Speaker 1: What is up, fellows, it goes, I am damn Valley
coming at you with the one, the only, this certified,
my certified PANTAMTS co host, mister Grant Hughes. We're here
to talk about how the three heaviest favorites the second
round of the NBA Playoffs are all totally screwed.
Speaker 2: It's over.
Speaker 1: They all lost Game one at home and we were wrong.
We have to adjust our priors accordingly, and that means
they are doomed. Their president is doomed, their future is doomed.
There is no hope. That's not actually what we're gonna do.
We're gonna talk about which which one of those three
like it should be on alert the most as we
move forward. Grant, how the heck are you?
Speaker 2: I'm doing well? I I said this last time. I'm
just loving that we've cut the field in half and
we can spend even more time focusing on fewer games.
That's a great thing. I don't wanna. I'm not gonna
We're not gonna jump right into what I think about
these games and how how panicked we should be, because
that's that's the that's like the bulk of the content here.
So I'll tell you I'm doing well, and I'm not
gonna ask you how you're doing. I'll say I hope
that you're also doing well, and uh, maybe we should
just get started.
Speaker 1: I do enjoy we said this the fewer games thing.
I'd like kind of like, well, I guess it wouldn't
be this staggered. But if the NBA ever did cut
its number of games during the regular season, it just
like gives you sort of a preview, like yeah, like no,
this would rule the Knick Celtics, which we picked. Did
we both pick Boston in five for this series?
Speaker 2: I believe still alive, still in place.
Speaker 1: People already doing victory laps in our comments. It is
technically like, well, yeah, we're rethinking this, but also not
technically wrong yet.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't.
Speaker 1: I came away from Game one basically in shock as
to what I just like the when the Knicks were
down twenty in my head, I didn't I resisted putting
it on social media, but I will save space here.
It wasn't just oh, this game's over, okay, this season's over,
like this is as I expected, like they'll maybe they'll
steal one, but this Boston's not even really giving you
their best punch in your down twenty Yeah, did you
make Like what are you take you away from this
game and as it applies moving forward?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I was in the same I don't know what
place other than that you could really find yourself in
when the deficit's twenty right, just the way that it
was shaking out like that, we could talk about some
of the surprising things that were apparent even at that
point when it seemed like, oh, Boston's gonna win every game,
like walking away, like you know, the deficits will always
be in the twenties, Like there's just no way this
is going to be competitive. I just I just think
like there was real cause for concern because it seemed
very easy when that lead was as big as it
was and Boston like wasn't playing well, you know, really
like there were things that weren't going Boston's way and
it was still just like this is these teams are
on different levels. Having said that, I don't know how
you walk away from this game without bullet point number
one on your like here's my analysis being some version
of make or Miss League, you know, Like I'm sure
you've seen various iterations of the stats, like we can
talk about Boston's process. The result was like they got
forty five uncontested threes and they made twelve or thirteen,
I forget what it was.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it was the ones that were completely unguarded.
So like the six plus feet away I think were
twenty four and they were seven of twenty four.
Speaker 2: Like, if all you knew going into a game, like
I okay, I'm you're coaching Team X, and I tell
you Dan, your team will attempt forty five threes that
will be be termed uncontested, you'd say, like, well, so
we we won by fifteen or like they're like what
you If that's all you knew, you would assume you
won with like a ninety percent rate of certainty.
Speaker 1: Especially when you go back and look. So in the
four regular season games that they played, and this is
with that fourth one where it was kind of close,
but also includes the first one where the Knicks were
absolutely drubbed, This were a minus one hundred and seventeen
from the three point line. So if someone came at
you with the stat that you just said, knowing.
Speaker 2: What happened in the first season, yeah, I mean even
what were the Knicks like seven teen of thirty seven.
I think from three I got I should know that
off the top of my head. But even if you
knew that, and you and you said you were also
aware that Boston got up sixty and forty five of
them were really good looks, like you'd still say I
think Boston still won this by double digits pretty easily, right, Like,
I just so that I don't want to reduce it
to that, because I think that that like lets Boston
off the hook a little bit because of the way
like not all those threes were, you know, the ones,
even though they were not really closely guarded like Boston's
offensive process. This feels like we could pull up a
clip of us talking about the Celtics and like searching
for a concern from any point over the last like
three years, and some version of what we're gonna say
about this game would would like appear, right because the
whole settling getting into your actions too late, not attacking downhill,
not get I think the Celtics also made half of
their shots inside the arc, so it's.
Speaker 1: Like, well when they actually took them, yet, like, so.
Speaker 2: Do that more? Maybe you know, it's all the it's
all the same concerns or like nitpicks you would make
about Boston, those were all just on display and that
that is a problem and it deserves more discussion than
just like the I mean shot sixty three's you're gonna
make more than you know that you did and you're fine,
Like there's some there's a little bit to talk about here,
so take that, or like just where are you on this,
like as from a Knicks perspective, like positive, what positives
do the Knicks take away here? Like what can you
say other than Boston missed a bunch of shots to
say to to make the case that the hey, the
Knicks did X, Y and Z well enough to win.
I've already requested off for the parade in June's where
I think. So I do want to take the because
I think that this applies to the Knicks. When you're
looking at a lot of the.
Speaker 1: Three point variability, you don't tend to credit defenses, especially
defenses that haven't necessarily proven that they're going to be
the reason that you go into some of these shots.
What I do think the Knicks did a really good
job of doing was if you go and I didn't,
I didn't go back and watch all sixty of Boston's
three pointers. I watched a lot of the makes, and
some of those mates were when Boston got New York
into rotation and they were scrambling. But a lot of
the other times, like their misses were coming when New
York either their rotations early on the possession were just
spot on, or like you didn't put them in rotation
at all.
Speaker 2: And so there's a lot of switching by the Knicks,
right that surprised me.
