Speaker 1: What is up, fellow Sikos. I am Dana Valley coming
at you with the one, the only, my certified fantabulous
co host, mister Grant Hughes. We are here to do
the other half of the live podcast that got canceled
last week. But we're gonna ask questions for every single
Western Conference team as many as we could get to
for all the teams entering trade season. We are now
in it. We're past December fifteenth. We are here. We're
in trade season. We've got questions, probably very few answers
as per usual before we get started, and we will
be going in order of reverse record order. Is that
what it's called, Grant? Is it for best ending worst
record to send ending record record. So we get to
start with a team that is very tough to come
up with questions for. But I do have one incredibly
unassailably important question, Grant, how are you doing?
Speaker 2: I'm happy to be establishing our brand as inquisitive because
we do ask a lot of This is not a
just asking questions. I don't know segment, I guess or episode,
except the sort of is. And I like to ask
questions better than I like to answer them. So this
is gonna work out perfectly, and we will try to
provide answers. I guess, but I guess the team we're
going to start with is probably the hardest one to
achieve that with because they sort of have all the answers.
And it's very hard to formulate questions for the Oklahoma
City Thunder, which is because we're going in order of
descending record, that's obviously who we start with. I'll take
the reins here and choose. I'm not gonna flip a
coin this time. As fun as that.
Speaker 1: Was, well, we wait, we do have confirmation. Some got
ass on Twitter It is Eisenhower and the Liberty bell
on the silver dollar, so you know your stuff and
for anyone understand that reference, go check out our trade value.
Speaker 2: All right, where do I want to turn here? We've
got a couple options, you know what, Let's let's think big.
Let's work big to small, just like we're working best
record to worst record. Here, what is the Thunder's biggest weakness?
Last year, this was easier to answer. What happens to
the offense when shake guilds Alexander's not on floor? Is
Jalen Williams good enough as a creator. We got kind
of like, I guess it was like series by series
in the twenty twenty four postseason, we or nope, what
year is a grant? Twenty twenty five postseason, we kind
of got some answers and then some more questions. They
won the title, so obviously it's not the biggest concern
in the world. But is that the issue now still
or is there something like do you want to go
outside the box and be like, how do they kick
enough picks down the road to keep the dynasty running
through twenty thirty eight? Like are we in that territory?
Speaker 1: I don't have like a good weakness for them. You
could look at their statistical profile and say, like, they've
not been a great offensive rebounding team this year? What
are they twenty ninth in offensive rebounding raiders?
Speaker 2: Which, sorry, don't you think that's one of those things
where it's like because if they want it to be,
they could right like it. I don't feel like it's
some structural flaw, you know, No, And it's also just.
Speaker 1: Even if they're playing dual big, how how big are
the other players on the court generally with them? I
don't I think you could look at it and say,
do you need someone that you trust to who's more
of a high volume three point sniper that you trust
to play more minutes than Isaiah Joe. But I don't
know why you would ever go out and try to
address that at this point. It's and everything with Okase
is a straw man argument. By the way, I've seen
a lot of like, oh, people want them to trade
for Giannis and they shouldn't know. I have seen absolutely
nobody who matters say that. I've seen nobody who doesn't
matter say that they should trade for rh honest or
make some big trade. This team is No team is perfect.
I think their biggest your biggest criticism might be, you know,
they are kind of still offensively one Shay Gildest, Alexander
injury away from disaster, Okay, no ship. How many teams
can we say that about with their their best player.
So I if I had to gravitate towards something, it
might be, you know, it would be pretty cool to
have just a three point like bombs away guy who
was better than Isaiah Joe, or they could play more
than Isaiah Joe. But would they even play that type
of like that has to be the bar for that
is who?
Speaker 2: Right? Right? Yeah, like if you had a struggle to
come up with I don't know, like just like last
year's Malik Beasley. Yeah, I mean great, like you're gonna
make a trillion three, but like would he like is
he on balance better than Caston Wallace or like yeah, you.
Speaker 1: Might Joe set better screens anyway, right, or are.
Speaker 2: You playing them over Wiggins who actually can create stuff
sometimes just to just to put a point on it, uh,
small samples obviously, because because Jada started the year behind
with the with the wrist injury, two hundred possessions so
far this season with Shay off and Jada on, the
Thunder are winning those by almost ten points per hundred.
Not because of the offense. The offense is like one
hundred and fourteen and a half points one hundred possessions.
That's below the league average, but they're winning those minutes
by ten per hundred, So like if that's your biggest problem,
and like, frankly, it still might be like that's just
those that's just the I don't know, one of a
thousand clear signs that the Thunder actually don't have problems.
Speaker 1: You know, maybe it's they don't do any of them
have more than ten fingers, because they're just gonna run
out of room to put their championship ring.
Speaker 2: The great, perfect Great.
Speaker 1: I could go to this one. Should they be looking
to trade for first in two thousand and thirty and beyond?
And you alluded to this a little bit when it's
saying get more picks to keep the window open, I'm
just saying they have no extra picks grant starting in
two thousand and thirty unless some of those Denver obligations
trickle into there. And so if you're Oklahoma City, is
that something that's back of mind to where it's, Hey,
if we could trade, we've got extra twenty twenty six
first if we could just scoop up some later first
rounders in the coming years, we should go ahead and
do that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean we have talked about, I guess as
part of like the made up Zubot's trade ideas where
you're giving back more immediate picks for picks that are
further down the road, when theoretically, like I guess, I
don't know, the idea would just be to just keep
optionality at a max for longer, because I don't know,
maybe there's another guy coming down the pipeline that you're
gonna have to pay a ton and you want flexibit,
but like they're already paying Williams and Chet and Shay
a bunch. So I don't know, Like if I guess
maybe on the theory that if you like, let's use
the guys they have now, like Topitch and like Sorber,
you know, just guys they've drafted in the first round recently.
