of money. It's gonna expend. You
asking me to do math on the fly?
Speaker 2: Can you Mike check? Do I sound fire?
Speaker 3: What else?
Speaker 2: So?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I guess maybe the main question is just like
does this suggest expansion is more or less likely? And
like the terms of expand like, what is this, how
does this affect the ongoing discussion about you know, Vegas, Vancouver, Seattle, whatever.
Speaker 1: My initial thought and I apparently approached I think I
initially approached it.
Speaker 2: From my mind doesn't necessarily work this way.
Speaker 1: From the wrong end was if franchises are skyrocketing and
this amount of value, our owners, like current majority owners,
are gonna want to sell if they think that trend
is going to continue. And then kind of miss like
what Timberwolf sell forard a one point nine billion dollar
valuation And so when one Taylor one in arbitrary like
what would he have been able to sell the team
for this summer?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: So that made me think, oh, that's just gonna make
owners not want to dilute, potentially dilute the valuation of
their own franchise by adding two more. But then we
see the reporting that because the Celtics sale is in
final and that grism is looking to add like other
like he's trying to get more funding. Are we gonna
get in the habit of seeing teams sell off these
like minority chunks more often and those are technically worth more,
where yes, you're going to concede like if so, if
the franchise is valued, it's six billion dollars.
Speaker 2: You're not gonna get maybe.
Speaker 1: Dollar for dollar if you sell twenty percent of the
franchise at that six billion dollar valuation, But are you
gonna get more than you normally would have years ago,
like closer to like approximating that six billion dollar valuation.
And if so you get cash, then you're still the
majority team governor and your franchise. You're still maybe to
capitalize on the rising value of your franchise. And it
just made me think, like based off that reporting, that
I wonder is that three hundred and that's for two
expansion franchise, So if it's one, it's even less money.
But is that extra money that's coming in three hundred
plus million? Is that enough of an incentive for owners
to Again, I don't want to call it a risk,
but like you, it is a risk of diluting the
valuation of your own franchise. Like what payout are they
gonna deem is greater? And I just the more we
talk about expansion, everyone we've said it's inevitable, but the
more I think about it, it's like it still feels
like it's forever away.
Speaker 2: Based on just some of the t leaves that are
out there.
Speaker 3: It's so funny. I was thinking about this this morning,
about how like, yeah, we have taken an imminent expansion
as like a given. That's like as well, it's just
gonna happen, And like I kind of I'm leery of
this because I keep doing this with like whether it's
the the prevalence of three, there's too many threes being shot,
and like the NBA media discourses this, it's just like
I keep defaulting to like everything's fine, like and everything's great,
Like why are we so hung up on like let's
change this or like let's add this or whatever. So
I caught myself thinking like do we actually need expansion,
like other than the fact that Seattle got robbed of
the team and needs a team back, Like that's persuasive
to me that fan base deserves to have a team,
But like from the business perspective of the NBA, and
like the talent dilution thing, like there's actually kind of
like this is maybe another one like some decent arguments
against expansion, like do we need this? Does the league
need this? Things seem to be going fine, like I
just I don't know. I had like a weird like
step back and reevaluate the whole thing because we had
just been assuming it was a guarantee and and like
does it need to be I don't know well.
Speaker 1: And also the NBA, Brian Windhorse said this a couple
of weeks back. They're focused on like developing the euro League.
One of the notes was, I think this was from
the Sports Business Journal. The league thinks that the Europe
markets and then the Middle East like basketball markets could
be worth between like three and five billion dollars an
annual revenue for them if they're able to like put
their footprints there and so like it, maybe it makes
more sense for them to vote financially. It says, well,
we're gonna get more money and we're not gonna have
to touch not only the product here, but like the
rising like risk the right because I would assume if
you add two franchises to the league and you you're
going to naturally dilute the talent that way. Even if
they kind of expand the expansion draft parameters like infory Okay,
franchise values, maybe they'll continue to go up, but they're
not gonna like this is what did he like this
ten X, like we're seeing on these values now like
for what you initially like sometimes pay for it. So
I maybe maybe we're overthinking this, but I think I
subscribe to kind of your thought to where it's I
don't know if we need it, but from a financial
perspective for owners, I'm just wondering if it's even worth it.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, it's interesting. It feels like strangely it's become
less of a no brainer than it seemed like, I
don't know a year ago.
