Speaker 1: What is up fellas Eko's I am Dan Favalley coming
at you with the one, the only, the certified, fantabulous.
Mister Grant Hughes Hardwood Knox has gathered you all here
today so that we can talk about why every single
major NBA contender is not going to win the championship.
This is actually us just looking at our biggest would
be concerns for each contender, and then we will decide how,
like what level of alarm we have for each of them.
As we go throughout this entire process will alternate the
order of contenders. We don't know who's gonna pick what first,
but this will be a fun com We've moved into,
like firmly into the big picture portion of the regular
season because so many of the games just don't matter
at this point. There's still a ton of playoff seating
happening in the big games that I was really excited
to watch Burst Pistons the other night, but there's just
sort of even I know, Rockets War, I saw the
end ended up being a good game. That was one
where it's right, no Chris stops, no steph.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but we're just like, what are we doing?
Speaker 1: Like it wasn't one that I was amped up to watch,
but now did spotlight some of the concerns that will
probably have for the Houston Rockets who fall into this exercise.
But Grant, how are you doing?
Speaker 3: First and foremost, Well, I also watched Spurs Pistons last
night as we're recording this the following morning, and like,
give me that all the time. I just like, I
think that's my because coming off the their first meeting,
which was maybe my the game I enjoyed most regular
season game this season and the one I've kind of
like spent the most time thinking about. I was so
this one snuck up on me. I'll admit it. Like
I didn't realize until yesterday morning that they were going
to play. I was like, yes, Like that's that's the
game I want to watch all the time. This was
a very different version of that than the first game.
But I just like, to your point, it's so hard
to find games right now that are like what am
I Can I learn something from this that like is
gonna matter for my analysis of the season and champion
That one didn't that's for sure.
Speaker 1: And well even that was just the caveat was okay,
Jalen durn getting into fat would he gave like four
fouls like very early on, and so that that was
a big one. But like Asar Thompson going down with
the eicle injury, then Ron Holland was injured by the
end of the game. But you saw enough to kind
of understand the theory of what each team was going
to try and do. But even there's always those caveats
at this I guess throughout the year, there's always those caveats.
Nick's Thunder the other night, though, why was that game
on that? It was it was equitable because both teams
were on the second end of a back to back,
But why was that game on the second end of
a back to back? That's something in the schedule you'd
like to out, but I mean rooted out. It's okay,
the Thunder still just don't have Jalen Williams or aj
Mitchell and what are we gonna learn from it? But
how much can we really learn from the thunder? The
thunder rule?
Speaker 2: Who knew? Yeah?
Speaker 3: There was more in those like those are still those
are like the one tier down from a from a
Spurs Pistons type of matchup right now, because you might
learn something about the Knicks.
Speaker 2: You know they were full strength. I mean potentially.
Speaker 3: I know your mind is made up about the Knicks,
so you're not gonna learn anything the rest of us.
Speaker 1: I have a take, and it doesn't really belong on
the Knicks or Thunder session. I don't think and I
say this as a Knicks fan. I don't want to
see listen to podcasters writers hear the head coach complain
about the way that fouls are called when Jalen Brunson
is on your team, just like I don't want to
hear it from the Thunder because Shay.
Speaker 2: Is on their team.
Speaker 1: First of all, if you're gonna complain in that, then,
like the rest cost us this game, that's my first
clue that you are, or at least on this particular matter,
a deeply unseerious person.
Speaker 2: I won't listen to it.
Speaker 1: I will I won't.
Speaker 2: I won't.
Speaker 1: I'm not the type of person to mock people, and
if I do, I'll say it to them. But like
I don't, I don't need to dunk on you. But
that's my first clue. Like Mike, the rest of Mike
Brown's press conference, like that little jab at Jell, like
Shay like he does a really good job convincing refs.
Dude had seven free throws that game, So I just
let that stuff is, well, it's a pet peeve of mine.
Speaker 3: Your first point on that is the the most salient one,
which is, like you, dude, Jalen Brunson is at least
as foul baity and grifty as Shay is. So you
don't get to call out the other teams guy for
doing similar things in a slightly different way. Oh yeah,
I'm so with you. I know this is we're already
on a tangent, but like I.
Speaker 1: Mean you, I mean, you're talking.
Speaker 3: About the refs as as the most important factor in anything.
Speaker 2: I just like, I I guess it's possible that.
Speaker 3: On some isolated case you're right, but I'm not interested anyway,
because it's just lazy and it's it's it's conspiratorial and right.
Speaker 1: And the thing if you're not show me for forty
seven and a half minutes that everything was step first
step equal, otherwise to say that this cost you the game,
like it's just the refs are never going to cost you.
I'm sure if I guess if you're gonna be on
the take, But that's another conspiracy theory that we don't
need to go down the round.
Speaker 2: I just don't.
Speaker 1: I can't listen to those arguments. And they're also just
like even if you debunk them. And there was things
going around about the one of the calls that people
were upset about in that nixed Thunder game, specifically about
no no, no, like this was a foun It's well no,
but it's the other stuff too. It's like he I
just I can't. But that's not why we're here. What
we had we had to narrow down the list of
teams that we considered contenders. How do you go about
like what is your Do you have a guiding question
when you're because if you really think about it long
enough and you could probably talk yourself into saying, oh,
there's like fifteen teams that just like I could envision
the Hornets coming as one example, just coming out of
the Eastern Conference.
Speaker 2: It's weird that your head went there first, but best
team in the league for more than a quarter of
the season, why wouldn't it. Uh So, yeah, let's frame
it this way.
Speaker 3: Originally looking at this, I think based just on where
sort of the odds off, you could get to like eleven. Uh,
that was gonna include the Lakers and Sixers. Sorry to
those fan bases. You're not contenders in the way that
we're gonna consider that. So I guess there's some subjectivity
there we could have. You know, you got to make
the cut off somewhere. To me, I guess i'd say
you're a contender if without some shocking stroke of luck
or totally unforeseen set of circumstances you could win it.
You could win the title this year and we would
not be blown away. That's a pretty loose standard. I
think maybe the true contender class should probably be a
little narrower. But this is still as we'll get into it.
I think all of the teams will.
Speaker 2: Discuss here fit into that category, not not.
Speaker 3: You know, I'm trying to think, like I do think
even like just to say the Sixers or Lakers, to
use the two sort of like last cuts here, if
they won tie the title this year, either of them,
I would need a really deep dive ex you know,
if you if you time traveled, then it's the middle
of June and I say, Dan, the Sixers won the title,
you would have some questions. Whereas if I said Minnesota
won the title. To use a team that's like firmly
in here, you'd be yeah, well two conference finals, like, okay,
that's a pretty good run. Little surprising, but I'm not.
I'm not blown away here anything to add to that.
As far as the categories or before. We just sort
of just like what we're actually the way.
Speaker 2: That we're going to poke holes in these contenders.
Speaker 1: I have a hard and fast rule that if you
make a trade at the deadline that specifically to save
Josh Harris's money, I won't put you on the list.
And so the Sixers not making it fits with that rule.
Speaker 2: Okay, good, well, I'm glad we fit both of our rules.
Speaker 1: Then, so why don't you pick the first team? We
will talk about where we're going.
Speaker 3: You mentioned the Spurs. Let's just start there, because this is,
you know, maybe the easiest thing to dismiss for me.
It's too soon, and I don't have a great statistical
argument against why against them winning the title. I think
that just to stay on that topic, that second meeting
against the Pistons was pretty eye opening.
Speaker 2: Wemby's defense was just it's hard.
Speaker 3: It's hard unless you're watching a full game of Wembin Yama.
I think is it gives you so much more of
a sense of like what he's doing out there defensively
than seeing the highlight blocks, because just the sheer number
of instances where the opposing team has what should be
a close range attempt and they just don't even consider
taking it and that leads to a kickout or a
panic move or whatever. His blocks are incredible. This is
not a new argument like his just his impact on
the types of shots teams are willing to take. I've
never seen anything close to it. So and then he's
just he's learning the Yannis stuff where he's just driving
and getting fouled, like he fouled Jayalen during out of
that game effectively by just taking it to the basket.
Speaker 1: Which side.
Speaker 2: In the post.
Speaker 1: I'm sure oldheads loved that one where they were trying
to get Jaylen during and pet foul trouble.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Right, So here's the stat here, which again I cited
him last time. His newsletter is the best. Tom Ziller
was looking at this issue a few weeks ago. Here's
the salient point. Of the last fifteen NBA champions, only
one of them won the title without securing at least
one playoff series win in the previous five years. That
team was the Bubble Lakers that had Lebron who'd had
plenty of playoff experience and series wins under his belt
by that point. So like triple asterisk next to that. Basically,
you can't win a title if you haven't won at
least a single playoff series with that core in the
previous three seasons, if you five seasons.
Speaker 2: So the Spurs might buck that trend.
Speaker 3: They it looks so dominant and you can just see
they have in women Yama the unsolvable thing, like they
can win different ways. I'm getting into the case for them,
But does that can we just dismiss that as like
that's dumb? The Spurs are a different team than any
of the predecessors you're talking about. Who cares if they've
got playoff experience, let alone a win.
Speaker 2: Look how good they are.
Speaker 1: I assign more value to this for the Spurs than
I do to people have said it about Detroit to
where I know that they didn't win a playoff series
last year, but the Pistons have their playoff scars. To me,
I don't know that there's a difference between they made
it to the second round versus they pushed the Knicks
to the brink in the first round ended up being
in the conference finals. And it's not just about Webby's
played in big games before. I would worry more so about, Okay, well,
what does if you're reliant on Dylan Harper, if you're
what does Steph Castle look like in a playoff setting?
But even Steph Castle's concern for me, my biggest concern
for the Spurs might be, well, Howard defense is going
to actually treat Stefan Castle in the playoffs rather than
they need the collective experience to overcome that. I would
come closer to dismissing it more so than not. But
you also can't write off the trends of well, this
might be a special circumstance, but it's it's not Lebron
on the bubble Lakers. That Lebron has three titles by
that point already.
Speaker 3: And I mean, like, I really do think and this
isn't analytical at all, except there is this stat we
just laid out, this historical stat. I just really think
that it's not just that, well, you haven't won a
playoff series, therefore you can't win a title. It's like
there's all these other things that you learn about yourself
in the problem, like that the Pistons kind of learned
last year to use your example. Even though they didn't
win that series, they could have won that series. The
Spurs don't know yet, Like, Okay, we're gonna get into
deep into a series. Teams are guarding Castle or Harper
a certain way.
Speaker 2: What's our solved for that?
Speaker 3: Like they just haven't had to deal with that over
the course of a series. Like what if Champagne and Vissel,
who basically won the first Spurs Pistons meeting, what if that.