Are they gonna play? So maybe the idea is, like
do you want more guys that just won't have a
chance to develop on the team now or can you
kick that can down the road? Like it's a luxury
obviously that they're even have that option, But that'd be
the only reason to do that, right is just because
like you just want to see if you can I
don't know, not minimize certain guys that would otherwise get
to play and then just have more freedom and optionality
and flexibility like you know what seven years or six
years from now as opposed to the next two or three.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't that's it. There's no, I guess there's no.
But that's a real concern, right is you want to
be able because if you get let's just say, with
the Clippers pick, you get a top five prospect, how
do you find minutes for him next year? If Topi
is healthy, it's okay, not yeah Brooks, Thomas Sorber, but
it's not like a need. And the only other one
that I think we could have is do you just
look to move usman Jang. He's it's not about oh
he's coming up on r FA, we need to capitalize
on his value. But what are we do or do
you just keep him and maybe he gets a second
championship brain that he can a lot for the rest
of his life.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, just on the theory that he's probably
not going to play a role like going forward, because again,
they've got these other guys that are theoretically gonna get
healthy that they've drafted after him that will They're not
the same position, really, although Sober, I guess maybe the
way that Jang has been used might be kind of similar. Yeah,
I don't know. He's not helpful now and you're not
going to pay him, so maybe you see if there's
anything out there for him. But it's not like he's
done enough to this point to there's not like a
robust market for him. I wouldn't think although second draft
teams like, let's just throw Brooklyn out there as the
constant example. I don't know, why wouldn't you just see
if this guy has something, if you actually gave him
sustained minutes, which he just has never really had.
Speaker 1: So our next team in second place, I believe you
could correct me if I'm wrong, but that would be
the Denver Nuggets. Do you want to pick their first
question that we go to.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we just have to start with the defense,
and it's pretty top line question. Is it's a championship
caliber defense? There below the league averaged eighteenth and twenty
ninth in forcing opponent turnovers, which when you watch him,
that feels about right. But it is odd in some
sense because it's not like Jokic Like a lot of
times defenses that don't force turnovers just play like imagine
like the brook Lopez Bucks schemes where he's just in
a drop all the time, and it's just you're coaxing
the types of shots you want, you know, the low
expected value shots, but you're not speeding anybody up. You're
not putting two on the ball that often. The Nuggets
do kind of use Jokic differently in that he comes
up to the level a lot. They do trap a
fair amount, because just having Yokic in a drop is
not the same as having Brook Lopez in a drop.
That's not a good way to play defense. And yet
they still don't force a lot of mistakes. So is
that a good enough defense to win a title? Maybe
they were, they were close to that level. They were
seventeenth when they won it a few years ago. Uh
and and you don't have your you know, I guess,
are Aaron Gordon and Christian Brown the two most disruptive defenders.
Speaker 1: In the rotation? Shots? And I mean Spencer Jones why
erroneously called a rookie on Blue Sky the other day, I.
Speaker 2: Say it all that's the two big guy that. I mean.
Speaker 1: He played twenty games last year and I actually remember him.
I skeedd about him having a possession on them. It
was just a beat and I was looking at his
basketball reference page. Yeah it was a mistakes.
Speaker 2: Well, what do you think about this defense?
Speaker 1: Where we do we care?
Speaker 2: Is it? Is it a big enough deal to raise
the flag?
Speaker 1: I don't fucking care about anything. No, I don't care. No,
I don't know. So I'm asking you Christian Brown and
Aaron Gordon have now and Aaron Gordon specifically has now
missed a bunch of times where if you even go
through their most used lineups right now, Aaron Gordon is
in so few of them, and so you can look
at it and say, I think six of their seven
most used lineups have a defensive rating of one hundred
and twenty or higher. That's not great. Their most used lineup,
which does include Aaron Gordon and Christian Brown, and it's
the starting lineup, is in the seventy third percent isle
of defensive efficiency right around there. That should be, in theory,
good enough if you're going to be able to play
the way that you do on offense where O Nicole
Jokic is in the game, we'll just pencil them in
for a cool one twenty seven, one thirty offensive rating.
I don't is this a championship defense? Is such a
loaded question. I would say no, but I think they
clearly have more than enough overall, because you're looking at
how good the offense can be and just some of
the defensive talent where Spencer Jones is a guy and
Peyton Watson's gonna play this way, and you get Brown
and Aaron Gordon healthy. I think it's a I think
for what their offense can do, the defense of personnel
they have is enough.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I think I think that's right, And I
think it's it's gonna be the type of thing where
a lot of this is gonna be on David Adelman,
because the way that Denver's defense will be successful in
playoff series is by being schematically like adaptable, and we're
gonna need for Denver to win a championship. I think
we're gonna need to at several points in its postseason
run look at the defense and say, like Adaman, really
like good scheme against this team, Like they're gonna have
to be pretty adaptable. It's not like it's not like
the Thunder. It's not like you know name, nobody's like
the Thunder. But it's not like a team where they
just play their brand of defense and the offense can't
do anything. It's gonna have to be like series to series,
game to game adjustments like that kind of thing. And like,
say what you want about Jokic on defense, Like I
think I think he's shown that, Like if you've got
a scheme that makes sense he's gonna be able to
be a helpful piece in it, but he's never gonna
be the guy that's just like, oh, they can't score
around the room. It's not it. They'll never be that
kind of defense with him.
Speaker 1: My other big question for them would be what is
their biggest need to you and should they can they
address it?
Speaker 2: Uh? What is their biggest need? I? Well, I think
it's probably another a guy who plays browns because it
will just say a wing that is not going to
get the Christian Brown treatment on offense, which is to say, like,
if you you will lose this playoff series. If Christian
Brown can shoot ten threes and make six every night.
I think they need somebody that, not that it may
not be a better player than Round on balance, but
someone that doesn't give a defense somewhere to say, please
beat us with this player right like that, because that
feels like what we've seen in the past, and that's
what we may see going forward. Even though Brown has
come a long way as a shooter, it's still like
that's just what defenses will do, don't you think?
Speaker 1: No, I agree with you. I could see certain matchups
to where they might appreciate having Tim Hardaway junior who
just has that short term memory is gonna get threes up?