Speaker 1: This time, I would be curious, but like maybe the
Celtics are kind of the just we've now seen the
seven billion dollar number thrown out there. I would just
want to see, like, is there any team that could
fetch a higher evaluate, Like it would be the Lakers
or the Knicks, right, could you see like there? I
think both of them might have better arena situations like agreement.
So but I would just if you put the Lake,
if the Bus family put the Lakers up for sale
right now, I'd be curious to see what they it
would be value.
Speaker 3: It would be more than six point one, like guarantee,
what would be the Yeah, whatever the highest number is,
it would be above that. I don't know how high
it would go.
Speaker 1: If final question on this expansion by what was the
twenty twenty five Will there be expansion by twenty thirty
two when the Celtics draft pick, maybe at the end.
Speaker 3: Of the Celticton finally unfrees their pick, I will say,
I don't. I don't know if they'll actually like be
a team in existence, but the process will have like
formally like it started by you know what I mean,
Like they'll be it will be official that something expansion
wise is happening. Whether that's Europe or like Mexico City
or somewhere domestically. I don't know, because who knows how
ambitious the league could get as they approach like the
next TV deal. So so yeah, but I'll say yes,
what do.
Speaker 2: You think I'm gonna say.
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna say yes, I have to, Like we've
been saying it's imminent until like seven years down the pipeline.
But I don't know, like it even don't these expansion
fees if you're the group that is buying the team,
I guess if you have a large group, it's different.
It just feels like so much money, like if they're
gonna rise to five billion, and you know you're probably
gonna suck for a couple of years. Like, doesn't it
become prohibitive to like buy an expansion team.
Speaker 3: Not if you can sell it for If you buy
it for five and you can sell it for six
in like two years, you know, then.
Speaker 1: There there's gotta be a bubble on this, right, because
it's like when we were purchasing a house at my
wife and I had a terrible time.
Speaker 2: It was our decision.
Speaker 1: Don't feel bad for us, but like people constantly telling us,
like her, you know, someone my elder family members saying like,
we paid ex for our house in nineteen eighty and
it's worth like ten times that. And I would respond
by saying, if my house ever ten x is in
value for what we paid for it, something has gone
terribly wrong. And so like there has to be some
sort of a bullet these franchise We're not gonna get
to a point where's like, ah, man, like the Hornets
just sold for fifteen billion dollars, right, that's not gonna happen.
Speaker 2: Why not?
Speaker 3: I mean that's just the way I Yeah, I guess,
like I guess, positive momentum doesn't sustain forever. But it's like,
over a long enough timeline, as long as the NBA
continues to exist, Like I don't, I assume valuations will
just keep rising. I don't know. Maybe that is naive.
Maybe that is like the housing bubble thing. I don't know.
Speaker 1: So because we haven't talked enough about numbers in this podcast,
I feel like it's good to get into the salary
cap update. Bobby Mark's confirmed what we all expected, that
it's going to rise by ten percent next year. So
the luxury tax will be set at one hundred and
eighty seven point nine million. The first apron is at
one ninety five point nine million, and the second apron
is at two hundred and seven point eight million. The
actual also included the actual salary cap number.
Speaker 2: There we're at what is it? One fifty eight nine?
I think is the number? Sounds about right? Sounds about right,
So this is what we expected. No surprises.
Speaker 1: I wanted to ask you, since there's no surprises, who
becomes Non Celtics Division just now that we have these numbers.
I think it's between two teams. But I was who
is the most interesting team to you this offseason? Now
that you know what the salary cap and the apron levels.
Speaker 3: Are you going to be well again? Since we kind
of expected this, I don't know how much like which
new team has entered the chat on that front, because
it's kind of the usual suspects, like one just has
to be Phoenix, right, Like how long Mattishbia seems like
it's going to do this forever based on his most
recent comments, but like how long can you continue to
go down this road? That's the first team that comes
to mind. I hope they're one of the two year thinking.
Speaker 1: Of Yeah, I had the Nets as the other one,
just because there are other teams that could end.
Speaker 2: So the salary cap.
Speaker 1: Is coming in at one fifty four point four point
six million, so the team that the Nets are just
the only team that we know is going to have
functional cap space, Like there are teams that could get there,
but other moves need to be made, and then there
for other teams. It's like you can create cap space,
but now that the non taxpayer mid level exception is
so high, it's sort of if you're not gonna have
twenty million dollars in cap space, you might as well
figure out a way to operate as an over the
cap team. So I'm looking at the nets and if
they're gonna have fifty plus million in cap space, they
need to facilitate basically every single move. So and I
we've talked about this. I believe they actively prioritize keeping
that cap space.