Speaker 1: That had to be I'd love to see the date
on that. Some like that had to be the game
where they switched the most, Like maybe it was one
of the other Celtics games earlier in their season, but
with its core and the other thing that I thought
they did a really good job doing. So they were
in the middle of switching, but like they also did
a good job of continuing to And he had possessions
where he ended up on Tatum and but Jalen Brunton
spent most of the time on Drew Holiday. And I
think unless you want to get if christophs Porzingis is
on the court, you might ask yourself, like it better
have a big on Drew Holliday. You can get into
that but Drew Holliday seems like the smartest one for
John Brunton, and now you're able to keep him on
because even though they were switching, there was I think
it was a possession in the fourth quarter where it's
like Karenton counts a screen navigation was insane, so he
switches the initial action but then doesn't get caught off
by another screen and he goes around it and he
picks up the guy again. So John Brith was able
to stay on Drew Holliday that entire possession, and that
was just I don't want to say it was the
best defensive performance I've seen from the next this season,
but in terms of like the variability of what they
threw out there and the execution of it, I came
away thinking, like McHale, Bridges, Josh Hart Oji all having
like that type of defensive game at once. I do
think what helped them get there is so Christops porzingis
and the illness like that he is, like when you
look at the Knicks roster specifically, he's the guy you're
not say he's always gonna make his shots, but like
he's the guy the type of big that just breaks
it and it's just so different when one you're going
to have, and they didn't perform particularly well in the glass,
but when it's just out Horford, like, it's different because
now you don't have the Al Horford and Porzingis minutes
and it's just different when it's Al Horford out there
versus when it's just Porzingis out there. You might be
a little bit better off if you're Boston wanting to switch. Defensively, sure,
without Horford, I won't argue that, but offensively, like Christaps,
Porzingis is just more of an anomaly there. Yeah, at
this point. So I think that helped them. But I
also think what the the Knicks did a really good
job of doing is like they got after it after
Boston's misshots too, and it was like there were still
some possessions where things bogged down. But if you're gonna
be able to play with a semblance of pace, like
Josh Hart really good at setting the pace for them
and and forcing but like you know, Boston after missus,
like going up against their defense when it's not set. No,
I don't think they're gonna make seventeen of thirty seven
from three, So like that stuff will normalize, but it
did just give you hope that Okay, there's like there's
a blueprint here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think I see a lot of, uh, you know,
allusions to all Orlando put the blueprint out, like speaking
of blueprints, like Orlando is just not switching against Boston
and for more isolation stuff, staying out of rotation, all
that kind of thing. Oh the Knick's crib from that,
I think that that's probably true to some extent. But
the thing I couldn't avoid thinking, and we've seen it
in a few other playoff series, what do you think
maybe like because the idea of like, oh, switch ability
on defense is like this premium skill, like that's been
around for a minute, Like you know, the the Draymond Warriors,
those Rockets teams with PJ Tucker at center, what you know,
both had hardened slash Curry as like the vulnerable guy
that's the brunts and roll keep those guys out of
the action and switch everything else Like that was really
more designed I think to slow down like a pick
and roll or a pick and pop or just like
short circuiting that action that had become so prevalent. I
wonder now, and the fact that the Celtics got up
as many threes as they did, Maybe just means this
is a theory we can debunk immediately. But I also think, like, well,
if the goal is to stay out of rotations, switching
solves that. And if the reason you want to stay
out of rotations is because there are teams that will
just fire off threes with no you know, no remorse,
no second thoughts, like Boston does, like that's an interesting
trend that I think a lot of teams might employ.
Now Boston is the extreme case because the Celtics shoots
so many threes, and that's like what they want is
to get you, you know, closing out late to somebody
and getting a look that way. But I wonder if
as the three point like volume had just continues to
increase around the league, we might see like not a
return to but like a like a reinvigoration of like,
all right, we've got to switch everything. And if you
want to beat us in isolation on two point attempts,
best of luck, because we're going to shoot a lot
of threes on the other end. And so it's possible that,
like I think Game two in this series is going
to be a phenomenal like I don't know, not a
litmus test, but like we may get a sense of,
all right, how committed are you Nix and everybody else
that's that's trying to switch so much, like is this
going to be a new like a new thing now
where just because we're so afraid of threes being just
burying us, you know, like to circle all the way back,
you give up forty five uncontested threes, Like you can't
that that can't happen as a defense like that. That's
a mistake. And so that's the irony of me praising
the next switching having given that up I am aware of.
But like, if you want to get that number down
against a normal team that's not Boston, switching might just
do that, like and at least force at least so
the best thing I would say about the Knicks is
they forced Boston to like kind of lean on their
worst instincts. And maybe that changes in game two. But
I think the switching thing is going to be interesting
to follow, like as a league wide kind of trend.
Just let's stop letting teams get open threes because we're
scrambling and we didn't because we played the pick and
roll straight up makes Does that make sense? Do you
think that might be thing?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I also just sort of wondered, like how much
of it could become And I think that applies to
this series, to more variability. And even so the Knicks,
like they did place a man in this and I
just the Orlando blueprint. I understand what people are saying
about it, but I didn't necessarily I didn't see a
lot of it. And like Orlando was running these dudes
all off the three point line right, which the Knicks
were just not doing. So that's almost counterintuitive to think about.
I do also think that and this is I think
the Knicks won this game like more than Boston. Like
it was a combin it's always a combination of things
where I think that maybe this showed that the Knicks
do have more punch in them than we expected against Boston.
But Boston's process, as you mentioned, was bad, and I
think like one of the low hanging fruits is just
I don't know what was going on with Jason Tatum. Yeah,
like were they trying to over course correct because of
what happened in the Orlando series, So they're determined to
get off these threes, but he goes from averaging about
thirteen drives per thirty six minutes in that Orlando series.
So he has seven drives against the Knicks, which when
you factor in overtime, that's like five and a half
drives per thirty six minutes. This is someone who has
the ability to get downhill and not bail out and
draw some fouls. And he had like there were because
the Knicks were switching, Like there were moments when Jalen
Brunson was on him and just like he bumped down
Brunton off him and it was okay. That creates a
separation for your pull up jumper, but that's not falling
right now, like maybe to get to the basket at
that point. I think that they can certainly do more
of that and that will be okay. What because part
of the appeal of Boston is it's not just they
have all these dudes that can space the floor. It
is everyone on the court basically at all times can dribble,
shoot and pass and decision make like however you want
to frame it. And so they just didn't lean on that.
I think the Knicks did a good job of kind
of and that I also kind of wonder in that
sense if the Piston series helped them, because that was
such a physical series and Boston just doesn't play that
way even when they're at full strength. But I think,
like as much as the Knicks gave Boston real trouble,
like Boston really kind of just self sabotaged itself on
so many of these offensive possessions.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think you have to do some version of
this in every game that flips, like like Game one did.
But like if I'm apportioning, you know, the Knicks winned
or did the Celtics lose it, I think that the
larger percentage of that weight is on the Celtics lost it.
Just I mean just the shooting aspect of it. That
like that you said, the low hanging fruit that was
just like left unpicked over and over again. What was
I know, I can't remember when in the game it happened,
but Tatum did hit a deep like isolation step back
against the defender he should have taken. It might have
been Cat, it might have been Mitchell Robinson. But then
like there was the one late with like five and
a half seconds left, I think Tatum did have Mitchell
Robinson on him and he shot a deep three, Like,
I think I'll be stunned in game two if Boston
doesn't and and Tatum specifically, if Boston doesn't make a
real concerted effort to just like get downhill and try
to finish, because I do think the Knicks are going
to stay home a fair amount. That is like kind
of the Orlando blueprint is like just try to finish.