Speaker 2: One of them is cold?
Speaker 3: Like what if one of them gets picked on probably
the cell defensively, Like you just you haven't gathered enough information.
It's not just like there's a rule and you can't
advance farther until you take this baby step. It's like, no,
the reason that teams don't go from zero to champion
is because the process of kind of diagnosing your flaws
and like finding the right fixes, and honestly, for the
Spurs in particular, just like natural maturation and growth, Like
we really think a second year guy in Castle who
I love beyond measure and Harper as a rookie are
gonna be playing like I don't know what the third
and fifth or sixth most important roles on a championship
team that goes through all these players. It's just like
it's too much, too soon. But I would say, tell
me what you think about this, because I was thinking
about this the other day. If you just kept this
exact roster as it is and like aged it up
three years, so you have Castle in his fifth year
and and Harper and his fourth, or and Champagne and
Vessel haven't totally like this roster as it exists today
right now, just aged up, I think just absolutely as
a champion, I don't know if they need to add
anything other than experience.
Speaker 1: I feel like you could still I wonder if they
have enough just complimentary shooting, because if you age it up,
or we just assuming that Steph Castle and Dylan Harper
are more reliable in those because even they need like.
Speaker 2: A one of them, maybe one of them is.
Speaker 1: Sure, but even then I would still be they need
kind of another wing or combo forward who does it
how we're because if you're aging them up, Harrison Barnes
is only going to get older. There also, by the way,
everybody be careful when you are taking your naps is all.
Speaker 2: That we have one so when you get that age.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and they have Julian Champagnie obviously, but there's also
like you look at their roster and it's do we
really need like Luke Cornett valuable for sure Wemby, but
like you have Bismock Biambo and Mason Plumley and Kelly
olnek All on this roster.
Speaker 2: We couldn't have done something mean, I believe in the
core it's.
Speaker 1: And even one of the concerns I saw some people
talking about it. I think it was of the what
is it the Jared Dubin and Mo de Quillo podcast,
I can't remember the name of it, but they were
wondering whether Wemby's gonna be able to log playoff type
of minutes when he doesn't necessarily log those regularly throughout
the course of the season and then he just goes
and plays. When he played thirty eight minutes against the
Pistons the other.
Speaker 3: It was notable, like how much more he was on
the floor than usual, And that's yeah, that's terrifying, I
think too. Can't you imagine maybe it's the first round.
Maybe it's the second where if wembin Yama has a flaw,
it's it's at this point in his career, it's still
that Like, I'm not sure the Spurs know the best
way to use him offensively, and I do think a
lot of teams will be able to make things hard
enough for him as a scorer to wear because the
Spurs actually do need him to be a major offensive
threat for them to kind of have a playoff caliber attack.
Speaker 2: Defensively, I think they're gonna be great.
Speaker 3: I don't think there's a solution for them, but I
can imagine part of that learning curve being Okay, here's
what we need to do with weim Binyama in a
playoff series offensively. Here's what teams are gonna try to
knock him off his game offensively. Now we're ready for
it in year two or three or four of this,
you know, dynastic early dynasty kind of thing.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna go, let's try and give these an alarm
scale of one to ten. I'll go I'll just say
medium five because I don't want to in the moment
I'm looking at this team and saying, yeah, two, But
I don't. I can't just reject the historical trend. But
by the way, another Tom Ziller stat from his newsletter,
they have the second best record in the league against
like top three seeds. It's I think the Pistons have
the best record, and then it's the Spurs, and it's
we could I get you can also make the case
the regulars and isn't the playoffs, which is fair. But
I'll go I'll go five or maybe to some respect
like a four and a half, just to dip my
cap to put this team.
Speaker 3: I don't really know what to do with this because
I I don't think they are going to win it
this year, and I'm more so than literally any other
team on this list. Like that's okay by me because
they're not used to and the st there's no stakes
at all. I would say, I'll just join you at
a five because I don't really know what kind of
concern level to put on this team given where it
is and its growth trajectory.
Speaker 1: Let's go. Let's just go to the team they just
played and also another younger team that's just absolutely dominating
this year. Deep Pistons I worry about. I want to say,
their offense but if we want to get a little
bit more granular, I think it's just their ability to
generate easy opportunities in the half court. And you look
at all the players they have, there's just not a
solve on the roster. I really like Jenkins, Tobias Harris
has had some big moments for them.
Speaker 2: Duncan Robinson is entirely way too important to this team.
Speaker 1: And I mean that has a compliment to Duncan Robinson
for the way he opens up the floor. Non kid
players on the Pistons are in the eighth percent tile
of three point shot making. That's per b Ball Index.
You look at the quality of looks that they're getting
in the half court, their rim rate declines a ton
when kid cunning him isn't on the floor. Looking at
what kid has to do specifically, I'm not sure that
he's had a high quality shot all season. These numbers,
even when you watch the Pistons, you feel it. But Grant,
these numbers are insane. He is in the second percent
tile of shot quality at the rim, the thirtieth percent
tile of paint shot quality, the twenty second percent tile
in overall mid range shot quality, and the eleventh percent tile
in three point shot quality. Now, let's isolate the rim
and three point looks. There's only one other player who
has a worse collective shot quality in those two areas,
or as bad of a shot quality in those two
areas as Kid Cunningham. It is your MVP pick LaMelo Ball.
That is, this is just things are never gonna geither way.
Speaker 2: LaMelo Ball is terrible.
Speaker 3: Shot quality is entirely self created because he just takes
the one footed threes against two guys because he likes him.
Speaker 1: Yes, but also until recently, and especially when you look
at the basket, it's just like the attention that he's
gonna command. But yeah, you're right, he's I wonder there
should be a self inflicted shot quality metric in Kaid's case,
though it is not even close to self inflicted.
Speaker 2: It's a symptom of the rest of the roster.
Speaker 1: And so I find myself wondering they're not gonna play
Ron Holland, Asar Thompson and Kate and Jalen Durham together
a ton, and when they have their offensive ratings actually
through the roof this year, but their league average and
first chance offense, I do sort of wonder if a
team decides to really sell out on Jalen Duran coming
out of a screen, what is like Detroit's second best
offensive option, Like if Kate doesn't and even for Kid,
if he can't get the ball to Jalen Duran, what
is his second best option? So it's just or a
third best because the first best is probably just Kid
taking a shot himself. I their defense is incredible. You
just can't get to the rim against against them. If
everyone's going to be healthy, they do a good job
of they're gonna get out and be opportunistic in transition.
But I look at this team, especially if you're not
even gonna get the type of rim finishing you want
from a Star Thompson or free throw volume ors just
like other guys who can come in and draw a
ton of fouls off rip in the half court. I
just don't know what this offense is gonna look like
in the playoffs. I think it's going to be a
slog I think they're built to win anyway. I still
would have liked to have seen them done more at
the trade deadline other than get Kevin Hurder who hasn't
played a ton to address it, and the other counter
they could do, And I just don't know. I don't
know if you think they could get away with this
a ton in the playoffs. Is their offensive rating is
in fact through the roof when it's Duncan, Robinson, Jenkins
and Caid on the court. I just don't know how
many minutes of that can you carve out in postseason settings.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I had a couple thoughts.
Speaker 3: Again, we'll stop talking about Spurs Pistons, but like it
happened last night, so it's top of mind that when
the Pistons really needed a bucket, which was most of
the game, really the best they could do consistently was
a Kid Cunningham self created two point jumper off the
dribble where he creates space and has to shoot a
contested seventeen footer, which, like, those are exactly like that's
the best they can do sometimes, and this is a
Spurs defense, that's impossible, so file out in there too,
But those are the exact type of shots that if
kid wants to shoot twenty of those in a game,
every playoff defense will just be ecstatic because even that's
like just a super low expected value shot.
Speaker 2: The other thought I had while watching Kevin Herder come
in the game was what a half measure at Oh
well that too. It's just what was the thinking.
Speaker 3: That Kevin Herder Not to pick on him, but a
player of that type like fringe rotation guy on most
good teams who can be an offensive plus, was the
thinking that he's enough to alleviate the cramp spacing and
the shot creation issues like that, Because if it was
come on like, that's what's small time thinking? I really,
if you wanted to make the case for why this
team needed to trade for Michael Porter Junior, you saw
it against the Spurs because there just wasn't another real
threat out there. And I had that thought when specifically
there were minutes with Jenkins and Kid and Karris Lavert,
who in theory or at least long ago, was viewed
as someone that could kind of create some shots for
himself and for others. And that's about the best, Like
Marcus Sasser showed up in that game for a minute
because they needed this is what we're doing. The Pistons,
I think are good enough at what they do well
to win a series or two. Pretty feel pretty good
about that because they have such clear strengths in other areas.
But this is just not an offense that is going
to survive the playoff callent I just don't I don't
see how it happens with with the non threats they
have and the non creators that they sort of have
to play with to do all the other stuff that
makes them good.
Speaker 2: So they're just kind of stuck. The ceiling just isn't
high enough.
Speaker 1: Right, And I think the problem where you run into
is looking at specific matchups where it feels I would
say Cleveland and Boston specifically, especially Boston that's going to
have Jason Tatum in there, their ability to go off
on offense against any particular defense, and the three point
shot making they have on their rosters. You can maybe
even say this with the I'm not being facetious here,
if you run into Charlotte in the first round, teams
that could maybe get out to these double digit leads
and then make put even more pressure on you to
make these decisions of well, how much do we skew
toward offense with our lineups for sustaying with our base rotation.
I'm going to go on a scale of one to
ten here, I'm gonna seven, and like, just look seven
and a half to an eight feels like the range.
They should be the favorite to come out of the
east still, but it's just they are so they just
don't have a margin for any type of error on
the offensive end, as good as their defense absolutely is.
Speaker 3: As I'm trying to find a number, I'm weighing the
fact that we're going to have a similar issue with
at least one other and maybe two other teams just
off the top of my head. So I'm trying to
weigh how severe the Pistons offensive issue is with against
a couple of other teams. My first thought was eight,
because I just think, I think this is an issue.
I do have one team with a similar issue that
is indeed higher than an age.
Speaker 2: Officially, I think I know it is.
Speaker 3: Maybe we should talk about them next, just because it's
kind of a natural flow. I think if they get beaten,
this is why it will be. And I almost can't
think of another reason other than injury, you know, for
why the Pistons will will come up shore.
Speaker 2: So I'll give it an A and just move on there.