Speaker 2: When you look at how they went about their trade deadline.
Speaker 1: They took on no long term money in the Denis
Shooter or dor Infinny Smith deals, and just based off
what happened at the deadline, there were certainly opportunities for
them to add money to their books heading into next season,
and so I'm just curious as to what their thought
process is there with it. Are they gonna use it
to facilitate trades. Are they gonna, knowing that they don't
control their first round draft pick after twenty twenty six,
they're gonna say, Hey, maybe we go and we're gonna
overbid on restricted free agents, or we're gonna try and
make a trade ourselves depending on where we land in
the lottery. I just find them super interesting, and that
was always going to be the case. But I don't
I don't think everyone talks about their cap space. I
don't think their active prioritization of it is receiving enough attention.
Speaker 3: Well, it's probably not, and for two reasons. One it's
like they're the only team that has it, and two
it's like it's more interesting now because of like the
dire straits that so many other teams are in, even
with the numbers going up, So like, do you the
free agent class sucks? Like that's that's been discussed plenty.
It's like Lebron is probably the best possible free agent.
He's not leaving Kyrie Irving might have otherwise been the
second best, and he's got a torn acl Like there's
just not you know, the the glut of like, oh
my god, they can go get two of these guys
or like several high end free agents are gonna change teams.
Like that's just not where we are. So do you
think in conjunction with teams like that we've talked about
like the Celtics, like the Suns, like the Bucks even
and you can go down the line, are are the
nets just getting in position to be like a supercharged
version of what the Pistons were at the trade deadline,
where it's like, hey, they got fourteen million to burn,
they're guaranteed to be involved in stuff and pick up
assets in the process. Is are the nets going with?
Like will be your like you send send us your
misfit toys or send us your guys that you just
can't pay because you're trying to get out of the
second apron or under the first or whatever, Like is
that what this is about? Because they do. They got
their twenty six pick back too, right, So like they're
not they shouldn't be in the business. Not that they
can be because of what the market offers, but like
in the business of like let's sign a fifty million
dollar play Like that's not that can't be what this is?
Speaker 1: No, And I just you mentioned the free agency class stinks.
I don't even like looking at the restricted free agent
that it might be worthwhile for them to try and overpay.
Speaker 2: First, I don't like the name.
Speaker 1: Doesn't the first of all they have one of the
more interesting restricted free agents in cam Thomas, right, and
then do you then go and try like do you?
I could see Sean Marx trying to make Philly pay
through the teeth for Quinton Grimes.
Speaker 3: Like are they the Josh Giddy team? I don't think so.
Like it's they do need.
Speaker 1: A floor general, so maybe, but the Bulls will match
that because it's the they could max out. Josh Giddy
in Chicago would probably god probably match it.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I'm with you on that.
Speaker 1: And it also sort of seems like I guess we've
yet to see it. Maybe if you want to go
back to the Karl Anthony Towns trade a little bit,
but again, immediately that didn't have as big of a
bearing we haven't seen like the first or maybe was
Paul George the first major cap casualty of the second
aproner where it's a team just.
Speaker 2: Gets rid of a really good player. Yeah, like via trade.
Speaker 1: It certainly hasn't happened because they just let Paul George
leave a free agency and that ended up working out
well for them. Could the Timberwolves? Like does this end
with the tim or the Suns? Like, But I guess
when you start talking about those players, it would be okay.
The Sons want to get rid of Bradley Beal. They're
not gonna send Kevin Durana out for nothing. The Wolves,
it's who is the best play, Like, they're not gonna
cut Jade McDaniels to make room to keep Randall and
Reid and ni Keil Alexander Walker. I don't think the
Celtics with like Drew Holliday and Christops porzingis like, would
this be a situation where do the Nets just take
on Drew Holliday because the Celtics are sending them a
pick or even nothing like.
Speaker 2: We've yet to see a move like that. I don't
know if we'll ever get there.
Speaker 1: I think teams might plan their books accordingly moving forward,
but it does feel like if you had to guess,
I guess is my question? Do you think it's more
likely that they end up acquiring someone like their biggest
transaction is we acquired this player like a real player
and I'm not saying a star, but to help a
team get out of the second apron or lower their
tax bill whatever, or we facilitated this trade because Team
X is trying to navigate the aprons.