Just you gotta beat us with contested twos. And I
think the Celtics and Tatum specifically and Brown really too,
if you get a big switched out like or Brunson
switched on to you, there's just a lot of ways
to get to the basket, and maybe that opens up
the kickout game and you get your threes anyway. But
it's like I think, I think Boston just needs to
make some lay like or get fouled, because especially with
the Knicks being as thin as they are, like foul
trouble matters more for the Knicks than most other teams
because like Tim's just doesn't want to play a bunch
of guys Like that's that's another bonus for Boston if
it can just quit shooting, quit settling. I guess it's
it's a trite way to frame it, but like that
is what it felt.
Speaker 1: Like, and it's you know what's also fascinating here is
because you mentioned the foul trouble and I find myself
coming away you felt Mitchell Robinson's impact on a lot
of defensive possessions. But they went to mal A Mitch
or what I call it now, Mitch's get stitches will
be and so they went to that he's three of
ten at the foul line. But kar Anthy Towns was
also in foul trouble right like I'm just and they
had to go to precious to Chua and like Josh
Hart was on the court when they did that. At
one point I was like, ah, I thought I thought
this was over, but I don't know, Like what's the
Like how playable do you see Mitchell Robinson being in
this series? It does you would think that if porzingis
is gonna be limited or not available, it's you would
get a lot easier. But if you don't think that
him playing twenty minutes per game in a regulation like
I'm not rid, even like Factory, in a game that
has some overtime in it, if you don't think he
can give you twenty minutes per game, it becomes even
more critical to keep Karl Anthony Towns out of foul trouble,
which did not happen right for much of game for
game one.
Speaker 2: Well, that's the other wild thing. And I short answer, yeah,
like I think if Porzingis doesn't play, that just gives
you more options to play Robinson. But but like another
point in the Knicks favor I guess is that like offensively,
Cat wasn't good and he he had his typical like
you know, handful of dumb Cat fouls. I think he
outperformed expectations defensively, like holding up on switches fairly well.
But like to win a game without Cat really being
like anything close to the best version of himself offensively
and to have been limited by foul trouble, that's one
that's like that's not in the in the like if
you're looking up, like, okay, what are the examples of,
like what are the Knicks games Knicks wins gonna look like? Oh,
Brunson will have fifth or like the Celtics will miss
a ton of threes. Like very few of those hypotheticals
involve Kat just having a bad game offensively. You would
assume that he's gonna have to be great, and they
won a game when he wasn't. Like it's still I'm
not changing my priors, but it's like the Knicks got
this one, and so like now you just they don't
need to get lucky again as often, you know, And it's.
Speaker 1: There's a level of luck involved at every step, but
also does it give you any Maybe it's not confidence,
but sort of like you're gonna stop and say, well, like,
maybe anything more about this series because mkel Bridges and
Kalonton Towns did not I know, mkel Bridges had a
big three that they did not have good offensive games right,
and they both shot like these egregious air balls at
one point. Mikel Bridges always seems like he's actively going
away from the basket. Yeah, and yet you still won.
And so I want to I want to throw flowers
out to two players in this I mean, Josh Hart
was really good too. This is and I promise Raptor
Sans I watched him in Toronto. This is the best
version of og Ananob that we have ever seen. And
it kind of started to creep up before the Brunton
ankle injury, but it really popped off after it, and
they just kind of never went back. It feels like, yeah,
his usage is down, not creating as much with Brunson
there one duh, but two, it does feel like they've
kind of apportioned some of what would have been the
McHale Bridges usage at full strength back to Ojannoby. I
still don't necessarily trust him as a playmaker, but he
had this one finish, like he has Jalen Brown going
one on one, goes to his left I think it was,
and he finishes over Jalen Brown and through Al Horford
and it's like.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, and he finished with the right hand on
the left side with like a hang, yeah.
Speaker 1: This is And then to then just be defending Jason
Tatum for most of the game, which the cell and
this again, I think a lot of this was settling.
But you have to give the credit like to oj Annobe, Mcalbridge,
Josh Hart. The Celtics average point six to three points
per possession on plays in which og Anobe registered as
like the final defender on Jason Tatum, and so to
carry that workload and then do what he did on
offense incredible.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And then Jalen Brunson I'm trying to think of who
are the other players in recent NBA vintage that I've
thought of this way, and I think it's probably Dame
and Jokic of where it's just no, I don't like
the Knicks's crunch time process, and I've been pretty vocal
about that, but I just expect every shot he takes
when it matters most to go in now. And I
can tell you I don't think I've ever felt that
way about a Knicks player specifically, Like this is this
is insane, Like some of the shot I mean him
and Aaron Gordon apparently.
Speaker 2: Right, like right, well, yeah, I mean, anybody else but
Brunson you would be surprised. But at this point, it's just, yeah,
it has become the expectation that he's just gonna hit
the big shots and and he I mean this game
was no. I mean, he's nine of twenty three overall,
but he was five and nine from deep six. Is
like he just he shouldn't be able to keep doing this,
like with the sheer workload that he's had to endure.
Is like if anybody is like should have an excuse
for like, ah, he looks a little slow tonight, like
it's him, him and just maybe well him and Steph
I guess after that Rocket series. But like heah, I
agree with you. It's just the expectations should be that
he will hit big shots late and and I don't know,
maybe we need to reevaluate clutch player because like that
just is what he is and we can't dismiss it like, oh,
he won it this year. So uh yeah, I mean,
I think you're encouraged if you're the Knicks for certain.
I think at the same time, unless you think from
Boston's perspective that like they'll continue to miss and they
won't change up some of their process and in reaction
to this loss, like I don't I don't feel like
the concern level from Boston's side. Uh maybe it wasn't
high enough to begin the series, but I don't think
it's moving up. But you know, a whole bunch of
notches on the scale.
Speaker 1: I think you can look at this when you say
there's stuff for the Knicks to clean up, it feels
like there's more for Boston to clean up, and they
were still in control of the game at one point.
That's not to take away from what the Knicks did,
but there's there's. First of all, there's no reason to
panic after a Game one, like had the Knicks in
rationally speaking, I shouldn't declare their season over had they
lost Game one to a team that is heavily favored
over them, you can because they're justification there. But no,
I don't think Boston should be panicking. But I will
kind of be looking at and I don't necessarily see
it on defense as much or even some of his drives,
but the Jaalen Brown knee thing, like he was one
of ten from three all year necessarily hasn't looked the same.
So that and then in combination with porzingis but I'm
wondering if, like, okay, is this team just a little
bit more banged up than we gave credit for even still, like,
I think you're gonna see a far more complete game
from Boston in Game two.
Speaker 2: I'd be stunned if you didn't. I think the funny
thing is like if the Knicks had won this game
by forty, I feel like we would more easily write
it off as like Boston shouldn't be concerned than the
Knicks winning a close game, because it would just be like, well,
nothing's valuable from this game because it's just such an outlier.