Does he end up being better for them in some
of their core lineups, saying Christian Brown, I do wonder though,
to me, I wonder if it's just kind of more
of a ball handler I don't like, rather than having
to rely on a Bruce Brown like some sprinkling in
some jail and picket there. We've seen Peyton Watson do
more with the ball. They have a lot of guys
that can you could pepper in things, but I'm wondering
if and is there a way to check kind of
multiple boxes at once. My favorite trade target for them,
I think is Io Desunmu, if they can figure out
a way to get him from Chicago where some ball handling,
some positional maligeability on defense, I do think that posing
defenses might treat him without the ball a lot of
times like they would Christian Brown. I'm not sure that
that is. I think Christian Brown is probably a better
feit for this roster because of his off ball movement
of what he can do getting inside the ark that
when he's more physical, But just as a looking at
the backup ranks behind their starting lineup. I just don't
know who's your favorite ball handling on Maybe I would
Assumer doesn't even provide enough of that. Maybe it's I mean,
it Mayevrado makes more sense.
Speaker 2: I don't know, right you're you're asking like behind this
because I was gonna say, well, Aaron Gordon, he can
bring the ball up and do stuff against certain matchups,
but that's not answering the question of who outside of
the main guys is. I think that's a good point.
Like Bruce Brown in the past, you would have said
can handle some of that, and maybe he can. But
it does feel like, yeah, I don't know, now you're
making me rethink the need being because Tim Hardaway does
kind of do the type of thing I'm talking about
instead of Brown as a shooter. But it may be
that they need somebody else that can and ideally I
would want that other ball handler. And maybe this is
a discon more thing to be a second like point
of attack. Yeah, put the offense on his heels kind
of kind of guy.
Speaker 1: I think.
Speaker 2: I think you know, as you're we're asking a lot
now now we want a guy that's kind of like
really blow up screen and roll action on defense. And
also handle the ball and also make shots.
Speaker 1: I do wonder if of all the boxes that we've
kind of list that they need to check, does he
come the closest to checking all because you could go
and say you want a wing who defenses might respect
more from beyond the arc. But what they have is,
like there's ball skills and can they do you want
them defending at the point of attack or should they
be on some of those bigger wing covers de shum
Wu I think would be really good for this game.
I'd wonder, yeah, that's a good fit. But I think
the and the final question for them would be are
you willing to give up Peyton Watson because that's probably
their best asset unless you're considering seconds. And I'm also
just wondering with the way that he played. The Nuggets
are basically right at the second apron next season after
giving the Christian Brown extension, and it's to eleven players,
so that's without filling out their roster. Has is Peyton
Watson on this team? Next? We know how restricted free
agency works, but you're not gonna get like this is
someone who's gonna get I don't know, around mid level
money per year I would think, or even twelve million
a year. Is that like if that might even be
too low, I don't know.
Speaker 2: Well, and if he is, who isn't, right? Like, I
think the biggest hindrance to Watson one being properly paid
and two being on the Nuggets is someone like Spencer
Jones can sort of come out of, you know, relative obscurity,
and he's not as good as Peyton Watson, but he doesn't.
He does. They're asking him to do somewhat similar things,
or at least what they used to ask Watson to
do in a more limited way, and he's doing a
lot of them, and he's way cheaper and certainly's gonna
be way cheaper than Watson is on his next contract.
So yeah, I mean, And based on the Nuggets history,
don't you think it's very plausible that they might say, like,
I'm not sure we want to pay this guy, we
might need to move off of him, even if it
makes us a little bit weaker. I don't know.
Speaker 1: They also have the history of paying their own players too.
Speaker 2: I don't want to. I don't want to proactively move Watson.
I don't I don't want to move them at this deadline.
I think, I'm I'm what.
Speaker 1: If you can get what if it's Watson and Nausey.
Speaker 2: Well, then then the benefit is you're getting off of
Nause's money, which is like a become a bit.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: At this point it's only what does he make seven
and a half next year?
Speaker 1: He's got two years and fifteen after this year left.
Contract just feels like it goes on forever.
Speaker 2: Has there ever been like a relatively short smallsh contract
that has seemed to have been on the books for
longer than his?
Speaker 1: Does Bryan Cardinal have like a seven year ridiculous dealer or.
Speaker 2: Something I remember like Juwan Howard or something signed like
a ten they we should look back.
Speaker 1: Where they all Mavericks Eric Dan Pierre.
Speaker 2: Let's just start just so many like ten year night
seven year deals and stuff like that. Yeah, I don't
know if you. I think the Nuggets are really good
and might, as we've said before, might have the best
shot at giving the Thunder a run in the West.
And like, even if I'm saving fifteen million over the
next two years by moving Nagi's deal, I think I'd
rather just have Watson around as an option for this run.
Speaker 1: I don't think high praise for mister Grant Hughes. I
don't know that I'm that confident I might honestly make
that trade. I'm not gonna lie, and I like, I
really like Peyton Watson, although I don't wish the balls
on anyone, so that's not fair. Uh, Grant, We're onto
the Los Angeles Lakers, who are just can they be
quietly in third place in the Western Conference? Because it
feels like they're quietly in third place in the Western Conference.
And the question that I want to pose is actually
a question that you came up with, What's who's their
best realistic three in D option? Because that's what they
need if you were building an ideal trade target. I
think there's a bunch of players that can work, of course,
but it's no, they need guys who play both ends
of the floor because their best two way player right
now is Jake Lauravia. I'm not not I'm not even
trying to be an a hole.
Speaker 2: No, it's so here's the thing, Like I so, yes,
everybody wants and the Lakers particularly want and need a
three and D guy. Don't you think that the defense
part of that should probably come first? Just because between
Luca and Lebron and Reeves. You know, all three of
those guys are players. The defenses will honor from three,
so it had but I don't think any of those
I know that none of those guys are players you'd
feel comfortable with on like even other teams like second options,
let alone first. So you're banking on Marcus Smart or
Jared vand Vanderbilt or whoever, or a good zone scheme
to solve the def So I all, there's a long
way to say I'm more concerned about the defense than
the three. The three is kind of a bonus. So
that's why it feels to me like Herb Jones is
the guy that I would be fixated on if I
were the Lakers.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's like the dude.