Speaker 3: I feel like the latter is more likely, but I
think both are in play, and I do think this
those hypotheticals illustrate like a pretty interesting not an unintended consequence,
but in in consequence of all the aprons and stuff
in the new CBA, which is that like it creates
a situation where teams just just I'll try to be
specific about it so it makes sense, but like just
you will use the Celtics like they're in a position,
as we already outline, where like they're gonna have draft
picks frozen or bumped to the end of the first round,
and they're gonna have all these resources just like taken
away until they get cheaper, until they get below this
this certain level of spending. And it's like, so if
you're so like the sort the negotiating positions are just
are just different, because it's not just that the Celtics
are we're saving x amount of money by trading player
y to the Nets who can take them on, who
can afford that. It's like we're saving x amount of money,
we're opening up this pick, we're getting access to this
roster exception, we're getting all these other benefits that like
don't affect the Nets at all, But it just means that,
like the Nets can ask for more because the Celtics
are now the Celtics are a bad example because they
don't a bunch of more to give. But it's like
all these extra benefits that the Celtics drive by making
a trade, like the Nets can lean harder on teams
like that because they're like, we're the only game in town.
We're the only way you can get access to all
this other stuff that you need to build a good
team or build like whatever. So like I do think
Brooklyn has been smart in positioning itself as like a
uniquely powerful like get out of jail free card or
facilitator or whatever you want to call them, because so
many of these other teams are gonna look at themselves
and say, like, man, we are so inflexible. And it's
like it's not just the money savings we want. We
want to be able to run our team like all
the other teams do. And that's got like added value
to it, you know.
Speaker 2: What I mean.
Speaker 3: Like it does it positions Brooklyn specifically in a really
like strong spot this summer.
Speaker 1: I also wonder how many agents will bring their free
agents and that's like, hey, give us sort of the
balloon payment deal over a year or two because just
the market is because I don't know how many teams
are going to use their mid level exceptions. When you're
looking at the non tax payer mid level exceptions, they
can use them as trade exceptions now, and so it
feels like more teams will hold on to them or
actually use them as as trade exceptions. So yeah, you're
right that I think Brooklyn was was really smart. Here
anything else, just sort of on that before we get
to our last item.
Speaker 3: No, let's hit it.
Speaker 1: I think I might be intrigued by this more than
you are, because we talked about it before we started.
But Mark Cuban keeps going on the media tour of
I would not trade. Luka Nancic, do you want to
read us the quote that's making the rounds.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the quote the money quote is from Cuban quote.
If I had any influence, the trade wouldn't happen. I
was just as dumbfounded, dumbfounded as everybody else. After I
sold the Mavericks, the new owner, Patrick Dumont, decided that Okay,
in Nico we trust, so here we are. That's from
Mark Cuban on the Your Mom's Basement podcast at tip
to Kirk Henderson.
Speaker 1: I don't know, by the way, I've never heard of
that podcast before, but I like the name.
Speaker 3: It's a solid name. No notes. Yeah, So, like, we've
talked this a little bit, and so give me give
me your your take on it first.
Speaker 1: I just I don't want to look friend of the
show Mark Cuban because he follows us on the socials.
But actually, I don't want to be too critical here.
I just don't understand how someone in Mark Cuban's position
could either actually believe or express expects us to believe
that he really believed he was going to stay on
as the head of basketball operations without having that in
any sort of writing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think I can spend my take in a
way that is charitable to him, because I like, you
really struggle to accept someone that is as smart and
has been as successful as Mark Cuban kind of taking
it on faith that like this new ownership group was like, yeah,
we're of course, like we don't need to put this
down anywhere.
Speaker 2: But operators of all people too, right, yeah, right.
Speaker 3: Like you're definitely still in charge of this, like not
a problem. Let's just like well Kit, And like for
him to take that on faith, it's just like, I
don't my spin on this is I don't believe he
actually ever thought that he was gonna stay in a
decision making capacity and he's I can't get inside his head,
Like I don't even though I just did, I can't
get deeper inside his head and say, like, and the
reason he's coming out and saying all these things about
like well if I had if I had had any say,
this wouldn't have happened is like, I don't know, maybe
maybe he feels bad for what MAVs fans find, for
the position Mass fans find themselves in now, And it's
like that's a pretty yeah, Like you'd want to console
them by saying like, hey, you know, I would have
loved to have helped, but I was double crossed.
Speaker 1: Like I don't so much as seeking absolution for someff
like the.
Speaker 3: Sure, yeah, in some ways this is his fault because
this wouldn't happened if he hadn't sold the team. It's yeah,
so I just don't it's it's a weird backhanded way
to credit him. But but I don't believe he ever
thought that absent a clear agreement, he would just continue
to be allowed to make personnel like basketball decisions Like
that doesn't square for me.