Like Weirdly, the Knicks winning a close game that involved
a comeback is like more concerning for Boston than if
Boston had just you know, gotten blown off the floor,
because either there'd be all these you know, you tried
out all the excuses like ah, they had too much
time off, or you know, they just didn't. Weirdly, a
tight wind that the Knicks fought for and like seized,
it's more concerning for Boston than getting crushed.
Speaker 1: The final thing. I really do think we need to
pour one out for Tom Thibodau because in a game
that went to overtime, he found a way He's scrapped
in claude to get Michale Bridges one hundred and twenty
thousand milliseconds of.
Speaker 2: Rest only fifty one minutes played. What restraint?
Speaker 1: It's one hundred and twenty thousand milliseconds of rest. That's kudos, Ta,
although actually keep credit him like that was they tried
different things defensively. For everyone wants to talk about adjustments
from Tibbs, he did at least do that. Yeah, we'll
see what happens. Sometimes I wonder if like the foul
trouble forced it, like the was that game won against
the Pistons where Josh Hart was in foul trouble and
so it forced him to make some adjustment. So it's
almost like you need to take the club out of
Tibbs's bag to force him to try and use something else.
Speaker 2: Hey, whatever works, You're on.
Speaker 1: Too, and we'll get you should stay tuned towards the
end because we will pick which of the three heavy
favorites should be most concerned Thunder Nuggets. I picked you
did have you had Thunder and six. I had Thunder
and five. I'm seeing a lot of the Thunder aren't
ready for this moment stuff after game one. I also
think that we should probably talk about that. Chet Holmgren
is just a bust at this point, right, like, how
do we how do we do the hot take thing?
What would like the hottest take coming?
Speaker 2: He's not clutched, he's not built for the moment. What
else does Nick Anderson all over again saw that somewhere.
Speaker 1: I don't know what is standing aside from I made
the joke about it like Aaron Gordon, just like, so
the Nuggets are what eight playoff games? When he has
two game winners through it, Like that's incredible.
Speaker 2: And like arguably the most incredible game winner we've seen.
And I don't know how long on the on the.
Speaker 1: Hold on Russell Westbrook passing up the chance to try
and get a bucket to give Aaron Gordon though I
thought he was gonna try, and like, shoot, oh.
Speaker 2: That was like prime, I'm throwing myself at the backboard
and like whatever happens happens like vintage Russ, just out
of control. So yeah, you're right that he's the real
winner because he just somehow, somehow saw a way to
give that and it was a great pat like he
made the right play.
Speaker 1: But he made a lot of like his defense in
Game one too, and we could say that I had
a lot of moments during these playoffs, of course, but
like he was, they were moving him around on all
these different attimements. He's been he actually.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he's a good defender on the ball like that.
I think he still makes mistakes a lot like gambling
or just like you know, off ball stuff, but he
really is someone and like this matters. I guess Brown
fits into this category two for Denver, but like Russ
is a really someone you can put on a good
offensive player as long as he doesn't have to like
do too much like processing about like off the ball stuff.
He's like he can do that, and as long as
he doesn't like shoot you out of games or do
a bunch of dumb turnover stuff or over aggressive stuff
like he I never thought I'd get here, but like
he's a valuable role player. Like we I think I'd
finally come around on this version of us.
Speaker 1: How many years did it take? Wow?
Speaker 2: What year of his career is this? So this is
a different situation I think than the Celtics Knicks series,
just solely because some of the things that went wrong
for the Thunder I guess, well, I guess in a
way that's kind of mirroring the Boston shooting stuff. But
like the Nuggets were plus twenty on the boards. I
think they had eight more offensive rebounds. That whole rebounding
thing has been it's a little outdated. That was a
bigger concern for like past Thunder teams and the versions
of them that didn't have centers this year. But to
get bludgeon on the boards and like have that be
a pretty significant reason that you lost this game, Like
that's that's like you put a little pin in that one, right.
I think maybe there's a few other things, but that
was the first thing that jumped out to me. Is
like Jokics just playing volleyball on the glass and Gordon
getting in there for a handful of extra possessions. And
then like, this was not a high scoring half court
offense game for either team except Denver did really well
on second chance opportunities. And I think, you know, if
you're looking for something that swung it, like that's pretty
close to like option one for me. Yeah.
Speaker 1: The thing I also noticed and not that part of
this was so there are two things defensively, I really
thought that Nikola Jokic ended up with small players on
him like too often. If you're okay, I know that's
like Oka C's thing. And you were also dealing with
some foul trouble to your bigs, which is what Nikola
Jokic does. And I know this isn't necessarily harram oh,
but I'd probably like to if you're in that situation
and look, this is perfect. We have Alex Caruso guarding
Nikole Jokic on the screen card photo. I'd probably like
to see you send help a little sooner than we
were seeing from them on that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but that's so risky though. You send a second
guy and Jokich is gonna dice you up. You know that.
That's the conundrum with him.
Speaker 1: He diced you up anyway. That's the other thing too,
is I guess are they looking at it as so
Jamal Murray like after the first quarter? I like, if thunder,
we're throwing more bodies at him. And so it was like,
I guess that worked on Jamal Murray, But is that's
the smartest approach for your overall defense here? I do
think the bigger issue for Okac was they got to
be better after their missing shots. On the offensive end.
The Nuggets scored one point one to six points per
possession after an Okac miss. Okay Se had the best
defense in the league in those situations at one point
zero seven points upper possession through the regular season and
the playoffs so far. Like that, there was just a
lot of where it's like, why are you Why is
Jamal Murray so far behind your defense after a miss
on it? Like even if you want to factor in
the long rebound stuff like that was just that was
weird and that feels like more than because you can't change.
You can't make chet Holmegrin thicker. You can't make Isaiya
hart and Stein any thicker like you can. That felt
like low hanging fruit they could clean up.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean Denver. I think Denver had the best
transition offense in the league. And like, but all we
do all postseason is talk about like, oh that doesn't
matter because teams will be diligent about getting back and
certainly the thunder are one that is like you're not
gonna outrun the thunder, you know on the break. Ever
that so that is like that favors the Nuggets. But
I would agree with you that, like I think the
thunder are gonna that's getting cleaned up. I would imagine,
like cause that's all gonna be really conspicuous stuff that
shows up in the film where it's like see this,
see that guy in the white jersey that's like ten
steps closer to the basket than you are, Like, maybe
don't let that happen after a miss like that, that
seems fairly easy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they ran, They were in transition on like forty
five percent. That's never missing, OKC, that's astro. They were
at thirty percent for the regular season, which is a
good number to be over forty percent. Is just like,
I like, you don't Denver's Offen is gonna figure out
a way to score anyway because Nicolaiokic just exists. You
don't want to give them those additional opportunities.