Speaker 3: Lets should I I think I'm just gonna go where
you're leading me here, and maybe this will be quick
since the issues are similar. Let's go down to the
Houston Rockets, who have had some struggles. UH has a
late game offensive team. Uh, they have similar issues with
some of the guys that make them so good at
what they're good at just are not useful offensively in
a playoff setting. Talking about Aman Thompson, Alprin, Shing Goon,
the just the look we all want more reliance on
Reed Shepherd and.
Speaker 1: Hey, he played, he played, He's.
Speaker 2: Playing more, right, Yeah, your docus credit, he is playing more.
Speaker 3: I mean, so I assume you're gonna go with this
is an even more significant uh. Like the panic level
with respect to Houston's offense is higher than it is
for Detroit's because Houston does not have its Cade Cunningham
to just set a high floor like the wheels can
really fall off offensively because Fred van Vliet's not there.
Reed Shepherd has not been given the opportunity to be ready.
But I would feel comfortable still saying he's not ready
to just be the reason that Houston is good on
offense by himself, or at least the main reason, which
it feels like at this point he almost will have
to be. So this team does have Kevin Durant I mean,
I guess I'm maybe like not acknowledging that enough and
setting the offensive floor. But the numbers are what they
are in terms of their overall offensive rating in the
half court, their late game stuff, if you subtract the
offensive rebounding dominance that they still have continued to have
without Steven Adams, Like this just isn't a good offense.
So that I just I mean, I know you're ready
to talk about him because you were kind of pointing
to them, but I'm way more concerned about Houston's offense
in a playoff setting than I am about Detroit.
Speaker 2: So we're just saying something and I.
Speaker 1: Think it just comes down to and this is maybe
it's a little bit of an end ditment. Like against
Reed Shepherd, I just don't know that he's had enough
of an opportunity to fully cook. You have Kate Cunningham
in Detroit. That player is not Yes, you have Kevin
Durant who's just not He's not gonna get to the
basket as frequently is Kate Cunningham at this point.
Speaker 2: He's not the passer that Kate Cunningham is going to be.
Speaker 1: And so you have that huge variable in Detroit in
their favor that you just don't have in Houston right now,
because even if Reed Shepherd is going to be on
the floor in crunch time, this is still someone that
how much agency over the offense is he going to
get in those minutes it's gonna take. Does Al princhingun
need to fill out for him to be third in
the pet like you might still be more inclined to
go with like rely on Amen Thompson there, and he doesn't.
He's not gonna have the the status to like not
give the ball to Kevin Durant, which is just so
often their default.
Speaker 2: And you look there.
Speaker 1: They'd started off hot in this category, but they've now
dropped to twenty first in first chance offense and I'm
honestly shocked it's still that high.
Speaker 2: It feels like it should be lower.
Speaker 1: When you're looking at the way that they've played in
the late game play calling their nineteenth and crunch time
offensive rating. Overall, they have turnover issues in that. And two,
I don't want to say emi Udoka's credit. I guess
just to try and play devil's advocate here. When you
start to really dig into their offensive data, there's not
enough evidence or even a ton of evidence to say, well, reed,
Shepherd comes in and they're better off. They're averaging one
point zero five points per possession when Shepherd plays with
kd Ahmen, Shangun and Tari Easan, which is so like
that's their like their default starting lineup right now, They're
at one point one six points per posession when it's
just Shepherd, kd Ahmen, Shangun and Jabbari. That's a slightly
above average. You're at one point four to eight for
some reason, somehow with Shepherd, kd Ahmen, Shangun and Josha Kogi.
I think where the real issue lies here for me
is I'm just wondering if in these instances, if the
offense is ever going to be elite for a long
enough time when it matters most with both Ahmen and
Alprin Shangoon on the floor, given your other perimeter options
who aren't KD or read Shepherd, and so now you
start to dig into those numbers. The Rockets are scoring
one point two point one point twenty four points per possession.
When Shepherd plays with KD and Shangoon and no Ahmen Thompson,
the Rockets are at one point one to nine points
per possession when Sheppard plays with Amen Thompson, KD and
no Shangoon. I'm not saying the answer has to be
you put one of those guys off the floor. I
think if you had Fred van Fleet, and maybe you
will in the playoffs, some of this changes. But I
don't know that if you put Fred van Fleet in
Read Shepherd's spot, You're going to feel a lot better
about Houston's crunch time, never mind the process. Yeah, put
the offensive efficiency overall, given the personnel that you have.
Let's just say around him and KD.
Speaker 3: That they had Fred van Vliet when they were the
number two seed last postseason and they lost in the
first round because they couldn't score. Like that's all right,
So that this has been a diagnosable issue.
Speaker 2: For a very long time.
Speaker 3: I think ultimately, I know you don't want to oversimplify it,
but I kind of can just get on board with
the current versions of Thompson and Shannggoon. Just don't give
you enough downhill playmaking slash shooting to.
Speaker 2: Make this work.
Speaker 3: And you can surround those guys with with Smith and
Shephard and like Easton's making threes, and I just still
I don't think defenses. It's just too easy for defense
to play this team, dishonestly, they don't have to account
for one.
Speaker 2: Or two key players.
Speaker 3: And like, this is the conundrum, right, because Thompson is
great at like a lot of things, and Shangun is
great at a lot of things. And so the best
version of the Rockets on balance have them on the floor.
But that just means that the best version of the
Rockets is never going to be you know, the best
version of the Rockets is gonna have these flaws just
built in until one or both figure out how to
have very different offensive games. So similar to the Pistons.
But I would argue, and I think I think you
would agree, more.
Speaker 2: Pronounced and more like ten. You've already seen it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a ten because this is exactly why they
got upset in the first round last year, and like,
what what's different?
Speaker 1: And the in fact you added KD and it feels
like it hasn't changed enough. And the other thing here
is there were Pistons fans were not happy about this
when I said, I think this is going to be
their best chance at winning a titles this season. The Rockets,
even if you don't necessarily believe it by default or
in the same I think you can, and I will
make the case even though I had that take about
the Pistons, it's more inexcusable that the Rockets didn't do
anything to address this need the trade deadline than the Pistons,
because the Rockets just traded for a thirty seven year
old Kevin Der.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Good point.
Speaker 3: I was gonna push back and say, well, but like
the Pistons really their ceilings higher. But but the Rockets,
so they should have gone for MPJ, because you know,
he really might, we would be talking about them, I
think very differently the Pistons if they had.
Speaker 1: They also had it felt like more of a clear
go after that guy or of Houston because you wanted
some creation. It was we talked about Michael Porter Junior
for them, but we also said, like, would Kate Cunningham
be good enough? How good does this player need to be?
But their timeline is inherently more urgent, just because the
person who has been no worse than their second best player,
and that's putting it probably a little generously, is not
going to be This guy isn't going to be around forever.
Just well that's how age works. He's will will not
get better, like won't get better?
Speaker 3: Like that's you might so like, yeah, okay, Shepherd might improve,
but Durant like sorry, if he holds, Shepherd will become
a super nova. But Durant will be lucky if he's
this good next year, Like that would be great if
he was this good next year.
Speaker 1: I mean, credible question.
Speaker 2: Who makes more?
Speaker 1: Who makes more all NBA teams for their career? Paalo
Banko or Read Shepherd?
Speaker 3: Oh, things are looking good for our guy Paolo at
at the moment. Uh, it's really bad that I'm hesitating.
Speaker 2: It's really bad. Are we being serious? Is it still?
Speaker 1: He plays in the East, it's gonna be easier for
him to get recognition.
Speaker 3: There, No, man, it's a question. I'll just say read
Shepherd for the for the take of it all, Okay,
what's your ten for me?
Speaker 1: With with Houston?
Speaker 2: Though? Absolutely for sure?
Speaker 1: You Now, I don't know who to pick though, because
this was easily gonna be my next pick and I wasn't.
I mean, do I be am I this guy?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: Let's well, who'd we do? Let's go to an Eastern
Conference team, Let's talk, Let's talk Cavaliers. So I'm this
is so the sample James Harden's playing well for the
Rockets is a OK and thumb and is still shooting
like a trillion percent from three. This is the trade
looks better just because now we've seen it in action.
Even though I'm a firm believer in if they don't
win the title, I don't know how that trade ends
up being a success. So short of Darius Garland is
just never good.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Again, that being said, they're seventeenth in defense. Since Harden
made his debut, they have close to a one to
eighteen defensive rating when Harden and Mitchell are on the court. Now,
the caveat is, and by the way, what's concerning about
that number is they haven't gotten unlucky on opponent threes,
but they also haven't played with Evan Mobley a ton
and they're all of a sudden they're allowing point zero
nine eight points per possession when he's on the court.
So their base defense I think should be fine. It
does help that Harden has some size in girth to him,
and I think Mitchell by and large has been better
defensively in Cleveland than he was for a lot of
his time in Utah. My concern with this team is
they are just uber reliant on Dean Wade remaining healthy
and then Jalen Tyson defensively overall, and if not them,
then you're kind of saying, oh, we need Kean Ellis
or Dennis Shrewder to guard up. And I also just
wonder if their guard situation. This would have been true
with Darius Garland unless you thought he wasn't gonna play.
But does having Harden and Mitchell all of a sudden
when you get to the playoffs diminish by necessity your
dependence on Sam Merrill, who's been excellent already, has fantastic
chemistry with James Harden and I think is better defensively
than people give him credit for. But he's not a
turn the water off wing, and that I think. I
don't know if Jalen Tyson will ever get there. Dean
Wade is probably the closest. It's one of those two, right.
The problem is they don't have that player, and I
think you don't need to have that player necessarily, But
when you're backcourt is built the way it kind of is,
and you're gonna run dual biggs, a lot of the time,
I think that that's going to matter, And so I'm
very curiously what their defense looks like in the playoffs,
and even more curious there gonna be minutes presumably Evan
Mobley's at the five, So what does it look like?
Then what happens with the rebounding They're not even an
incredibly great rebounding team when Allen and Mobiley are on
the court together. Presumably that's not going to get Harden
might help there a little bit, but you're not gonna
get better if you do downsize to Mobili at the five.
So there, I just find myself wondering if couldn't James
Harden have like one of his best playoff runs ever?
And we look back and say, yeah, like the Cavs
just still weren't good enough to get past the Pistons,
or to get past the Celtics. Who's still with Jason
Tatum coming back? Now, have those extra wing bodies laying around,
or are more switchable on the defensive end, or even
a team like the Knicks to where it's their defensive peak,
I might argue at this point is higher than Cleveland's
defensive peak just having mckel bridges, Jose Alvarado ogiananobi if
Duce McBride gets healthy. I think Landry Sham has been
one of the more kind of like how Sam Merrill
is defensively for Cleveland, Landry Sham is that for New
York it's oh no, like he's better and he's gonna
fight on defense. More is that the concern you have
is that the right one? Or where did you land
with that?