Speaker 2: It's just like, I don't know even who I put second,
but it does feel like he would. You could live
with him being someone you're not sure about his three
point shot at like the high volume it would probably
need to be at in most of these lineups on
the Lakers hypothetically, But I do believe in the defense,
and I think he's someone that like anywhere from two
to four positionally, I guess four. You'd be like Okay, great,
he's gonna be able to handle that, and you probably
can't play Jared Vanderbilt in like huge situations. I don't
think because of the offensive stuff and giving defenses a
place to hide. But do you have anyone besides Herb Jones?
I just I feel like it's just clearly him.
Speaker 1: If we're gravitating towards the defense part of it, Naji
Marshall would be a really good fit for this team.
He's gonna do mostly downhill things on offense, but that
would be someone it would be interesting lower end guys.
I mean, if you're concerned just about defense of chaiyak Baji,
the Raptors have made him available. He's cheap. I don't
know who else springs to mind here, Yabuselli feel like
they should maybe take a look at him, or I
think at all twenty nine team should be taking a
look at yea.
Speaker 2: A little self serving, Mike.
Speaker 1: Does anyone else spring to mind for you? Or if
you just decided that it is Herb Jones at this point.
Speaker 2: The thing is like the types of players I would
iduate next are like Vanderbilt, which they have, and it's imperfect.
You know, It's like some Okay, can he guard three
or four positions? And does he have length? Is he
gonna rebound? Can he play? Is gonna win the hustle
battle type thing? And that's just Vanderbilt. So unless you're
going for someone on Jones's level or better, and I
don't know how realistic it is that they'll put the
kinds of offers on the table, you'd need to get
somebody better, which maybe dovetails with another question here. It's
hard to go outside of It's hard to go like, okay, well,
if not herb someone at this level, because then you're
just talking about Vanderbilt and they have that guy.
Speaker 1: I was gonna ask, though, should they consider leaning further
into I wanted to zig or zag where you were
zigging because Luca Reeves Lebron, I'm even RUI. They have
given the Lakers a very firmly a top seven offense.
There's room to grow there. And when you look at
the rosters specifically, they don't have that off ball sniper
who's putting a ton of pressure on defenses. You have
Luca gets up threes. Reeves I think is even over
seven attempts per thirty six minutes. But they're not doing
it in a way like the name that I would
have that you would go this rout is you don't
want to complete defensive liability. But Dante DiVincenzo seems like
he might be available in Minnesota. You put him in
and you're adding that three point volume. But all of
a sudden, it's we go from the seventh best offense
to the third or the second best offense. And does
that really hurt your defense relative to where you're at
right now? And I'm curious if I went one of
two ways on this, I could see that element being
hyper valuable on this Lakers team. But then I also
look at the way that Luca wants to handle the
ball even with Reeves and Lebron sometimes does a movement shooter,
Like do we see a ton of like Dante DiVincenzo
pinballing around hitting those ultra deep, difficult threes, which he's
still done this year. His shot quality on threes is
actually pretty bad. He's still shooting thirty eight percent on them,
and he's in the ninety nine percent tile of deep
three point shot making. So I like his fit on
the team, and I just kind of wondered in my head,
would it be easier for them to just elevate this
offense and just put more separation between them. And what
is a league average or slightly worse defense than it
is to go out and get a herb Jones. And
how much does a herb Jones even help their defense
right now?
Speaker 2: What's the example of this type of player in previous
Luka doncic led offenses. I'm trying to think. I'm asking
because I was like, like on some of those Dallas teams,
who was it hard away? That was like flying quote
like flying around?
Speaker 1: It was hardway and then it was clay for a
minute or tried they tried to make a play for
a minute.
Speaker 2: I asked, because I don't know if like, yeah, you
want movement shooters. But I think the way that Luca plays,
which is so deliberate and so plotting and so get
to the middle and draw a second defender and they
hit a standstill guy that I don't know, it feels
harder to utilize a guy who's sprinting around and relying
on like what a series of well timed passes to
get the types of shots we're talking about up. I
don't know if that's a thing in Luca offenses. You know,
I think it is still worth asking, like why not
just lean into a strength, get another shooter to surround
because Luca will find that guy whether he's moving or
not right like, and can utilize him. And if you
don't think that someone like Jones elevates the defense because
by the way, like we're still talking about DeAndre and
Jackson Hayes as like the anchors of your defense. And
so does another perimeter guy really solve the problem if
you're talking about like postseasons and.
Speaker 1: Where, and also how does it work with a Herb Jones.
It's so you have Lebron Big, Luca Reeves and Herb
or we guaranteed that that or would they prefer to
have Rui on the court anyway? And so you get
into how much do you want to give up for
Herb Jones if he's not definitely a part of your
closing units.
Speaker 2: So you could just get us a shooter, let's lean
into the strength. Maybe we're going to then be the
third best offense in the league and the defense doesn't
really get meaningfully worse.
Speaker 1: And it could be a different type of wrinkle for
the playoffs. Just because we know Luca's been banged up
when he gets there. In the past, Lebron's older Reeves
has proven that he can carry an offense, but like,
how can he do it against certain playoff defenses? I think,
I want to be clear, I think I tend to
land where you are. I just sort of wondered. It
almost feels like it would be easier to get someone
that would continue to augment what they actually do well,
even if they're kind of veering away functionally, than it
is for someone to come in, because I think if
they want someone to come in and just oh, we're
all of a sudden in the top ten or eight
ish defense, it probably needs to be at the center position. Right,
don't think that they have the assets right now to
go out and get said player like Cleveland's not is
gonna sell incredibly low on Jared Allen right, also is
not that guy.
Speaker 2: At the moment, I was gonna say, that's the exact
name I was thinking of, and then I even immediately
talk myself out of it, just like just as you did.