Speaker 2: Do you think as a as just in isolation, that
the Thunder are happy with Jokic taking twenty nine shots
uh and making fifteen? Like just do you think what
about game one? What can game one tell you about?
Like how the Thunder it? It's the the old Like
do we want to let Jokic score because we know
he doesn't Like that's not his like that's not option
one on his like programming basically, like is it is
it because he had what forty two got to the
foul line thirteen times? Do you think the Thunder want
him to try to beat them individually and that's like
that's why they played him the way they did or
was this just Jokic like taking what was there?
Speaker 1: Regardless, it sure seems like that's what they want because
if you even meant you said you wouldn't do this,
you wouldn't throw two on Jokic earlier that, yeah, you
don't think that okay, well to just talk about that
for a second, you don't think that, okay, is the
person out like where maybe you could still if.
Speaker 2: Anybody does it to them, And we should say there
were moments in this game. I think the biggest lead
was fourteen, but I early it certainly in the first half,
there were moments where it was like, oh, this is
like the Thunder can just create like a level of
frenzy that like no other team does, and a lot
of that's Caruso, like he was unbelievable, just so disruptive,
and then like the other thing that happened, Like I
had several moments where it was just like because we
talked about like did we overthink the Thunder and is
it just like they're just that team, They're so overwhelming,
And there were Dort Dort steals a Jokic like no
look pass and transition just goes up in two hands,
it like a free safety and it is like, I
sincerely can't remember seeing anyone ever steal a Yokic pass
like that, and so they was just like, well, there's
another example of how the Thunder are just different and
there's no way that the Nuggets can win this game.
They're gonna get just ran overwhelmed and like the thunder
did hit levels where it felt like they were unbeatable.
They just there their ice, They're conspicuous in their isolation,
Like how few of those there were?
Speaker 1: I think the yeah, yeah, I did we underthink the Nuggets?
Isn't now the question that we might need to ask
because oh.
Speaker 2: No, because my only thought on the Nuggets is they
have Yokic and so they're they're well they're.
Speaker 1: Also just we did I think we've done it job
of not underestimating this in the past, but like they're
pretty huge, yeah, and so like even if it's it's
not it wasn't a Michael Porter junior game that was clear,
Like the shoulder stuff wasn't great defensively, like Christian Brown
has God and he had some really good straight up
possessions on Shae Gilga Alexander in this game, Like Shay
had some moments where, especially if they weren't throwing a
ton like a you know, being aggressive with him, then
we saw them be a little bit more aggressive with him,
like when it mattered, and it was sort of the
what is it Like the anyone but Shay Approach I
think is like kind of what it was. But Peyton
Watson has a really good side. He was kind of
all over the place this game, but he had some
good moments. Jokich is huge when you're talking about getting rebounds.
Aaron Gordon is pretty big. And if you get one
or both of ok C's biggs into foul trouble, that
size discrepancy becomes even more pronounced. And so I'm just
I'm relooking at this series and it's I'm not changing
any of my predictions. I mean, like, do I think
this series is gonna go longer than five games? Yeah,
like fucking obviously. Now I do.
Speaker 2: Ever, I mean, maybe we'll see, well.
Speaker 1: I do the thing that I want to get in
because I think, like Denver is, I don't like what
game was it last year? Like was a game four?
Speaker 2: Whatever.
Speaker 1: They've just flipped a defensive switch. It feels like where
it's like, oh, like they're gonna play, They're gonna be
able to be physical, They're gonna be able to do
a ton of different things. Russell Westbrook is gonna come
out here and just annihilate things. Christian Brown, I feel
like has gotten noticeably better during that stretch. What is
what did you notice about Okac's offense that you think
they could do, because you mentioned like, did Okase look
at this and say, we're fine with you Oki taking
twenty nine shots?
Speaker 2: Because yeah, he will.
Speaker 1: He will have nights where he goes fifteen of twenty nine,
but like you said, it's kind of not like, you know,
that's not in his DNA, Like that's not something he's
probably comfortable doing it, but that would not be what
he wants to do. First, What did you notice about
Okac's offense though, in terms of how Denver either was
defending them or what Okac did or didn't do, or
what was it? Oh, we do need to revisit the
problem of what does the offense look like if it's
not shake Gildess Alexander trying to generate it? Or was
this Do you think it was more about what Denver
was able to do? Do you think it was more about
some of the shots that Okay missed, because I think
Denver might look at this and say, Caruso and Dort
huge games from three. But you could say what you
said about the thunder and Yokiche if he scores forty points.
We'll live at that. We're gonna try and limit everybody else.
If you're the Nuggets, you're probably like you look at
what shake Yilloslexander did. Had a good line, but like
you made life tough on him, and it's you live
with Alex Caruso and lou Dort detonations in that scenario.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think so. I guess like this is another
so in addition to the rebounding issue, I think this
is another Like, oh no, this is one of the
things we were concerned about for a long time, which
is just if if all you do as a Denver
defense is make SGA work, you know what, you have
twenty six shots for thirty three points and got the
line nine times like that, that's not you know, I think,
all things being equal, you're okay with Shae getting thirty three.
I guess weirdly if you're Denver, but the but it
is just like what was Jadabo's five twenty Chet didn't
make a three? Like I mean, if if Dort doesn't
go four for nine from three, you're you're developed. Probably
what if he shoots I don't know, two for nine,
This game's like not close, maybe down the stretch and
then like I just it's I can't get a whole
lot farther than It still seems like an issue against
good defenses, which I guess Denver is now at the
moment for the Thunder to get somebody else that can
reliably create offense, create advantages like all that kind of stuff.
Like even Jadab had moments where like he had a
couple of great drives, again maybe conspicuous for how few
there were, but y had what he had like a
hard drive left pull up that just got blocked. You know,
it was towards the end of the shot clock late
in the game, didn't really hit his threes. What was
he at two for nine? It does feel like the
supplementary offense is still a problem, and again, like we're
not going to overreact. I do think it's like if
if check came, if Chet hit five threes in game
two and Jadab had thirty points on like seventeen shots,
like we would just say, okay, there, that's fine. But
it is an issue when problems you foresee arise, because
like there's a reason that we've been concerned about that
kind of thing for a team as good as the
Thunder as like it's one of the few things there
don't consistently excel at. And maybe the samples of like
well as long as Williams is out there with chet
or Hardenstein, maybe those samples weren't big enough and maybe
they didn't come and you know against playoff defenses that
are designed to, you know, kind of exploit that that frailty.
I don't know, I don't know. It's we're talking about
a one game sample, so nothing smaller than that, but
it does. I'm a little concerned for the thunder. I mean,
you sort.
Speaker 1: Of have to be who do you think what would
this series share because this was like also one of
the worst games in terms of watching like two teams
finish around the basket when they got there. If that
becomes a trend in this series, who do you think
that favors works? Like this is ugly around the basket?