Speaker 3: I think all what you're saying is is plausible where
Harden could be great and everything else every several other
things don't go right for Cleveland, And I'm glad you
gave a lot of numbers because my analysis of Cleveland
is not like that thoughtful, because it's it starts and
ends with they have James Harden. He will have to
be great throughout the playoffs for them to be successful,
and he's never done it. He's two and twelve and
shooting thirty nine percent in elimination games. His list of
like the thing I like to say is his playoff
collapses will not be the leading sentence of his career epitaph,
but they're gonna show up no later than paragraph two.
They like that is next to changing the concept of
how usage offense with Houston and being one of the
greatest you know him alone offensive players of all time.
He's defined by just he has so many to complete
shit the bed games in critical moments, and the boy
him Grant, Why is that going to stop?
Speaker 2: Why is that going to stop?
Speaker 3: Dan? It's one of those like, let me when it
when it stops, I'll be happy for him, hands up,
go ahead, But I don't see him.
Speaker 1: Oh no, finish your thought was that?
Speaker 3: I just it's basically a long winded version of saying,
I'll bet against it until he proves me wrong.
Speaker 1: I think that's fair, But then I also kind of
forget what's happened to Cleveland already in the postseason of
the years prior. And if you were worried about what
what would you rather have? The James Harden you've seen
who's on the court in these elimination games, are their
prospect of Darius Ill By the way, if I was Cleveland,
I would not have made the trade. But the counterpoint
would be, or would you just rather have nobody in
that spot? Because there's a real chance Darius Garland wouldn't
be available.
Speaker 3: I think the problem is what you're saying is still Also,
Darius Garland is not exactly goaded as a playoff performer,
and injuries have been a factor. Like honestly, same for
Donovan Mitchell. He hasn't made it. You know, there's always
he's breaking down, He's he's playing, but he looks exhausted
and hurt or he just is hurt. And that's peppered
in there against some incredible playoff performances like going back
to Utah. Even Mobley has not been his best self
in the postseason, neither his Allen. So there's all these
other are they really up for this kind of questions
that surround the Cavs and then you're adding the ultimate
is he really up for this?
Speaker 2: Answer? No, guy in James Harden. So like concern level
like what is.
Speaker 3: So?
Speaker 2: I mean, I I have one.
Speaker 1: It might be a hot take my concern levels like
a five or a six here, Yeah, just because Mobley
since he's come back, has looked pretty damn good. And
so now that you have even if James Harden's not
playing well, I think the attention that he commands is Okay,
are we kind of seeing that Evan.
Speaker 2: Mobley is now?
Speaker 1: You and I were big on Evan Mobley can be
the focal point of your offense and just your best
player overall, and you're gonna be a contender. I will
say I haven't completely walked off that belief, but we
are tottering yet. Doesn't mean Evan Mobley's not an All
NBA caliber player. He app yep, look what he did
last year. He was where he finished fifth on my
MVP b out or whatever it was.
Speaker 2: But this isn't.
Speaker 1: It doesn't feel like that's going to be a every
season perennial type thing for him. That's why I'm ultimately
going and because he exists and the ability to play
with him and Jared Allen exist that I think you're
the floor for your defense if you go dual big
with this team can still be pretty high. I'll go
six just to communicate that this team is still built
rather weirdly. It's just a lot of you have your
two bigs in Evan Mobley and Jared Allen, that it's
just a bunch of non wings.
Speaker 2: Basically, Yeah, would you.
Speaker 3: I guess if you had to pick right now, do
you think the the Pistons or the Calves are more
likely to come out of the East.
Speaker 1: I would say the Pistons. There's just like more proof
of concept of what they're doing. And you factor in
the James Harden thing, and I think that there's just
something maybe Mobile will prove me wrong over the course
of the rest of the year. This Calves team, other
teams feels if they're still.
Speaker 2: Built to win ugly. The Calves do not. It just
doesn't dual Big one Big. It just doesn't.
Speaker 1: They don't seem built hashtag built for that.
Speaker 3: I think I would agree with you. So what did
you say the Cavs. I'll like, yeah, I'll go six
as well. I mean, I'll just go seven because I
really do think, well, they haven't really proven anything either,
like the guys that are still there from their previous course.
Speaker 2: So there's that aspect of it too.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because you could even point to they kind of
turned things around, turn things around even before the Garland trade.
They're like the best team in basketball since before the
New year. When you're looking at records and it's you've
reached the point, who would be the best analog for
this where it's like not like you've we've seen you
dominate the regular season before you have to prove it
in the playoffs. Probably it was probably a James Harden team.
Speaker 2: I mean James Harden's rockets. There you go, that's it. Okay,
is it my turns?
Speaker 1: You?
Speaker 2: It's your turn? Okay, this one we got. This has
to be a collaborative one because this was really hard
for me. I'm gonna pick Boston.
Speaker 3: The obvious massive variable is Jason Tatum is is gonna
be have played a game by the time you're listening
to this, And and does that just mean that Boston
is now the best team in the East because they
were already fairly close to that and they've they were
already there?
Speaker 1: Could we both we know we're gonna have to do that.
Speaker 2: We were wrong and we were.
Speaker 1: Sorry podcast and sometimes, oh my god, that's not about that,
and everyone. I think everyone's wrong about the Celtics. They
were favored at sports books to win the East before
Jason Tatum's turn return. I don't care. That's insane that
they're grant They're on basically a fifty five win pace
as and Jason Tatum has played zero games and they
did the full on tax ducking super Mario Meme maneuver
where he's evading all the fireballs and like all the obstacles.
Oh yeah, yeah, and they're just yeah, we're pays for
fifty four to fifty five wins.
Speaker 2: Ain't no thing. We're good.
Speaker 3: I mean, So this is and having and I agree
with you. So having laid that out there, I gotta
just like nitpick, I guess. And so what I landed
on was just this Celtics team and this is kind
of an extreme version of what's been true for several seasons,
just doesn't get the cheapies, which is to say, they're
dead last in free in rimitem frequency and they're dead
last in free throw a temp rate.
Speaker 2: So it makes you wonder.
Speaker 3: Now they make up for that with an otherwise pretty
high variance style, a lot of threes, not quite as
extreme as it's been, but incredible Jalen Brown two point
jump shooting. It makes me nervous when a team doesn't
get to the basket.
Speaker 2: And this is very much related.
Speaker 3: Does not shoot a lot of free throws because if
you believe, and this has been largely proven to be true,
that the increased physicality of the postseason and just teams
scout you out of the one, first, second, and third
most you know, preferred offensive options in your Arsenal. At
some point you kind of got to just get to
the basket and bang around and get points that way,
and Boston just does not do that at all. That's
the best I got, because this is a team that
has blown away expectations, is wired as tight as any
system wise like understands how it needs to play to
be successful, and is adding Jason Tatum. I you know,
I don't know what to do with that team in
terms of like is there a structural flaw?
Speaker 2: You might point to the center rotation.
Speaker 3: I guess like Vucevic has looked mostly very bad, so
it's cata and then you're gonna play small or trust
Luca Garza or whatever. I have a much harder time
finding just this glaring thing like we can with Detroit
or with Houston or even like with Cleveland. So I'm
just pointing to, yeah, you guys don't get enough easy points,
and that's the best I got.
Speaker 2: You got anything else there?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 1: And I think to just to add to that is
I don't I'm not as worried. I've seen some people
talk about it's not that is this Jalen Browns or
Jason Tatum's team? Now, like that's a that's a first
take conversation that I think was an actual first take conversation.
Speaker 2: Sure it was.
Speaker 1: The real conversation is, well, what does he look like?
And how does what's the interplay like? Does it change
their offense at all? Jason Tatum is so scalable. I'm
not worried about it. And I actually view Jalen Brown's
experience running more pick and rolls than ever, more self
created shots than ever, as just well, now they're better
built for Jason Tatum to play off others, and he's
always been able to play off others. They'll find that dynamic.
I'd worry about where your point was. Jason Tatum was
one of their best drivers of free throw attempts. You're
probably not gonna get that version of Jason Tatum, and
if you do, I mean, holy crap. I would nitpick
a little bit about the center rotation as well. Are
you gonna be just because you want some more heft?
Are you gonna be dependent on vouch? What does Kato
look like in the playoffs? I think what you could
also go a little bit more generally too, is all right?
Speaker 2: Like you right now?
Speaker 1: You kind of need minutes from Baylor Shireman or Hugo Gonzalez.
What do those guys look like in the playoffs? This
is you know, the Derek Whites, the Peyton Pritchard by
the way, like he's getting more self created opt like
that just sort of insulates them further against No, they'll
figure it out on offense. And you don't have questions
about Pritchard and White and Brown and Tatum and even
maybe even Sam Hauser at this point. But that's half
your rotation about and I think the rest is okay, Well,
what do they look like playing heavy minutes in a
postseason rotation? And that to me might almost be the
bigger concern, which underscores I would give this whatever pick,
whatever concern you want from the list that you laid out,
I will give it a I'll give it a three.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I think as we're talking about this, I'm realizing that
my concern level is related to kind of the stakes
of not winning it this year, and for the Celtics
for sure. I mean, it's it's not quite right to
call it a found money season because the circumstances that
led to it, chiefly a catastrophic injury to your best player,
are so unfortunate. Like there's nothing like, this isn't a
lucky year in any in that sense, right, you don't
want to have to have blown away expectations because your
best players hurt, but it still happened. I think the
long term outlook of Boston just is only better now
because it's pretty clear that Jason Tatum could come back
diminished and this team might still just be the team
we go into next season viewing as on par with
the Pistons as favorites in the East. So I'll give
it a two because they had no business being in
this conversation at all.
Speaker 1: And so it's like if we were coming into this
with the Celtics entered the season as favorites in the
Eastern Conference, your concern level is then problem, like why yeah,
why are Pistons concern level is like the granted we
didn't have them as favorites in the East either, but
the expectations have soared as a result. And just with Boston,
it's if this is all if they flame out and
it was all done in service of all Right, now
the team is willing to spend more because they ducked attacks.
You got some sea legs under Jason Tatum. All right, Cool,
But if you really believe, Because what's troubling there, though,
is if we go with a three, and we went
with an eight seven and a half eight for the Pistons,
are you are we also effectively saying that we don't
view the Celtics' peak as being on par with the Pistons.
Speaker 2: Is this year?
Speaker 1: The othernet is No, I think Boston's peak is right there.
I think Boston is the biggest threat to Detroit in
the Eastern Conference. You can make the case for Cleveland,
you can make the case. There's cases for everybody. Yeah,
So I do struggle with that. But it is like
the expectations for Boston were lower coming into the season
than they were for the Pistons because they weren't dealing with,
as you said, that catastrophic injury absence.