I do think we arrived ultimately at like at the
core of this, which is the Lakers can tinker on
either side of the ball, but ultimately they'll be most
limited by they don't have a great interior defender, and
like you just it's so hard to put together a
defense that is gonna be meaningfully better than average, especially
with the with Luca and Lebron and Reeves around, unless
you just have a transformative guy in the middle, and like,
who is that?
Speaker 1: Good luck and knowing that, so our final we have
a bunch of questions left in Lakers don't wanna pick
one here? Should they be willing to move the only
first round pick that they can move right now? Or
if you're the Lakers, do you kind of look at
what's that? Look everything we just talked about, the things
they could do, the problems that would remain. Do you
sit there and say, this summer, if we don't move
any first round picks, we can move whoever we take
it in twenty twenty six plus two thousand and thirty
one and two thousand and thirty three. Having Luca diminishes
the value of those out years considerably, But three first
round picks is a lot, and so almost I would
say almost that that's not Yannis level territory. It's not
if the Cavs decide to move on from Mobili. But
that gives you, I would say, the freedom to explore
a bunch of different can also because you will be flexible.
Now you might lose some matching salary because of how
many expiring contracts you have. That would be another hurdle.
But I've gone back and forth because at one point
I'm like, well, you have Lebron, you have Luca, Just
go damn it if you can get her Jones for
the one first round pick. But I've I've galaxy brained
it sufficiently to think that I believe they might be
better off by having the three first round picks in
the clip for this upcoming summer.
Speaker 2: I think I lean that way too, because that's the
way you get the next guy that it's it's Luca
and him right or whoever, that whoever. That is like
having that kind of asset package to put on the table.
But I feel like I made this argument surely after
they got Luca, and must have been this past offseason
when we were having similar conversations about well, should you
wait or should you do something? And it's basically like,
how sure are you that the the second best player
Luca plays with going forward? This is before Reeves turned
into it. Whatever, this is like like an all fringe
All NBA, like offensive engine player. But the question was
just like, you really think you're gonna be able to
do better than this version of Lebron James as Luca's
best running mate, Like that's so then if you're saying yes,
it's like, then we're definitely getting a no questions asked
all NBA player because Lebron at this point, you know,
over the summer, was like, he's a fringe All NBA
guy and he was last season, and it's hard to
be any better than that unless you're a true MVP candidate.
So unless, as the Lakers, you think you can go
get that guy, then you should be going for it now, right,
like and now that Reeves is this good unexpectedly, like
you really should go for it now, because what are
the odds you're gonna have these three players, a trio
of players that are this good and then have the
ability to add I just like, I don't know. Sometimes
I think teams make the mistake of thinking like, well,
there's always gonna be this chance to be even better
going for you know, two years from now, which maybe,
and that's why you don't make a move now because
you want those three picks to go get Yannis or whatever.
But like, it's pretty hard to have three better players
than this, and so why isn't the time now? Why
why shouldn't you trade one pick now?
Speaker 1: Is there a player that they could target that would
make it easy for you to say, yeah, give up.
They can give up one first round pick right now,
in thirty one or thirty two For the kids at home,
I know you know this, and so I think the names,
the two names that I've seen them linked the most
to have been Herb Jones and Andrew Wiggins. Do either
of those players move the needle you're sending out salth
plus a first and I think even the Pelicans could say, hey,
that's not enough. And but you could throw a don connect.
There's probably some seconds to be moved around. Don't know
what their second round pick situation is right now. I'd
almost find myself wondering if I like Andrew Wiggins for
the first round pick better, even though he's more of
a wild card, but he just does more things offensively,
I think, where you can count on him to maybe
hit more threes. But I still I don't know, man,
I might I might peel myself into thinking that three
first round picks this summer, that's gonna get you a
lot of mileage.
Speaker 2: I lean that way too, And part of it is
because even though I just went on the diatribe about like,
it's harder to have three better players than this, so
why not go for it? I don't. I don't believe,
and I don't think most people outside of Los Angeles
believe that the Lakers are actually as good as their
record and spot in the standing show right now? Don't
you feel like there's a lot of just general skepticism
about how good this team actually is relative to its
record and where it is in the conference. So I
don't feel like they're close enough to justify because if
you do that, if you if you give up that
one pick, you're kind of taking yourself out of any
semi realistic shot at like winning the sweepstakes for the
next like Superstar, right because you don't have those three
picks to move anymore.
Speaker 1: Unless you're thinking it happens in free agency at some point,
which maybe if it's gonna happen, LA with cap space
is going to be the threat that makes it happen
to be fair, right, Our next team, the Spurs. Grant,
it's your turn to pick our first question.
Speaker 2: Well, this may sound a little familiar, but it's just
how aggressive should they be at the trade deadline? Because
I don't know how you felt, but that you know,
and then they lost to the Knicks. But but that
Thunder game really kind of opened my eyes a little
bit to we've always toyed with this, like you have Wemby.
Now he's this good? Now, why are you like not
to say the Spurs are definitely doing this? But why
why try to just like dial in twenty twenty eight,
here we go. That's when we're gonna really try to
peak and this is all gonna hit. If he's this good, now,
shouldn't you just make some moves to take a run
at it? You just beat the Thunder. Only one other
team's done that, Like I don't know, it's it's it's
tempting to do that. And then the question is just like, well,
what is aggressive at the trade deadline? Look like we're
back to the Lakers thing of do you just go
get the one guy that you know fills a need
and what is that? And or do you really get
after the honest thing?
Speaker 1: There is I think at this point, I'm willing, if
I'm the Spurs, to let's revisit the honest situation over
the offseason, and yes, you'd like to get two playoff
runs with him, but if you have to give up
a Steph Castle or Dylan Harper to do it, push
comes to shove and probably still giving up Steph Castle.
I want to go him and Dylan Harper been fantastic,
but if it means Giannis and I don't got to
give up Dylan Harper, but then you're also what you're
sending out as part of that deal. Harrison Barnes and
or Keldon Johnson and or Devin vesself all been good
for this team, and so I might let it ride
this season. What I find fascinating with them, though, is
they have layers to their aggression. Where the Lakers it
is it's salary and do we include this first round pick?