So who is ends up better off if that is
what ends up happening.
Speaker 2: If it's uglier, like it's a struggle inside, like they're
both like shooting like fifty like sub fifty five percent
at the rim.
Speaker 1: I think I'll double check that.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't say I would probably just say that favors
Denver weirdly, because I just I have visions in my
head of jokicen there missing a short one, getting it
back or tipping it out for an open three. It's
like I think, if if there's a scrum around the
baskets as athletic and mobile and stuffs as the Thunder
can be, I think Jokic is just too big, Like
I think, I think that favors the Nuggets in a
lot of ways, maybe, which like also the Nuggets we've
harped on them all here. Don't want to shoot a
bunch of threes, and don't shoot a lot of threes
if you want to turn this into a two point contest.
I mean, that's that's not the worst thing in the
world for Denver.
Speaker 1: I and I understand this is what this is countertruitive
because that jokis. But that's also why I would with
this Okac Thunder group advocate of you can cover in
a cold Yokic more aggressively then, And I also I
still don't know how much of that was just all
our guys are in found all hard Yokic foul trouble
right now.
Speaker 2: Which made me the case going forward, all the time.
Speaker 1: That's That's what I want to ask you. What do
you make of the CHET home grin of it all?
And specifically are you looking at ways to kind of
I do think Isay a heartenstein in so far as
anyone did a good job defending Jokic was clearly better,
and even he had his moments where it's again, you
could be a little bit more like, let's not give
Jokic like all that space on the above the breakthrough
that we know he's going to take and probably make
because it's one. Yeah, anyway, but are you doing everything
you can to? I've seen there have been some national
hours like oh is this not a CHET series? And
I can't get there? So if this isn't a CHET series,
the Thunder might not win this series, But like, are
you trying to do everything possible so that he doesn't
have to spend all this time straight up on Jokic.
Speaker 2: It's fascinating question. I think I think it could. You
might be the people saying it's not a CHET series
might be right if the Thunder are not are going
to have him guard Jokic as much as it seemed
like they did in Game one. I just felt like
every time I looked up, it was like, oh my god,
it's Chet and hard to seign buffe.
Speaker 1: Sacrificial like a sacrifice.
Speaker 2: So here's the thing, if is that plant? Because if
you have Chet on Jokic, your first thought is like
he's not big enough. You got to send two. Well,
then it's like, from the thunder's perspective, you've not only
sent a second defender. Chet's your best like back line
mop up guy, and he's not back in that spot,
so like you've taken him out of the play. So
sending two at Jokic when one of them is Chet
feels like you're asking to just get Aaron Gordon backcut,
dunked to death or like think you know, Christian Brown
open three to death. Like that doesn't feel like a
viable strategy. So if that's what you're gonna do, then
I if Chet's the loan big I think honestly, I
would rather just have Caruso or Dort try to stand
Yokich up on the perimeter and have Chet back, you know,
cleaning up messes on the back line. As bizarre as
that sounds, but we've seen remember the nets against Mbiid
just had two smalls on him. The whole game like that,
Like that that's a thing you can try. I would
almost rather have two wings or two guards bother Yokic
than to have Chet be one of two guys on
him or be an eye, unless the plan is like, yeah, sorry, Chet,
you're just gonna have to eat this one, like you're
the pitcher that we we've taxed our bullpen last night.
You're gonna have to give up nine earned runs or
not taking you out because the point is to make
Yokic a scorer. Like if that's the three D chest
that Dagnault's playing, maybe that's why you leave him in there.
But I do think in general, I don't want Chet
on Jokic, and I really really don't want him on
Jokic if it means you have to send a second guy,
just because that feels like it's there's too many compromises
being made.
Speaker 1: It does feel like if you're gonna not it feels
like it should just be Heart and Stein. But you're
that's interesting. I mean, we saw the Clippers do this
a little bit when they decided to put Harden on
Yo Kich.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you can do it. The Lakers did all that
weird stuff, you know, against Jokic this year. I just
don't think Chad is the right guy for that because
he has you can, you're taking away his like a
lot of his defensive value if you're putting him on
a guy that you just he can't guard, you know.
Speaker 1: And the the other thing too is you are then
taking away his offensive gravity if he's in foul trouble
to where it's just like Isaiah Hartenstein, Yeah, okay likes
a screen setter and the stuff he could do in
the short role. Sure, but like we even saw, like
Jokic will concede those floaters. Is Harner Scibas too? It
forces Denver to think more about its matchups. What is
doing defensively if Chad is just on the floor, and
I think that needs to be a priority. Is keeping
him on the floor because I think that helps optimize
your offense.
Speaker 2: How great are the playoffs where it's like the Nuggets
could be correct in saying our scheme is designed to
give Isaiah Hartenstein the exact shot he wants as often
as he wants it, and somehow that's the right decision.
Like the tactical stuff is so great where it's like,
as a defense, you can concede things that normally during
the year you'd be like, that's insane. Why would you
give that guy that shot? He makes it all the time.
Speaker 1: It's like, well, that.
Speaker 2: Means SGA is not shooting it, and that means we're
not giving up three. It's like there's all these layers
to it where when an offense thinks it's getting something good,
it's like, actually, the defense is cool with that because
there are worse alternatives to give up. Playoffs are great, but.
Speaker 1: The final thing on this game and it's more I
guess getting out in front of just Mark Dagnall, the
fouling up three thing, Yes, someone I don't like it,
just get stitches. I don't like, you know, I don't
like the foul. I want that to be like you
can't do it, like there needs to be something to
help prohibit it. My whole thing is just the mistake
that they made was fouling when Jokic was out of
the game and Denver didn't have a time out.
Speaker 2: I have no issue with anything else. Well, sorry, go ahead,
I'm glad you led with that because that is the
one that's like, Ah, even as I was watching, it
was like, you can't do that, but I'm also.
Speaker 1: Kind of a I'm not I'm not a big believer
in stubbornness, but I don't view that like if this
was Tom Thibodeau, it's different. I don't think Mark Dagnault
is stubborn in his principles and it could have just
been like a misque and it's yeah, in retrospec he
admitted it. I think even Jay Tubbt did you see
it was like damn, I didn't even think of that.
Oh really yeah, so it was a mistake. But the
something I always come back to is it's the same
thing with the last two minute reports or if there's
one missed call, something happens late in the game. There
was forty seven and a half minutes another basketball, and
like that's not the des and like that's the whole
It's not to me, and I don't like it's tough
to measure, well, how important is experience? And down the
stretch it certainly looks like, all right, the thunder do
not look like a team that has been to the
NBA Finals together, and the Nuggets certainly do. It's okay
to say that, but like I don't look at this
and say, like, oh, they're not built. It was a mistake,
and if they continue to make them, I just I'm
not a fan of that because it was it was
a mistake. It was jok was half a game. You
came a chance to come back in.