Speaker 3: To that point, we kind of talked about the idea
at the outset of well, if you time traveled to
June and said this team won the title, you're to
qualify here, you can't be That can't seem impossible to
you starting from today.
Speaker 2: If we were.
Speaker 3: Starting from October and you time traveled to June and
someone said the Celtics won the title, what would you
think like, well, they must have traded for Yannis like
or something like, there's just no So in terms of
like the implausibility, if you go back to the beginning
of the season, Boston is I mean, it is insane
that the Celtics are where they are right now. It's
it's just unbelievable, and it's honestly cool, like that's great,
this is awesome.
Speaker 2: I'm really like, it's exciting.
Speaker 3: To me that this team that already has a title,
by the way, is not done because clear that they
can weather what seems like the absolute most devastating, like
catastrophic storm and looked pretty good.
Speaker 2: Their next their five year time horizon looks pretty good
to me.
Speaker 1: And it's also just they kind of are good substitutes
for because you look at Philly and Toronto and they're
probably where we expected them to be. But Orlando was
supposed to be in this exercise and just not so
Boston kind of subs and replaces them. So it adds
that wrinkle my pick. Now, right, let's go with we
just did. Let's go to the Western Conference and we're
gonna talk about the Denver Nuggets, which I think because
I think there's one of two ways you could go,
and they're both more so general is you could say,
are they gonna be healthy enough? But I and then
it's their defense, And I just feel like those two
things are inextricably related, right because their defense has not
been great. Since Nikola Jokic has come back, he has
looked way less than great on that end of the floor,
and it's it's brought Have you given this any consideration?
Do you think that he would have come back when
he did if not for the sixty five game rule?
Speaker 2: Man?
Speaker 1: Do you think he's above that? Not based on his demeanor.
But this is someone who's won a championship, He's won MVPs.
Speaker 2: I could see.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying he's not competitive, but in my I
think in my head I always just assumed he's not
gonna get caught up in all that. But yeah, he
comes back with a one game cushing it. It's made
me think a little bit.
Speaker 3: He is high on the list of guys I would
assume don't care about about that stuff, but it is
he did come back at a point where, yeah, he
can miss one more.
Speaker 2: He's right under the wire right now. I wanted to ask.
Speaker 3: You like if you so the Nuggets have a title,
Jokic has a title. He put to bed the narrative
that we I think a lot of people bought. I
think I subscribed to it for a time before they
broke through and won at all, that you sort of
can't have.
Speaker 2: A defense that's good enough to win a championship if
he's in the middle of it.
Speaker 3: That died because he proved that one. He was better
defensively than a lot of people give him credit for,
and has mostly that's been the case for the last
several years leading into this one host championship. But this
version of Jokic, that is an accurate statement, I think,
because he has been so rough defensively where opponents take
more shots at the rim with him on the floor
than off, which has never happened before, at least since
his rookie year, So not a deterrent, that's never been
the case. And certainly schematically, it's easier to get shots
at the rim with this version of Jokic than it's
ever been and he's allowing like sixty four percent, which
is pretty rough among bigs that defend a lot of shots.
Speaker 2: So this is it.
Speaker 3: It's like we've transported the argument from twenty twenty one
to today, and now it's kind of applicable where the
jokic at the middle of a defense, I guess unless
you get Gordon back and he's one hundred percent and
Peyton Watson is back at one hundred percent, it's it's
just not enough.
Speaker 2: I just don't think the defense is good enough.
Speaker 1: I would agree, And now I'm gonna explain to you
why I think this is the right concern to focus
on and why my level is just like a two.
Speaker 2: Okay, great, I've seen I know.
Speaker 1: If you've seen this take spreading around. I'm Zachlow said it,
and so of course it's spread like wildfire after it.
Speaker 2: And that's not to denigrate anyone who did it.
Speaker 1: And I'm sure we've parroted stuff that Zachlo has said
all the time, but he just said, this doesn't feel
like the Nuggets is year, and now that has kind
of spiraled.
Speaker 2: Into its own take.
Speaker 1: I don't want to call bs I if they get healthy,
why not is where? So if you're concern is Aaron
Gordon is never gonna be healthy, Cam Johnson's never gonna
be healthy, Peyton Watson's not gonna be healthy again. Yeah,
I mean, you lose three of your top six seven players.
That's that's a problem. But the defense, we don't. Can
you tell me how many games there would be starting
five has played in together?
Speaker 2: Oh? I think I know. It's like ten? Is it ten?
Speaker 1: It's exactly ten, which there have been noticeably more than
ten games played this season.
Speaker 2: Grant, I'm not sure if you know.
Speaker 1: So you look at you start to dig into those
the Jokic stuff you're saying for sure, and the other
thing that Denver doesn't have the luxury of we've seen
more turnovers from them than we're used to since the
Yokids were and they just don't have, even at full capacity,
the raw athleticism to not get nuked in transition.
Speaker 3: Sorry, can I ask you, because we've talked, I brought
I harped on the defense of Jokic. You're pointing out correctly,
the turnovers there have just been more like what the
hell was that like turnovers from him since he I
just attribute that to the injury and so like, I
think he came back too soon, and I think this
is the version of him you have and it's not
it's not the real guy.
Speaker 1: It's also the first extended absence of his career mid season,
and so it's he might take some time to.
Speaker 2: Work his way back.
Speaker 1: And by the way, there's still like ten points better
p one hundred posessions with him on the floor, like
but he's he's.
Speaker 2: Still great, like full stop great.
Speaker 3: It's just this guy isn't. This isn't the best of
Jokic right now. And I would retract everything I said
about the defense, about their chances if you could promise me,
give me one of Gordon, give me Gordon Watson and
be nice, Johnson and be nice, and Jokic being and
then my concern levels like a one or two.
Speaker 2: Well that's it for that. So you start.
Speaker 1: They have a top eleven defense against top ten offenses
on the season I mentioned before, their starting five has
only played ten games together. They're in the seventy third
percentile of defensive efficiency when that group's on the court.
Small sample. Let's expand it a little bit. They're in
the ninety fifth percent tile of defense when Aaron Gordon
gets to play with Jokic and Jamal Murray. And I
think now you could point to it does feel like
they have more difficult choices to make without a healthy
Michael Porter Junior there, because at least you could say
he did feel like a roller coaster on offense. He
certainly was a roller coaster on defense, but the rebounding
was always there. You're not getting that from Cam Johnson.
And then he's had better stretches before he's gotten injured,
but I don't trust him to make any sort of shot.
I've just reached that point with Cam Johnson, which is
a weird spot to be in. So now you get
in the push and pull of well, who can you
sub in there? What would make sense sacrificing too much?
If it's Peyton Watson, What if it's Bruce Brown. I
think you can get away with the way that Cam
Johnson has played this season. I don't know how much
you're giving up by just throwing Tim hard If you
need the offensive element or the spacing, which I think
is important, I think you can get away sliding Tim
Hardaway Junior in there. And the sample size isn't huge,
but I think the numbers on that lineup has largely
been fine. This is all to say when I watch Denver, No,
I don't get the sense nightly that I'm looking at
this championship juggernaut. We haven't seen the version of the
Nuggets that's supposed to be a juggernaut at least nearly enough.
And I understand that does then in turn lend itself
to the well, this just doesn't feel like their year,
and I'm just sort of wondering. I feel like, is
Aaron Gordon, are these injuries being treated differently if we're
in the playoffs right now based on how we saw
them handle them in the playoffs last season, and so, yes,
these are big variables. But then I think that the
focus it be it's the injuries for me, is not
is Denver's defense good enough to win a title? Does
Denver have an elite defense? There are certain lineups where
they could probably get there, But the answer is just no.
It's they have the best offense in the league. They
continue to have the best offense in the league on
the year against top ten defenses, despite Yokic missing a
ton of time, despite inconsistency and scattershot availability from Cam Johnson,
heck of a job by Jamal Murray helping them navigate
all of these stretches. I just it's not that I'm
not that there isn't concern. I just think that we've
swung a little bit too far on the opposite end
of the of the spectrum to say this just isn't
this just isn't their year. And until you tell me
that Aaron Gordon specifically isn't gonna be on the court
during a postseason series, I just won't go there. And
so I'm gonna put since I cited the defense, I'm
gonna trust that they will be healthier by the time
we get to the playoffs, and I'm going to put
my concern level at a two and a half maybe
a three, And it's just maybe if I had an MD,
I feel more okay, like how these injuries going to
impact like what these guys look like or when they return,
But I don't, so I get to go with a
two and a half slash three, and I think I'm
around there.
Speaker 3: I'll just say a four because I am very worried
about Gordon's hamstring and I think that that is just
like the defining injury.
Speaker 1: For those important Now are you dealing with You were
dealing with a hamstring injury. Have you recovered yet?
Speaker 3: Yeah? But it moved to my calf because that's how
injuries work when you're old is just your compensated and
then you get hurt somewhere else. So, uh, you know,
godspeed Aaron Gordon. He's much younger than me and slightly
more athletic.
Speaker 2: Uh so maybe maybe we'll maybe he'll get through it.
Speaker 1: Does he have more slam dunk titles than you? You
guys are tied and that how many does you have?
Speaker 2: Not enough? That's it's close.
Speaker 3: I was just gonna say, den when Denver won it's title,
it had the number seventeen defense in the regular season,
like not a high bar. Fellas like they if they
get to there or or prove that they have that
slight like level up from that level in the postseason,
I think they're okay.
Speaker 2: Just give me Aaron Gordon back. That's that's what I
think they just.
Speaker 1: I think as Jokic gets better, the two things that
will improve. Okay, you're not dealing with as many turnovers,
so your defense doesn't like isn't like you know, throw
like it workd itself into a tizzy because of that,
and then Kim's rebounding. They're good at ending, not giving
up those second chance opportunities when they're at their peak.
I will say, though, as of right now, I think
they're twenty fifth in points slow possession on first chance opportunities.
That is, you can't convince me that's.
Speaker 2: Not a problem.
Speaker 1: I just think that they have enough when they're healthy. Okay,
the guys that are supposed to be playing. It won't
be nearly as egregious when all those guys are available.
Speaker 2: All right, do we got three teams left?
Speaker 3: By my account, one of them I've run out of
knits to pick, like I'm not because the one I
was gonna pick has kind of corrected itself. The other
one I just want you to talk about. So I'm
gonna get the Thunder out of the way here, and
you gotta play the hits. It's an oldie, but a goodie. Uh.
Speaker 2: But the non shaman play enough?
Speaker 3: Oh no, I mean and Uzman Janng was integral to
their title hopes and they foolishly sent him away, and
he's gonna be a superstar on the Bucks. It's a
non shame minutes. It's it was still an issue last postseason.