The Spurs can trade multiple picks, and they could also
do something where it's the Kelly Olynics salary slot and
picks who is the best player that and throw Jeremy
Sohan's salary and they're stacking on top. We can bring
back a pretty expensive player at that point I think
they're kind of obligated to at least say, hey, can
we upgrade the Julian Champennie Harrison Barnes minutes at the
very least, or augment them. And that leads me to
another question for san Antonio Grant, which is who is
Wemby's ideal front cor partner And if it's not a name,
what is the type? Because the more I watch them,
and the NBA Cup Final game against the Knicks drove
this home. And that's in part because Wemby's only been
back for a little bit. But I think that he
needs to have just like a not someone who doesn't.
I would prefer that they space the floor, but it's
just more physical and bigger and stronger than a Harrison
Barnes or a Julian Champennie. And I don't know what.
I don't know what player in a Trey Murphy doesn't
fit that he'd be great on this team, but he
doesn't necessarily fit that archetype he check. He definitely checks
another need and I couldn't figure out the name. I
do you know what name I actually went to. And
it's just they shouldn't do this because the salary that
it would cost, but Domas the bonus would make a
ton because he's not gonna the defensive like the rebounding
will help you. Just the physicality on offense, and he
stretches the floor enough to where he won't always be
in Wemby's way. I don't think he's the answer, but
that level of physicality is what I kind of started
thinking about. And I don't know who's the player that
would like check.
Speaker 2: That box Isaiah Stewart. I'm just trying to think of
players defined principally by their physicality and like he jumps.
Speaker 1: Who could also be available? Was my other problem. I
was trying to go through the list of right, right.
Speaker 2: He's not available, he shouldn't be available. No, I do
think so this We've kind of had some version of
this since Wemby was a thing where it's just like
what do you what do you put next to him?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 2: And a lot of times I my focus was always on, like,
don't think. The way to view it is, well, Wemby
can do all this stuff, so you can use you
can add a player next to him that has like limitations,
like a big that doesn't space or whatever, because Wemby
does and and so that covers that up. I still
think the Spurs should be of the mind that, like,
we don't we shouldn't be making concessions. We should just
go get the ideal guy and should have really high
hopes for it and not have to feel like, well,
we can we can onboard this guy because Wemby covers
up this deficiency. No, I think it's just like, go
get the the perfect player and don't make any concessions because,
like you said, they've got layers to the trades that
they can put on the table so they can be
really ambitious and searching for that player. I think the
number one quality does have to be, like, he's got
to be a bruiser. He's got to be someone that's
gonna just easier said than done, but just doesn't allow
Mitchell Robinson to like effectively win a game because he
can't be kept off the boards like that kind of thing. Awesome,
quick aside, hang the banner, right, what are we doing?
Why are we acting like no one cares about this?
Speaker 1: That's so stupid and honestly, I'm i am. I would
have said I said the same thing probably when the
Bucks won. When the Lakers won. Fuck off with the
NBA Cup trolling. At this point, I get that it's propaganda,
but the players actually seem to care. And you can't
complain that the regular season means nothing and they're trying
to do something to make it mean something. And it
seems like the players actually care about it, but then
make fun of them for celebrating. And then yeah, but
it's a no win. If the Nicks hung the banner,
it would have been a meme. And so I just
I don't there's give it and also give it time
to marinate. It's been three years. You can't. You can't
just create this thing and expect it to have the
same meaning. And for anyone who says it will never
mean any why do you care about the number of
All Star selections or all NBA teams, then they are
completely meaningless unless you care about player contract incentives.
Speaker 2: I just like it's I obviously we agree. Just look
at like shockhole thing comes from like international soccer, right,
there's like various cups that happened throughout the course of
the season where nobody views it as all we won
the Champions League or we won our entire league. It's
not on that same level. But it's like a thing
and teams care and it's just and so, like they've
been doing it a lot longer than the NBA has.
So this is the type of thing we're gonna look
back and be like that was dumb that we minimize
the important. Like nobody's saying it's this, you should hang it.
It should be of equal size and equally prominently placed
as like as an actual championship banner. But like I
don't know, teams retire numbers, teams retire coaches' numbers, or
they put their names up there. There's all kinds of
shit in the REP. It's not like a high school
gym where it's like, oh, we won the sectional track
championship in uh nineteen eighty four through nineteen ninety nine,
Like it's not there's not a thousand banners up there.
We could we could do the the Cup championship.
Speaker 1: And I just I wonder why the propaganda of it
all bothers like that there's cores or that's sponsored by Emirates,
because everything about the NBA, like the jersey patches are propaganda.
You have the last five minutes are brought to you
by like so and so, and then you have people
like brand sponsoring like post podcast Loser Lounges is something
I'll never understand that do you really want your company
associated with that? So I just I get, you know,
should they revisit, like do we need to have a
neutral site, especially if I know they're gonna move the
semi finals. But I find myself the neutral site it
loses something with the fans there. I thought the fans
were pretty engaged in Vegas, but because the players were,
the players were, That's why. But it would have been
cool to see like that OKAC Spurs game in either
San Antonio or Okay would have been insane. Yea, that
would have been insane.
Speaker 2: Yep, no doubt.
Speaker 1: To bring it back. Oh here's a name for the Spurs.
I immediately went to Anthony Davis, who kind of make
a lot of sense. But again you get into the
pick equity is less than y honest. But if you
have to give up all that salary to get Anthony Davis,
you should just wait on Yannis. About Naji Marshall, I mean,
enough of what you're looking for?
Speaker 2: Yeah, not not quite? I mean he how much better?
Or is he then Barnes and Champagnee Maybe a little
a different type of player, but I don't.
Speaker 1: I'm not more offensively than so hand and more physical,
but well, I mean, is that what they're gonna look at?
Though it doesn't feel like they're gonna futs and fiddle
on the margins rather than get Oh, this player might
close some games or be our like our sixth best player.