Speaker 2: You didn't need to.
Speaker 1: It was a mistake. But like, I don't know if
they continue to make it or something, But I like,
do you assign any sort of value to like how
the end of the game folded out in that I.
Speaker 2: Would say nitpick like I would if and who knows
what I would do in the moment. I'd probably be
in the fetal position because it's so overwhelming and scary.
Speaker 1: Know that nokitch is like that am I keeping track
of because it's not there's someone on the other on
the bench, presumably that's keeping track of Denver's timeouts?
Speaker 2: Like did they make I'm yeah, yeah, so I think yes,
you could be really nitpicky. It's not super nitpicky, because
it's like, just don't let them get their best player
back in the game for an offensive possession. Like that's like,
all right, we can we can agree that that was
probably a mistake, and to a lesser extent, the just
not burning any time before the intentional fouls like not
going for steals for a few seconds, like.
Speaker 1: They fould they found Aaron Gordon. That was the only
they fouled Aaron Gordon, right, who's like shooting eighty plus
percent right, and you couldn't have tried to get it
and someone else's like force them to get rid of
the ball.
Speaker 2: In terms of like the weight I give that stuff,
I would say that I think it's more informative to
look at the like handful of stretches where the Thunder
were just like chaos personified and were dominating the game
physically and doing all like that provides more like forward
looking value to me than scrutinizing what the last twelve
seconds look like tactically, Like you know what I mean,
Like if you're trying to project forward in the series,
like yeah, maybe we have another tight game like this,
and maybe we don't, and maybe the Thunder puts the
decision to foul or how to do that, or they're
not like the stretch where they dominated, Like I think
that's the clip you show in film before Game two
and be like look what we're doing to this team,
Like look how we're running them out of the gym
and just like playing at you know, we're redlining and
they're you know, they're at like three thousand. Ur like
that that stuff matters more even when you lose. And
I would say too, like I think we would be
talking about a lot of the same things. But like
that Aaron Gordon shot that won it. Let's say that's
a forty shot for him. Maybe it's a little higher
because he's open and it's a trend whatever. It's like,
even down to the last second before that shot goes
in the thunder, were probably supposed to win, like just
based on the math, Like that's not a fifty one
percent shot for Gordon. So like it's easy to panic
and easy to like scrutinize all this other stuff. But
like even if you give that up wide open to Gordon,
like you still should win the game because he doesn't
make that shot half the time, right, I don't know,
Like that's I think that's we got to keep a
little perspective on stuff like that.
Speaker 1: Anything else on this series.
Speaker 2: Alex Crusso is a monster, that's all.
Speaker 1: That's why you trade for Alex Caruso. Woul Josh Giddy
have had this game. We're gonna talk so we did
already talk extensively about Cavs Pacers Game one, and by
the time you listen to this, we've already seen game two.
So but we're doing the which favorite needs to be
most concerned. I will note go back and listen to
that Game one episode. I did it with Mort Jensen
of the NBA Podcast a bunch of different things. If
Grant wants to fire off any takes, totally let him.
We love Grant around these parts. Grant, did you know
that we love you around these parts? I hear it
a little too much to be honest, but something just
I'm interested to see the Darius Garland injury. But also,
and we're seeing this now that neither DeAndre Hunter, Evan
Mobley or Darius Garland participated and shoot around in the
morning of game two. And Brian Windhorst, as he says
this quote, typically it's not a good sign if you're
not participating shoot around. Now, these are the playoffs and
the games. I know you have a day off in between,
Like this is like a quicker turnaround for the playoffs.
I'm not assigning too much value to it, but if
you were, I'm gonna frame it like this. If you
were the Pacers one Game one. They are fantastic team
I've played, been underrated for like sixty plus games. Now, Like,
clearly I think this series might last longer than five. Still,
maybe I underestimated them. But if you're gonna be worried
about the Cavs more so than pointing to anything that
happened in game one, might just be like the Darius
Garland injury because it shifts the advantage creation workload most
onto Donovan Mitchell and Ty Jerome because like, that's not
really Evan Mobley's game just yet, even though we do
some of it and it's kind of tougher to do
I feel like against this Pacers defense specifically, but that's like, wow,
I'm gonna be very curious to see if they play it.
I would expect at least two of those guys to
play in game two, for being honest, but something to
put a pin in for sure.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah. It almost puts this series in a different
category because you're talking about it has injury concerns that
like could so obviously swing the result that the other
two series really don't I get. I mean, the Celtics
have Porzingis's mystery illness and then Jalen Brown and I'll
looking right and Holidays coming off the hamstring, but like
the Calves like didn't have like the Calves actually have
guys that did have not played and that may continue
to not play. So I mean, like, yes, I would
rank that I would be most concerned for the Calves
because of that, like, because it's just well, if they
don't have Garland alone for the rest of this series,
then it's like a coin flip at best, right, And
if they don't have Garland and if they missed a
game with MOBILEI like, I mean, the Pacers should just
be favored, probably, but I think it's more interesting and
maybe you may have to, like I don't want you
to circle back on everything you talked about with more,
but like the injuries aside, if you assume the Calves
will just have their full complement of players and they'll
be at or near like full capacity, anything in Game
one that stood out as like as a PACER's accolyte,
which you are, that like really validated your Like I
think the Pacers, you know, are really a threat here
anything independent of the injury stuff.
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, I think it's the fact that Andrew Nemhart
is like playoff. Jimmy Butler Incarnate is a big.
Speaker 2: One of the most threes he hitt in Game one
was like, that guy does not lack for confidence.
Speaker 1: I honestly, I think it is. And this is probably
worth a longer discussion about like the state of the
NBA in general, but the variability with which the Pacers
can play when you're looking at the pace, when you
look at some of the things they can do on defense,
but also the depth. It's where it's like you can
play I've called it, and people who listen to this
podcast regularly now for like the functional depth of that's
not you're not just regular season deep, it's you would
go to X number of guys in the playoffs and
the Pacers. I think the Calves are also a good
case study in this. I think the Rockets in the
last round were a good case study of this where
I'm wondering if that becomes more of a thing to
where it's, oh, like no, depth is going to be
more important to the playoffs, or where you have different
guys that are able to like attack in different like
Aaron Smith that's not someone that you would say, oh,
he's in it, Oh we need someone who's in advantage, Like, yeah,
it makes sense they have a bunch of guys that
could do things with the ball, but that's not what
he's known for. And yet the fact you can trust
him to make quick decisions, hit threes, put the ball
on the floor. He's got these really heady, like shoulder
prevalent drives. While also he'll just defend anybody. He's defending Giannis.
Last series, we saw a bunch on Matt like he
could defend the motion shooters as well. There's just so
many different buttons for them to push, and I think
that's what stood out and if I was looking at
this from the Cavs perspective, aside from the injuries, Donovan
Mitchell having his second highest usage rate of the season
kind of proved like, well, that's how much Darius Garland mattered.