It wasn't a big enough one to offset all of
the thunders myriad strengths in other areas. But Jalen Williams
banged up all year, not good relative to the standard
he's set outside of the most recent stretch of play
he had before his most recent injury. He looked pretty
good before that hamstring got him, but coming into the
season had surgery on his wrist. Shooting thirty one percent
from deep. The thunders non Shae minutes with Williams on
the floor this year one hundred and thirteen points per hundred.
That's a thirty sixth percentile figure, which is actually better
than it was last year. It was one to eleven
last season. You're still not encouraged by any of those
because those are regular season numbers. The playoffs are harder,
the competitions better, on and on and on. One thing,
we can just dismiss the non shame minute concerns because
the thunder overcame them last year, and also, what else
are you going to point to unless we just go
to the health well again, I think it's still a thing,
and I think it's magnified because Williams has had a
very down, injury plagued season, and if all of those
other injury concerns don't kind of go away, that just
makes his job when in the non shave minutes harder
because he's got less healthy help or you know, it's
a trickle down thing. So I don't really nowhere else
to go with the Thunder other than the thing we
talked about last year and have kind of focused on
when we're looking for flaws with them basically forever.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I look, it's they need. I think j
Dubb is still the right focus because I don't want
to say they could win the title without him. That's
a possibility, yeah, but it would be I wouldn't pick
them to win it if this is going to be
the version they get, or certainly if they're not going
to have him at all. His mid range efficiency and
the half cours dropped off by more than ten percentage
points last year in transition, or he was shooting seventy
two percent in the paint and in the restricted area
sixty percent this year, And I mean then you start
to dig into it at the Thunder's half court offense
is still above average overall when Jaydubb plays without Shay,
even though you mentioned they were the thirty six percentile
overall during those minutes, chet, I thought maybe we'd see
kind of a self created jump from him. We haven't
necessarily gotten that the efficiency in those areas. He's in
the twenty first percentile of self created shot making efficiency.
Speaker 2: I don't know. My concern level isn't high.
Speaker 1: I think when you start to stack these minor issues
on top of each other. So what Jaydub has looked
like overall health concerns and then just the fact that
they're not a high volume three point shooting team, and
they don't. They're almost entirely bereft of what you would
say or knockdown shooters. There's Isaiah Joe and even he
can be be streaky. Other than that, it's like Chet
Holmgren seldom has those games too where it's at the
game that they just won against the Knicks, like that
was sort of an anomaly for him. When you're looking
at that three point volume and efficiency. So when you
stack those together, maybe I could get myself to a four.
Otherwise I'm just kind of at a Jdub's still young.
I assume he's gonna maybe he never looks like a
top fifteen NBA player this season. The Thunder probably need
him to be a top fifty or sixty NBA player
to win the time. Just having JDub on the floor
because still someone who can do things with the ball
in his hands, or even having aj Mitchell two would
go a longer way.
Speaker 2: I'll settle in.
Speaker 1: At a three because the stakes are still they it's
a three because they don't look Remember at the beginning
of the season when we say, oh, they'll all get
into seventy four wins, and they don't look They have
not looked like that team as often in the intervening months.
I'm going with a one and there.
Speaker 3: And that's because like even this season, like you just said,
we've seen them hit a level that nobody hits.
Speaker 2: So it's in there.
Speaker 3: And and like you said, it's arguable that they don't
need their second best player to win a championship. That
just speaks to all the other stuff that they do
so well. They're just it's they They're the favorite. To me.
I think it's been fun to imagine the Spurs, to
imagine the Pistons and like even Boston, all these other teams.
Speaker 2: But I just.
Speaker 3: They still have maybe you know, the guy that's probably
gonna win MVP. They still have the best perimeter defenders
in the league. It's just they got so much that
even if this is a major flaw, it's they overcame
it last year, and so I mean, who's to say
they can't overcome something even more you know pronounced.
Speaker 2: If Williams like can't.
Speaker 3: Play, or if is he even worse, it's just I
think there's just gonna be ways for the Thunder to
solve this stuff.
Speaker 2: So I'm going only one. I'm gonna give.
Speaker 1: Who wins MVP. If in the event that Shay and
Yo Kic don't hit sixty five games, I.
Speaker 2: Think it comes down to the wire and it's Cad
or Wimby.
Speaker 1: Don't you like Lakers fans are gonna lose their shit
if that happens. I don't, and I don't dis I
don't disagree with your pick. So I kind of want
to see Lakers, that section of not all Lakers fans.
I want to see that section of Lakers fandom lose
their shit because the two top candidates fell out, and
I believe that a ton of them just auto would
have especially if since Johannis doesn't qualify either, they would
have Luca penciled into that.
Speaker 3: I I like Luca is so far from my I
know he's leading the league in scoring, and the numbers
are stupid and whatever. Like I'm trying to think who
else I would pick over him for MVP, just based
on like the total package of his season this year,
certainly Wimby and Kid.
Speaker 2: Then you get into what like who's.
Speaker 1: The Donovan Mitchell?
Speaker 2: Probably Mitchell is Anthony Edwards? A thought like I don't.
I mean that's that's maybe. Are you thinking about John Brunson.
I mean, I'm thinking conkiniple.
Speaker 1: Uh, LaMelo's shot quality, which is but I know means
his own fault is so low it's got to be lamellow.
Speaker 3: We need that stat I know what is like if
you like who makes it?
Speaker 2: What what would you call it?
Speaker 3: There needs to be an acronym for it, for like
self imposed shot quality s I SISK or something.
Speaker 2: I don't know what it is, all right.
Speaker 1: Also need a metric for I know they have rim
de terrence, but there needs to be a different name
for what Wemby does because I feel as deterrence begins
as soon as they cross half court.
Speaker 2: We they needs it. That stat needs a name.
Speaker 3: I think it needs to be able to You need
to be able to abbreviate it with fear like f E.
Speaker 2: A or like forced exit around the rim? Or around
the rim?
Speaker 1: Could you have done it with alien?
Speaker 2: Would have been a long interior excellent? Uh netminder? How's
that pretty good? It's not as good as your fear.
It's a hockey. I would nominate then, because I don't
want to do it.
Speaker 1: Okay, I'll nominate the Wolves. I'll nominate the Knicks. So
my concern I think people are gonna be inclined to
focus on the defense. I'm not going to they do have.
I would just like to note they are one of
the teams that rank in the top ten of both
offense and defense.
Speaker 2: That also holds true.
Speaker 1: I believe they join I haven't checked this in a
couple of days, but I believe they joined the Pistons
as the only team that ranks in the top ten
still of both sides of the ball when facing other
top ten teams.
Speaker 2: So I love the top ten stats. I'm not saying
the Knicks should be favorites to win the title. I'm
not not saying I am actually saying they shouldn't be favorites.
I look at their I.
Speaker 1: Don't even want to say it's their offense, but they're
starting five. The data is a lot better on it
this season than it was last year, and even that
a lot might be doing a lot of work at
this point because the margin is slowly shrinking, the offense
isn't nearly dynamic. I saw. I've seen people say that
a lot of Knicks fans thought the Knicks figured out
how to use Josh Hart against these pack to paint defenses.
They're just gonna have him screen that last year. Right,
It's okay, and it doesn't. It works to an extent.
But if you're having Josh Hart screen here are the
two primary trickle down effects, then you can't play him
with Mitchell Robinson. And the numbers with him and Mitchell
Robinson have actually, I've actually been really good. But if
you're not having Mitchell Robinson screen like, it's just not
gonna work. Josh Hart hanging in the dunker spot does
very little for me. The other thing, if you have
him screening, you're now neutering Karl Anthony Towns is already
Topsy Turvey offensive usage even further so, it's yes, have
it in the tool belt, but it's a bigger deal
that I think Mike Brown needs to be quicker with well,
can he's he hasn't had Josh Hart close some games.
To his credit, he's gone with Landry. He went with
Landry Shammittt. I believe against the Thunder he'll have another
kind of tool in his belt. Wants to use me
bride returns. But there's just something about the offense because
even if you remove Oh, teams won't guard Josh Hart.
What is the offense? How many minutes can you get
away with him? How many minutes a youre willing to
not play him in those instances? You then start to
have these other concerns to where it's just like who
is the Knicks' second best player? A default, but they
probably need it to be Karl Anthony Towns and just
the self creative stuff from Towns. This year has been
better lately. He's passing out of more of his drives.
Those are good things. He's never passed out of his drive.
So I'm just skeptical as to how much that's going
to hold their absence of a number two. It sometimes
worries me more than like what the Detroit Pistons have,
because the Pistons have a very clear thing. Kay Cunningham
and Jaalen Dern and they will if you let them
get into that two man chemistry, they will annihilate you
with it. The Knicks do not have, aside from Jail Brunson,
go do this. That is the knickses define. Yes, they
do other stuff in their offense. I'm not trying to
say that the agency that players have to bring the
ball up to court. There's definitely more leeway there. I
do feel like we've seen anecdotally, don't have numbers on it,
more half court movement, the things that Mike Brown is
just willing to try playing Muhammad Diar, mixing and matching
all these different lineups, like seeing what works in the
regular season, potentially to the detriment of their record.
Speaker 2: I can applaud all of that.
Speaker 1: The oversimplification is who is the Knicks' second best player
and are they good or not? Or are they do
they have a number two option on offense, a viable
number two option, and it can't be by committee.
Speaker 2: I just won't.
Speaker 1: I won't accept that answer. And it also can't be
on some nights Karl and the Towns is that guy.
Speaker 2: If kntee Towns.
Speaker 1: Isn't gonna be that guy seventy five percent of the time,
you're going to have an issue, and so I think
that's their biggest concern for me is just what are
their counters on the offensive end to these defense is
when you look at the Pistons, when you've even seen
a little bit of it with Boston san Antonio. I
know they've played san Antonio well, but Cleveland, like these
teams that have forced them their offense into stretches to
where it hasn't always looked great. What are the counters
to that in the plot? Do you have enough counters
to that? And I honestly don't know the answer.
Speaker 3: I think that that's a really interesting angle of approach
because because my first thought is, well, they have several counters,
but you're you're right that it can't be by committee.
So while it's valuable that Mitchell Robinson will probably win
you a game in any given series just because he
gets that many offensive rebounds that turn into threes, like
that's okay, he got one that way, And Brunson's great
enough at the do it all yourself to where maybe
he gets you one and a half wins, you know,
in a given series or two, and then it's like
where's it coming from? Otherwise, Towns is as likely to
torpedo a game as he is to help you win it, right,
so the same, it's kind of I think that that's well.