Speaker 2: Honestly, like and I guess this tells you what I think.
I don't know what this tells you. I don't want
to touch the Castle, Harper Wemby. I just want to.
I want those three guys to.
Speaker 1: Grow a touch Fox.
Speaker 2: Though it sounded yes, I know I would, I would, honestly,
Like I I find me instances of times when Steph
Castle's compete level fell below one trillion. Never happened, There's
no visual record of it. Like I I'm after the cup.
I'm just like and I felt like this about him
before that, But like I don't care about the shooting.
I don't care about it. He plays so fucking hard,
he cares.
Speaker 1: Harper Harper is great.
Speaker 2: I'm just talking about Castle singularly as like the effort
plays and just like the crazy athleticism, the defense. Like
I just I'm not trading Steph Castle period. I don't think, like,
if you tell me honest is on the table, I think,
I okay, sure we have to have a conversation short
of that, Like I don't want to mess.
Speaker 1: With So he's now of those three, he's now your
most untouchable is what you're saying.
Speaker 2: No, I mean him and Harper are equally untouchable. Like
I just I think a lot of people would put
Harper higher just because castles shooting stuff. But like I
I want no part of a trade that breaks up Wemby,
Castle and Harper at this point, No, thank you about
trade box first, and.
Speaker 1: Our question provides your own answers. We're kind of settling on.
They should be a modest level of aggressive. Can't trade
any of their basic top six or seven guys they're five.
Speaker 2: I just let him marinate for a little bit. I
would say.
Speaker 1: The next team we have up is the Houston Rockets,
and my first question is going to be what your
first question was for them? Is what happens to the
offense grant as they're shooting regresses, which it started to
they're only eight in three point percentage since Thanksgiving, which
that's less than that's less than first or worse than first.
Excuse me.
Speaker 2: So, I think from the moment like that was one
of the big stories of the season where we thought
the Rockets would have major offensive problems because no Van
Fleet and what do you do with Thompson shooting and
Shanngoon shooting, And basically because they have made a ton
of the few threes they take, the offense has been
pretty good. The real reason the offense is good is
because of offensive rebounding and they win the possession battle.
But n Read Shepherd, but n Read Shepherd is sorry.
They don't so the shooting will not regress because all
they have to do is have read Shepherd shoot more
and then it'll be fine. Uh.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I guess this is kind of a more of a
thought exercise, right because you could say that the shooting
will regress, it has. It's still very good. You mentioned
the post Thanksgiving numbers. They're still lasting a ten frequency.
They're third overall inaccuracy. I think the bigger tell is
that location based effective field will percentage just based on
where they take the shots. They're twenty fifth that they
should be expected to have the twenty fifth effective field
will percentage in the league not good? Should they? I
think if you're looking for, like what what should Houston
target if it's going to make a trade, shooting just
still has to be top a list. But I don't
know if part of me just thinks, like that's just
not what this team is and they're gonna be successful
offensively because of all the other stuff that they do
well and really, like not joking anymore, the more reach
Shepherd plays and the more he's featured kind of addresses
a lot of the offensive problems that the Rockets have.
Right Like the answer might just already be there. It's
a term. It's just a question of, like how much
can you scale up Shepherd's role without taking away from
some of the other stuff that Houston wants to do,
like playing big and glass crashing and all that stuff.
Speaker 1: Would you look at I mean, like I dotat what
does it take to get just to get some extra
shooting in there? Maybe with size getting Sphiema Kaylea Luke
from Utah who's having a nice season. He's so cheap.
The other one we already brought up his name is
you do have some salaries. It does seem like DFS
might be nearing his return, but just between him and Compell,
you do have some filler salaries. A Dante DiVincenzo is
that someone who cracks important lineups for this team, because
that's the if they're gonna give up. Like getting fee
is sort of okay, what you know, if he plays,
he doesn't play whatever. But if you go out and
get someone who is used to playing a ton of
minutes on another team, are they good enough to be
Now you could look at it and say, if Josha
Kogy's gonna play this much, then yeah, Dante ju Vincenzo
could play, but Joshakogy kind of won. He shot well
from three this year. But also he just fits like
the style that they want to play too. Dante Devincenzo's
not that guy who.
Speaker 2: I think you you raised. I think one of the
most important issues of like who cracks the lineup, you know,
when they they need to win this game in the
last five minutes, Like there's seven there's a lot of
non negotiables, right, so how much room is there really?
Like Shingoon one hundred percent on the Floorson's on the floor,
Jabari Smith, Right, I mean, Katie's a lock for me,
Jabari Smith is a lock because he does offer the
shooting in the size and then and then reed.
Speaker 1: Shepherd's right there. But could you envision is there a
scenario where I'll just use Dante ju intenso feels like
the best name that I mentioned. Is there a scenario
where he could close a game over Jabbari or read Shepherd?
It feels offensively It might depend on the matchups. That's
not outside the realm.
Speaker 2: No, that's possible. But because because it's possible and not like, yeah,
of course he would play over those guys, that should
limit the type of offer they're willing to make, right
which which if that's the case, like Murphy from the table,
who would be great on this squad.
Speaker 1: But it's sort of just like, I don't know, why
are we going? Why are we consolidating that many? You know,
if they're giving up a first round pick to get
somebody and salary, okay, sure, but when you're talking multiples
there are another team to where it's if they decide
they need to make that move, which they probably are
going to decide, they don't based off how good they
are right now. That'll happen over the offseason.
Speaker 2: Yeah, No, the more we talk about it, the more
I'm convinced it's just between Smith and just more Shepherd
and Durant, And if Shingooon develops further as a shooter
like that should be enough. And at that point it's
just shoot more. They just don't shoot enough threes.