Speaker 1: No, I put more value in what he said about
how either he and when you look at like the
MAVs reluctance to play a luxury tax in like over
the years, and then him talking about how he didn't
want to be a real estate developer, and it feels
like that's increasingly what en me. I buy that part
and then also cash out, Like look at the money
he got compared to what he paid for the team.
What I really struggle with here too, And like, if
you're gonna spin it this way, the in Niko we
trust thing, who hired Nico Harrison?
Speaker 3: Right, yeah, let's gloss over that one.
Speaker 1: So I'm just like you you were the one that
said in Nico we trust, right, So I just by
the way Nico Harrison before Luka Dacis traded the executive
of the year running.
Speaker 3: He was doing great, right, he was.
Speaker 1: He was doing great until he wasn't. So I just
and then also just I don't know, like I can't
buy this. I guess just in the past where it
feels like, oh he is there a level of real ignorance.
Is it inadvertent ignorance or selective ignorance because you look
at the culture of the MAVs, like that whole the
sexual misconduct allegations from years ago that was pent up
over what it was like two decades or something, and
some of these other hires that have gone awry and
the way that Rick Carlisle exited or just like some
of the like the staffing stuff. It just I it
just makes me uneasy. Here, I understand I do it now?
Do I think if he was running the team that
they would have traded Luka Doncic had Nico brought him
this trade?
Speaker 2: No? Absolutely not.
Speaker 1: But I don't know that you can use this under
the guys like, well, yeah, we would have kept Luca
if it wasn't for the Dumonts and Nico Harrison, Like
you played a part in this, whether you want to
say it or not. And even if you don't want
to say you played a part by selling the team,
I just don't. I don't understand what the point of
positioning it like this right.
Speaker 3: Is well, and like it does feel like he's I
think you may be onto it where it's like he's
trying to absolve himself of some blame here for what's happened.
Speaker 2: But also like.
Speaker 3: If you had waited, suppose he owned the Mavericks today
and we just spent a lot of time talking about
the Celtics going for six billion dollars, Like he's how
much more is he getting if he sells the MAVs today,
like at least another billion dollars probably, right, Like, I
don't know. So that ties back to like it didn't
feel like he got a ton in selling him when
he did, and it felt hasty, and it felt potentially
motivated by like I need money now or I got
to get out of this before this news store. I
totally wild speculation, but it definitely like I'm less sympathetic
because it did feel like he sold to certainly like
suboptimal owners at a suboptimal price in like a weirdly hasty,
surprising kind of way.
Speaker 2: Right, I would not. I don't blame him for the
Luga Nanchis trade.
Speaker 1: Don't think he needs to in like somehow that oh
I was supposed to run the team and this wouldn't
have happened if you didn't have it in writing and
as you said, if this was supposed to.
Speaker 2: Be but as a as a.
Speaker 1: Licensed lawyer, like at a deal of this scale, how,
I just there's no way that he actually could have
believed that, right with.
Speaker 2: I don't think he's sort of just written agreement, correct, I.
Speaker 3: Don't think so, Yeah, I just it's I don't It's like, yeah,
I don't know what else to say other than that
just seems highly unlikely to me with that.
Speaker 2: I just that's just it's something that's bothered me. So
I figured we could cover here. Are you ready? Do
you have anything else you want to talk about it?
You ready to take us out of here?
Speaker 3: I'm good. I'm glad we got through this, though. There's
a bunch of uncovered stories so far that we hadn't waited.
Speaker 2: What about how Steph Curry's hips? Do they lie or
do they not?
Speaker 3: Oh? Man, well, I mean like his hips probably are
very truthful as Pelvis, I don't know about how much
it's lying or not. I really thought he'd be back
for that Miami game and they needed him. Hey, newsplash,
Jimmy Butler's cool and all Warriors don't have stuff they're
drawing dead. So that's a nice reaffirmation of that. I
think that's going to cover it though. Thanks everybody for watching,
for listening. Remember, please rate, review, subscribe, check us out
on YouTube. I did ask a pointed bucks question. I'm
hoping for responses, either on YouTube or in our discord
or wherever else you'd like to get in touch with us.
Join our discord links for that in YouTube and podcast description.
If you're in our discord, you can partake of the
new and revamped guests a player operation which involved spreadsheets
and invite only. That's probably not true, but anyway, get
involved there. We're going to do some more guest players,
hopefully this week, and I think that's going to do it.
Shouts Frank Millikina. Apologies, Jared Allen