Speaker 2: Observed I.
Speaker 3: And I think maybe what it's reflective of is the
Knicks are really good, but the ceiling just doesn't quite
reach high enough because they don't have that second guy
that is a reliable enough source of like every night
help for Brunson.
Speaker 2: I think that's really interesting. I think that it's a note.
Speaker 1: By the way, okay, because I just don't as good
as they can look at points, and even you know,
they've shown their defense, they have the league's best defense.
Like the last quarter of the season, they've gotten very
lucky on opponent three point shooting.
Speaker 2: During that stretch.
Speaker 1: They have had games where opponents have outshot them from
three and they've still kind of defended well. But you
even kind of look at their record if they're shooting
below league gaverage from three, I haven't looked at this,
so I'm just gonna guess. I would guess they're winning
percentage last year or even the year before was way
higher when they shot below league average from three than
they do this year. It's just they seem so relying
on it in part because you don't have that's the
high variants shot when you don't have another number two guy,
and it's yeah, there they are all like Karnthy Towns,
Mikal Bridges, og An Andobi do elements of it, but
it's all. You need it all in a fuller package,
or at least a more consistent package, which I just
don't think they're gonna get. And so that's a nine
for me. And maybe that overlooks some of the defensive concerns.
But if you have a team that's built around Jalen
Brunton and Karl Anthony Towns, I like you're supposed to
be unsolvable on the off. That's what you've decided you're
going to be. I don't get that unsolvable vibe from
the mix. And it goes beyond to be clear just
how defenses are going to treat Josh hard and it's
they're gonna treat him that way even if he shoots
four to seven from three. They don't. He's hit more
of his wide open threes this year, he's still below
thirty six percent on catching shoot threes for the season.
Speaker 2: Defenses don't like they're not gonna care.
Speaker 3: He's a great example of of like the percentage matters
until it doesn't, because he could go if in game
one of a series he goes five for eight from three,
the defense will not treat him any differently the next night,
Like that won't change the scheme. I don't think. Maybe
if he does it twice, that's that's like the tipping point.
But yeah, I do want to talk you know, you
talked about the the brown or around the Brunson cat
pick and roll on offense. Suppose it should be unsolvable
and it's not. I do want to discuss what I
was gonna focus on until, like most of the Knicks
defensive numbers just got so good that it felt silly
the other end of the floor, where like I really
do think one of my favorite parts of the postseason
is teams X and Y show up with their game
plans and they kind of showy. They go out there
doing what worked, and then as the series progresses, you
find out what does and doesn't work, and there's adjustments, encounters,
and eventually you're playing a series that maybe doesn't look
like what you hoped it would, but this is just
where you are now and to me with Brunson and
with kat as attackable options in pick and roll defense,
My thought was that teams are gonna come into series
against the Knicks on offense knowing exactly what they want
to do, and some of the numbers are not good,
like Rollman thirty seven percentile. The Knicks defend Rollman at
a rate or allows scoring by Rollman in the thirty
seventh percentile, it's twenty seventh for ball handlers.
Speaker 2: It's bad.
Speaker 3: Why isn't the concern just that offenses in the playoffs
can pick on those two guys and the Knicks don't
really have a fix for it. And again, the defensive
numbers have been good enough to where it's like, is
that really what you're gonna talk about? But that just
strikes me as tactically where you would start as another team,
And why why should we believe the Knicks can overcome
that on defense?
Speaker 1: I if they get into a situation to where that
can consistently be attacked, they can't, right, But I think
that they've done a good job doing think is And
there's been a lot of talk recently about their shading
teams more towards the baseline that can make it harder
to attack that. I think what they've done a really
good job of all season is Jalen Brunton, like having
him be cross matched with anyone that allows him to
be the low man, and so if you want to
try and go after Jalen Brunson, it's gonna take more
work to get to him. Mike Brown has gotten the
unit I want to see more of, Like the staggering
patterns with them I think can help too. A lineup
I want to see more of is Jalen Brunson with
Modio War, Jose Alvarado, Ogan and Obi and then Robinson.
I would say they just throw a bunch of defensive
dogs around Jalen bruns in, but I think what we've
also seen from Towns and the data on the rim
attempts that he's contesting during this span when the Knicks's
defensive shift kind of happened, what also happened was, well,
they're not asking Karl Anthony Towns to be the traditional
rim protector as often anymore, and I think there's just
more chaos if he's coming up higher and he just
seems more in aged when he has to beat, Like
if you involve Klarl Anthony Towns in the action. I
actually think and he's up high, he's going to be
better off because just like the way he tries to
keep pace with players are just how engaged he is.
Not always gonna end well. Guys are gonna get by him.
He's gonna he's gonna found people. Yeah, but I'd prefer
that than to, like, let's funnel anyone towards the middle
cat where cats and drop or cats hanging around the basket.
Speaker 2: I'd rather have. I'd rather have.
Speaker 1: Jaylen Brunson as the low man than Karl Anthony Towns.
Speaker 2: He's gonna take fourteen, Yeah.
Speaker 1: So I I don't know that that's like, I don't
know that that should make you or anyone else specifically
feel better about it. But I think that they've circumvented
it enough. But it's also let's see it in the playoffs,
and it's if now you have to go up against
who is better or more prone in the league to
trying to suss out a mismatch than James Harden, who's
now in your conference, it's maybe Luca will like get bogged.
Speaker 2: Down into that.
Speaker 1: So well, we'll see what I mean. Their defense is
the numbers are cool, I'm gonnat, but like, can they
reach and maintain that level in the playoffs when all
you're facing is top ten teams?
Speaker 3: Basically, Yeah, No, I think that's a good answer. That's
I mean, that's why I kind of backed off of
it as the main concern is that I think the
main thing that you pointed out is just that, like
teams are good enough now when in the Knixt case,
for example, to just figure out how to keep those
guys out of actions together, like there's enough pre switching.
Speaker 2: You can do and all that stuff.
Speaker 3: It's still maybe the bigger concern though, as you as
you mentioned, it is just a team just ISO hunts
one or the other, and that's a lot harder to
keep guys out of actions. If if it's just like
let's find this guy and call him up and see
if he can if it's brunts and for example, or
and probably teams should just do that against Brunson all
the time to wear him down, because then that gets
into the other thing that you mentioned about if he's
not doing everything on offense, or if you're forcing it
out of his hands all the time too, like who's
gonna who are you that afraid?
Speaker 2: Of on the Knicks from a scoring perspective, not many.
Speaker 1: So i't a nine on mine.
Speaker 2: You give it, I'll give it like a seven.
Speaker 3: We've seen the Knicks kind of overcome that to some
extent in recent postseasons, but it's still I mean, that's
still pretty high.
Speaker 2: We have one art. Who's our final?
Speaker 1: It's your pick, it is.
Speaker 2: It's the Timberwolves.
Speaker 3: What I when I wrote about this, what I went
with was that they were I think it was thirteen.
They're twelve and fourteen at the time against teams with
winning records, and so I just using that as a
proxy for the type of competition they'll see in the playoffs.
Speaker 2: Haven't seen enough generally.
Speaker 3: I looked it up and the last several champions, you know,
going from Oka See to Boston to Denver and on
back farther, they're always just you know, twenty five and
ten or whatever against teams with winning records. That it
does bear out that how you perform against teams that
are five hundred or better during the regular season really
does shocker impact how well you fare against the very
good teams you see in the playoffs. The Wolves are
now sixteen and fifteen. That's not likechampionship caliber, but it's
now you're winning more often than not against winning teams,
and if you want to throw in the peaking at
the right time cliche, I think that's starting to apply
to them as well.
Speaker 2: This is a weird team.
Speaker 3: We've talked about them in the context of like, why
not kind of conversation when you're talking about a champion
two straight conference finals.
Speaker 2: Go bear anchors the defense.
Speaker 3: His playoff usefulness or lack of playoff usefulness on defense
has been wildly overstated. I guess you could point to,
is their offense good enough with him on the floor
to win the fourth playoff series? It'll take their fifty
eighth percentile overall with him, The best lineups are sixty fifth,
seventy first, ninetieth percentile on offense with Gobert on.
Speaker 2: The floor, pretty encouraging. Edwards is a kind of playoff
proven guy. The role players make sense.
Speaker 3: We could go with the secondary creation stuff. The Vincenzo's
not a point guard. You're a little reliant on Julius Randall.
Unless you think Bones Highland is going to really continue
to be a source of offense.
Speaker 2: I guess if I.
Speaker 3: Had to lean somewhere it would be the offense. But
we've done that for like four of these teams, so
I'm hesitant to go that way. But that's all to
say that the Wolves, for a team that hasn't actually
won anything, and for a team that has had ups
and downs in each of the last three regular seasons
that have caused us to like dismount the bandwagon very
quickly and then.
Speaker 2: See if we can catch back up to it just
as fast. I'm not I have a weird amount of
faith in Minnesota.
Speaker 3: I think do you feel the same way where it's yeah,
you gotta do some real squinting and real stretching to
find a fatal flaw or something that feels like a
fatal flaw unless you truly and maybe this is it
just offensively at the end of games, they just bogged
down sometimes and it's a mess, and that's going to
be a problem.
Speaker 2: But this team is there's a lot to like here.
I don't know. I don't know what else to say
with them. What are your thoughts?
Speaker 1: I was gonna go with the reliance on Rudy Gobert
defensively because what if there is a matchup to where
his offense and if Julius Randall's not having a great game, Like,
how do you accommodate that?
Speaker 2: You can't?
Speaker 1: You just decided Julius Randalls the one we're not gonna play. No,
it might be well, how many minutes are we gonna
be able to get out of Rudy Gobert there? And
is your defense built to hold up after that? Because
they are like thirteen points better per one hundred posessions
when he's on the court defensively, and the fact that
there's seven points per one hundred persons worse offensively with
him on the court. He is still just a decidedly
not positive And it's funny that because I'm with you
that we spend a lot of time talking about the
secondary ball handling, how much the ball needs to be
in ants hands, what happens in crunch time?
Speaker 2: Is it?
Speaker 1: I think I owe as someone who could help, like
kind of a pace changer, and like that, the Wolf's
second unit feels like it might be playing faster lately.
You look at what Dante DiVincenzo could do the season
that Bones Highland is having. Who are there above average
defenders on this team? There are Rudy Gobert and Jay
McDaniels and then Anthony Edwards sometimes when he needs to be, Yeah, when.
Speaker 2: He needs to be.
Speaker 1: And so maybe because that is sixty percent of your
starting lineup, it's just or preferred closing unit. It's a
non issue. And it's not like Dante DiVincenzo is a sieve.