But I think the other thing, and I know part
of this is like ingrained to their defensive philosophy. I
think they need to be more aggressive on going after,
like either running Indy off the three point mine or
going after like closing out on their shooters because there's
just too many wide open threes, Like thirty percent of
their threes Indies were just completely like six plus feet away,
so not even not even just open like wide open.
That's too. I know this team isn't when you look
on paper, it's not the best shooting team in theory,
but like you got kind of trounced and that was
with Tyre's Hawerbert and going one of five on wild
And it's weird for the get a Pascal Siakham game
offensively either.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And it's weird for the Cavs too, because like
as as many sort of imperfect guys as they have,
like a lot of them skew more towards like Dan
Wade as an example, a Korro as an example, Like
you should be able to put guys out there that
are mobile enough and long enough to kind of shut
off some of that to run guys off the line.
I guess to just to put it really simply like that,
the Calves should be able to do that. I think,
like I forget who somebody pointed out Mitchell was a
little gimpy after like something in the second quarter bothered him,
and he like you know, could he just didn't. Maybe
it was the workload, maybe it was a combination of things,
but like he just is gonna have to be because
like what version of Garland are you gonna get? You
can't be sure that it's gonna be. I mean, if
he's out there at all, it helps a ton just
to have another like shooter, you can't leave another guy
to pass the ball and make plays all that stuff.
But Mitchell, like, you know, he got his thirty, but
he worked he had to work way too hard for it.
Speaker 1: Well, And that's that's like kind of the one of
the trickle down effects of not having Darius car on there.
The other thing, too, is it did see mccas were
like sort of overreactive to whenever Jared Allen had to switch,
and I just I understand like that, you don't want
Jared Allen necessarily going up against Tyrey's Halbert, Like it's
the entire point of like your bigs is live with
the outcome of that or no? Is that did you
think that? Like that was sort of No, The right
principle is like, oh, we're gonna shade over, like we're
gonna sag way off. Yeah, like Max Strus in one
of the situations, we're just veering so far the shooter
he was tracking and I'm just like, yeah, Tyre's Halburton
might might get to his floater, but I'm more concerned
about him sprang out to somebody for three.
Speaker 2: I'm I'm kind of switch pilled now since we've been
talking about it so much, where I do think like,
as long as Allan doesn't give up the step back
three and as long as as so Haliburton, you know,
might get by him and get into the lane. I
think it's a twofold thing that's okay. One and two,
Don't everybody freak out and leave your assignment to come help,
because worst case, Haliburn is gonna have to make a
layup with the mobile and long Jared Allen like chasing
him down, potentially pinning it to the board or whatever.
The worst thing you can do is overhelp in that
situation and then open up the three or the swing
swing swing three the Indiana wants or swing swing drive
and it's a wide open layup where Allen's not in
the play Like, I think you gotta be a little
more disciplined in that in those situations.
Speaker 1: Now, let's ask the question which heavy NBA playoff favorite
in the second round, the Calves, the Knicks.
Speaker 2: I'm just kidding.
Speaker 1: The Celtics or the Thunder Calves Knicks Nuggets Thunder, Sorry
Calves Celtics Thunder. There you go heavy second round favorite?
Do you think is in the most trouble?
Speaker 2: I think it has to be Cleveland, just the combination
of the injuries and Indiana just being better than any one,
I guess other than you give them credit for.
Speaker 1: Well, no, I pick Cleveland in five, so I don't
give enough credit.
Speaker 2: Right Like, I think it's if the injuries are out
of it. It's a harder question. But the fact that
Cleveland has like multiple starters banged up and Garlands already
missed a game like that, that settles it for me
pretty clearly.
Speaker 1: I think that's the right answer. And also, I think
you can talk yourself into even if you remove injuries
from the equation, there's still a scenario in which the
Pacers match up really well with this team. Who would
you go second? I kind of feel like it's the Thunder,
which runs counter to me saying maybe we all overthought
the Thunder. So maybe I'm overthinking the outcome to Game one.
But when you see so many of the primary issues
that maybe you didn't think the Jokic thing, you probably
didn't think they solved, but like, oh no, they won't
get manhandled on the glass, and like the secondary offense
isn't that much of a problem, And then you watch
it's like, oh, okay, maybe maybe we jumped the shark
there by declaring them solved.
Speaker 2: Those are yeah, and like not I agree with you,
But it's also the act that like we're just the
least concerned for the Celtics because they just missed threes.
If you really wanted to get maximally reductive, that's what like,
I don't know, it was a tight game that that
could have gone either way, and like Boston just won't
shoot that pat again.
Speaker 1: If you want to get properly reductive, I would say.
So it's not like it's not we're not being too reductive,
it's the Knicks played a hell of a game and
they still could have and Boston played a terrible game.
They just still could have lost. They were down by
Knicks were down by twenty at one point.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, this was the only the only well yeah,
I think it was the only of the options here
that had a twenty point deficit in which the favorite
was ahead.
Speaker 1: So it did look a couple of times and Nuggets
Thunder though that like the Thunder were gonna run away.
Speaker 2: I was convinced in the first half, like, osh, this
is gonna get ugly, and just just didn't you.
Speaker 1: Have anything else to say or you want to take
us out of here. But look, that's all best wishes
to Grant in this difficult time as he gets ready
for it'll already happen by the time you listen. But
Warriors Timberwolves Game one, he's going through it right now.
I don't know if he can on his face. This
has been appreciate him tough. You know, he didn't miss
shoot around this morning.
Speaker 2: A man.
Speaker 1: He did the work, he got his treatment, and he
powered through the podcast.
Speaker 2: I I just just rest assured I will I'll be
a different person after game one. I can't tell you
if I'll be better or worse. I'll be different. It
will have changed me emotionally, I'm already I'm already like
emotionally hedging really hard. Like, hey, they got they got
out of the first round. That's pretty good for some
old dudes, you know, good for them. I'm happy.
Speaker 1: I'm happy they steph Curry outlasting That's my favorite. That's
defense at the age of thirty seven is just I'm
not He's not the only player that's ever had gravity,
but it's like a thirty seven year old like going
through what he did and still outlasting it is. It's wild.
Speaker 2: And Thompson specifically, just like, guess who's cramping up first,
young fella, not me, It's gonna be you. That was amazing. Yeah,
So that that whatever happens from here, Dan, I'm fine,
totally and I totally believe you.
Speaker 1: You okay good.
Speaker 2: Thanks everybody for listening, for watching. Hope you're enjoying the
Plaoffs as much as we are. Please remember to rate, review,
subscribe during our discord links for that and YouTube podcast description.
Tell You Tell Your Enemy shouts Franklich Apologies, Share it
Out