So but this isn't a team that like their defensive
identity to me is just very much Rudy Gobert. Still
at this point, you could sense moments when you're watching
the Wolves that the guys re guarding on the perimeter
seem like they forget Rudy Gobert is not behind them
with kind of the angles that they're rushering in, and
there could be these open pathways to the basket.
Speaker 2: That's just my biggest concern.
Speaker 1: And maybe it shouldn't be because you're not going like
because my concern le one might actually be pretty low,
because the best version of the Wolves, regardless of how
you feel about Rudy Gobert, includes Rudy Gobert. And so
if you're worried about their reliance on it's sort of saying, man,
I'm worried about how but I guess it's could you
say or Is it not the same that because the
we're worried about the Pistons is over to dependence on
Ky Cunningham. Can you frame it the same way on defense?
Or is it overdependence on offense is more dangerous than
an overdependence on defense.
Speaker 3: I think that's an interesting way to think of it.
I guess I am more just generally, if you take
the Gobert specifics out of it, I think I'm probably
more concerned with the team, like the Pistons that just
if it's not this one guy, where's the offense coming from?
Because defensively, I guess in theory, you know, if let's say, man,
it's tough to put a defensive lineup out there without Gobert,
that you feel good about, right, Because if it's like
Reid at center, not great, that's a real concern. Even
if McDaniels and Edwards can kind of turn some of
the perimeter water off, that's no way to live. So
maybe what we're arriving at is really just the importance
of Rudy Gobert is concerning.
Speaker 2: But then is that even fair?
Speaker 1: Like because could you just is the importance of Julius
no more concerning it? Here's the deal that he's had
thirty one from three or whatever.
Speaker 3: Randall out for nas Reed and that lineup this year
is a plus twenty five per hundred, So like if so,
But but I mean that's a tiny it's like one
hundred and sixty possessions. And if we're gonna be worried
about the Wolves shot creation, taking Randall off the floor
is like, that's that's not a solve, Like Reed is
not going to create shots for other people. Uh So,
I guess what I'm hung up on is is the
feeling that go bear still on both ends of the floor,
much more so on offense, just puts a weird set
of limits on what you can do, and that eventually
a team is going to exploit that.
Speaker 2: But is that fair? Like does is it like? Is
it fair to does it matter that the Wolves? I
don't know. After having I've watched this team.
Speaker 1: I've seen a lot of their crunch time, and I
worry about their offense, which is now creep to above
average and crunch time. And I was looking us up
because you said when you were talking about Gobert, you
like the top ten stats, their second in point score
per possession against top ten defenses.
Speaker 3: They're just gonna win the championship then, right, Is that
where we're landing is the.
Speaker 1: Concern that we can't settle a singular concern.
Speaker 2: For this team.
Speaker 3: I mean, because let's okay, let's try another angle. If
they wound up winning it, you would.
Speaker 2: Say, well, yeah, that makes sense.
Speaker 3: Anthony Edwards just kept getting better and now he's someone
will just talk about as a champion and he's a
top five guy going in the next year because he
proved it in the playoffs again, like right, like that
narratively done, dust your hands off made sense.
Speaker 2: We got there. I just there.
Speaker 3: I still think the thunder are better. But after that,
you can't point to a team that is indisputably more
dangerous than Minnesota. I think it's at least a conversation
with absolutly everybody else and and and we're just we're
reflecting that because we can't find other than Gobert, some
something related to Gobert feeling uh wobbly. But other than that,
I don't know where to go.
Speaker 1: I wanted to go before when we were coming into this,
because is Julius Randall is the type of player where
I feel like, if you just looked at his numbers
or didn't watch him regularly. You feel a lot better
about him if you're unplugged from what other people are
saying that if you sit back and watch him, it's
sort of if you look at Karl Anthony Towns's numbers,
but it's an All Star Maybe could he make All NBA?
Even if you watch every third, every fourth, every fifth
Carl Anthony Towns game, whatever it is, you feel differently
about them despite the numbers. So I can't, Like I
wanted to harp on Julius Randall, but even the three
point shooting especially not great post trade deadline. But it's
sort of they have a one twenty one offensive rating
when he's on the core without ANBIA words, I don't know,
Like what more do you want from the tup? Like
did Jewel Randall experience?
Speaker 3: No, Like I have not liked Randall as a player
basically forever because vibes, you know, like it just because
the ball stops. I don't love that because of the
pound the dribble stuff sometimes, but he's an effective offensive
player that like from the moment they traded for him,
it was like I get it because he's a front
court guy that can set people up like that matters
on this team that has one guy in Edwards who
took a couple of years to learn how to do that,
and they don't have anyone else you really trust to
do it. So I think I think you're right that
like there's something that's like a little itchy about the
trusting Randall too, But I don't know, man, and.
Speaker 1: That that might I think we've what we've done is
had this circular route back to it is the I
don't know if it's the secondary ball handling or just
the creation because when you look at the way that
Julius Randall sets up his teammates or Dante DiVincenzo or
n iiO Desummu, bots Island might be the closest they
come to just having Okay, this is an on ball
wiggle guy who can set up guys in the half
court with in a bunch of different ways, whereas Julius
Randall and I would assume it's very much predicated on we.
Speaker 2: Need to get all the way downhill to maximize it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and they'll see, they'll see the one pass that's available.
They're not like breaking the geometry of the floor and
like creating lanes for you know there there if there
are levels to facilitation, they're not at the top level
of of of the type of you know that you
might want as a secondary facilitator.
Speaker 2: That's because so could we agree to settle on that.
Speaker 1: We all thought that Terrence Shaddon Junior was going to
be better with Nickle Alexander Walker.
Speaker 3: Okay, if they had Alexander Walker, we wouldn't even have
to do this section.
Speaker 1: If you put a NAW on this team right now,
would you pick them over the thunder based on your
concern level with j.
Speaker 2: They would rise.
Speaker 3: They would rise to because I said that it's at
least a conversation between them and everyone, but the Thunder
they would rise to. It's now a conversation between them
and the thunder. That's how sincere my appreciation for now
yours is.
Speaker 1: I don't know that there's a great way to quantify
because you even mentioned their record against good teams, and
they're one of four teams with a winning record against
top ten teams. So it's just I think there's a
Jekyll and Hyde element to them, and maybe that's just
the concern and given what we've seen the past two
playoff runs, which of by the way, encompassed two I
would say very different core elements of the team where
you go from Karl Anthony Towns to Julius Randall and
Tante DiVincenzo. They made the conference finals that anyway, could
you argue that have there been one too many changes?
Speaker 3: Now?
Speaker 2: With now you do lose.
Speaker 1: Niki, Alexander Walker and iodusum Wu is sort of a
straight to DVD version of that. We'll find out and
it's like the Bones Highland story. It's one of those
situations where like, that's really cool.
Speaker 2: He's fined.
Speaker 1: It's footing in Minnesota, and I don't feel good about
that at all for Minnesota when you're looking at what
their level of reliance could be on him in any
given game during the playoffs. I'm gonna go with there's
something here, So I'm just gonna go with a four. Yeah,
I feel strongly about it.
Speaker 2: I'll go I'll go a five.
Speaker 3: Uh, but I don't have any We have yet to
pinpoint the reason for a concern level. If you could
d age Mike Conley by like five years, can you
imagine if it's just if you just had that guy.
Speaker 1: Who are the guys that could shift the championship race
if you just d aged them five years.
Speaker 2: Let's see, you only get one per team? Yeah? One?
I mean Lebron's gotta be on that for sure. If
he's five.
Speaker 3: Years ago Lebron, uh hmm, I mean probably Al Horford.
Speaker 2: The Warriors would definitely be.
Speaker 1: Just could you also say what about Draymond?
Speaker 2: Could you d age the entire roster by five years?
That'd be cool?
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, Mike Conley would definitely be up there.
Speaker 3: It's gonna be all the all the guys you russ
in Sacramento, we think five years.
Speaker 2: Might need to go a little farther back. Yeah, i
mean Harden? Well, how good was Harden five years ago?
Is that? Is that? Are we back?
Speaker 1: He was still he was? He was all NBA shoeing
type rather than oh will he make an All NBA team?
Speaker 3: Is there anybody on the Bucks you could dage five
years to give Giannis a real run?
Speaker 2: Probably?
Speaker 1: Man, what if you were to have daged before he
was traded Anthony Davis five years in Dallas?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Now, and then you're talking because that's.
Speaker 1: Like in Washington, and I'm not entirely too.
Speaker 2: Sure if you dhra young five years, you get conference finals?
Stray young, don't you now games.
Speaker 1: The rest of the Wizard's roster. I think you get
a bunch of minors that you get there.
Speaker 2: That's great. You don't want that? All right? Well we
did it? Got anything else? Is there?
Speaker 1: What's the contender that has the biggest red flat or honestly,
what was the hardest contender to leave off?
Speaker 2: Or what was the hardest team to leave off?
Speaker 1: Uh?
Speaker 3: Well, just by record and odds, it's the Lakers and Sixers.
The Lakers it just lightning round. That defense is not
good enough for the playoffs. Uh. And all your best
players are great on offense, and that's a problem.
Speaker 2: Uh. And for the Sixers, it's just what is it?
For the Sixers? You need embid to be MVP level
and EMBIID.
Speaker 1: But you also just have you have no like the
wing shortage on that team. It's kind of my properly
sized wings. Also the maxim minutes without EMBIID and George
have kind of come back down to earth. VJ. Edgecombe
has come back down to earth. There's a list of concerns.
The hardest team for me to leave off and I
really truly mean this was the Charlotte Hornets. I don't
have any faith in Orlando. Do you know what's kind
of a bummer with the Lakers is they just don't
I've never been more drawn to the Lakers than other
teams just because of the Lakers. But a team that
has Lebron James and Luka Dancic should be far more interesting.
Speaker 2: It should.
Speaker 1: The Lakers actually.
Speaker 3: Should more, you know, I I agree like and I
blame Alexandro personally.
Speaker 1: I think that's the.
Speaker 3: Keep looking at the record and like, huh, that's a
lot of wins.
Speaker 2: Howe needs to.
Speaker 1: Stop sipping on the crump juice and maybe they'll be more.
Just like everyone's just too buzzed on crump juice. Y.
Speaker 3: The er biggest weakness is their center is three people.
H that's fun, all right. I think it's time now
to thank everyone for listening.
Speaker 2: For watching, Remember to rate you and subscribe. Let us know.
Speaker 3: I'm sure we miss something or if any of these
really resonated, let us know comments here, join our discordinates
for that YouTube.
Speaker 2: And podcast description. You can wait in there as well.
Speaker 3: Tell your friends, tell your enemies. Shouts Franklin like Kino apologies.
Speaker 2: Jared Allen