Speaker 1: Right the name that I actually like for them, but
I haven't. I just don't. Knicks fans, I feel are
getting ahead of their skis when they propose what the
offer would be. But with the emergence of Tyler Kohlik,
and if the Knicks trust Jordan Clarkson, is duce McBride
available he becomes a free agent in twenty twenty seven,
I don't think you can. You'd have to include other
stuff to get Tarr Easton, and I don't. I'm not
giving up Tarry Easton. I love duce McBride, but like
he brings not ball handling. He does have a little
bit of a mid range game, but he's a defensive
menace at the point of attack, and his three point
volume has come a long way. And so if you
can do something compensate the Knicks outside of giving up
Tarr Easan, then that would be sort of the interest
because it's someone who, all right, does he close over
Shephard if you go, or over even Jabari if you
go smaller, maybe, but you don't have like even in
New York, he's not guaranteed to be in the closing lineup.
Speaker 2: I just wanted to December nineteenth, twenty twenty five, the
phrase the emergence of Tyler Kohlick was spoken on the look, who's.
Speaker 1: Gonna have the better career? Colick, aj Mitchell or Jalen Wells.
Who's to say right now? It's too soon? It's too soon,
That's all I'm saying. He I had two other quick
questions for Houston. Do you think you'll end up trying
to duck the tax? And this could be a draft
night question, but they're like seven point seven million dollars
over and with getting more expensive deals kicking in, and
you have to pay tar Easan this summer. They have
seventeen million in room beneath the tax next year as
of right now. Without tarr Easan, he could eat up
all of that space. And I'm just sort of in
my head, if you have the ability to duck it
this season just to delay a repeater clock starting, you
gotta be looking at whether it's does Fred van Fleet
accept a trade somewhere since he has that puss no
trade you have Capella that gets you close. I think
you're just dumping him. And then even the DFS, I think,
does DFS come back and you think that he's just
gonna meaningfully move the needle for this team?
Speaker 2: O don't know, that's what that's a Really, he's like
a huge you know if we're doing like wild Cards
for the second half or whatever, like he's got to
be way up there because you would, I mean, he
would seem to if the shooting will tell right, if
he's gonna make threes, then then this is a much
harder question, like who who does he take? Or it's
much easier like yes he should play, of course, but
like who's not playing because Phinney Smith needs twenty six
minutes a night, Like that's that's a tough call, Like
the fact that Easton again hasn't been playing a ton
and has been a sort of similar story of his career,
like what you know, maybe it would have been him,
but I don't know what you count on there related
questions should they just move Eastan? Like like is that
because he's even looking at her, right, you have to
look at it because he's one the just where he
is in his contract, right he's going into restricted free agency.
And two like it's it's easier to imagine where Finny
Smith would start stealing minutes from if he's gonna be
a major offensive plus, like Easton is just kind of
more of what the Rockets already have, right, Like he's
gonna defend, he's gonna hustle, he's gonna get offensive boards,
all that stuff, Like they kind of got those bases covered.
I would say, so, like, I don't know, it's not
that easy to say where his minutes should come from.
And at this point, it just like if he's gonna
miss time all the time, like how much are you willing?
It's very difficult to decide what you're willing to commit
to him going forward. That's that's what I think.
Speaker 1: When you have Amen, when you have Jabari Smith Junior,
and when you also have if Dorrin Phinny Smith, you've
even was that sort of a hedge against what does
it cost to retain Tarry Easton? I like, I guess
that if you were trying to make a deal, I'm
trying to think about what what do you want for
Tory Easton? You're looking to get somebody back who could play.
Is more cost control?
Speaker 2: Is that?
Speaker 1: I don't know if a team's coming out of first
with you, given some of the mercurial injury history plus
his restricted free agency, would you do as the Rockets.
I'm genuinely asking here Deuce McBride and each of the
Wizards's next two second round picks for Tari Easton, So
you're looking at number thirty one thirty two, you would do.
Speaker 2: That as the Rockets? I do in a heartbeat. Yeah.
I mean Easton just like he's a weird player, Like
he's just you know, he's he's a specialist. I don't
feel like he's a starter. This is already his age
twenty four season, so and he's like a hustle guy.
So I like, how much improvement and like skill development
are you pricing in? Like I'm not, you know, going
I don't see the curve going way up.
Speaker 1: Well More's hottest take, one of his hottest takes has
been that Tari Easan is better than Jabari Smith Junior,
and that's the guy they should look to move after
the season would be Jabbari I can't get there.
Speaker 2: I can't get I mean, well, the difference is Smith
is already paid. Uh, but I think that's a really
good contract for Smith, given just what he can do.
I guess in Easan's defense, like he's thirty six percent
from three for his career, and he's made over half
of them this year, but like he has barely played.
I just I guess I'm I'm open to the idea
that if Ethan were able to stay healthy and there
was more like offensive skill development in there, mate, maybe,
but like as the Rockets, you're very good. Now, I
don't think you want to be in the business of
exposing yourself to the risk of having a sizeable, you know,
rookie scale contract given to someone that's just like one
is kind of duplicative on the team, and two just
has not proven to be able to stay healthy. So yeah,
I would, I would definitely look at moving.
Speaker 1: Them our next team, the Minnesota Timberwolves. We don't have
to go. It's your turn to pick the first question.
I just want to say, we don't have to go
in order that they're listed on our sheet. That was
just a that was just we've gotten kind of in
order it could have been more like a draft. If
the first question is the most important, want to go ahead.
Speaker 2: I just wanted to think, well in this case to
me also because I was the one that put this
question out there, I mean, I'm sure you would have two.
How do they solve this late game offense? And is
that solvable with what's I'm just asking questions as as
everyone listening knows, all you have to do is answer
with the subsequent question, and that's what gets the discussion going.
And we don't solve anything. If these were easy to solve,
they wouldn't be uh, you know, it'd be really easy
to run an NBA team. Some of this with the Wolves,
there are blown when you know blown games. They're late November.
There was Phoenix, who was the other one Phoenix and
then like three days later with somebody else can't remember.
And some of it is just like the eye test
of the the works just gum up. And the success
or failure of Minnesota's offense depends on like does Anthony
Edwards hit two of the six contested pull up sea
attempts or four? And that's just the line between winning
and losing.
Speaker 1: And it's been tough sledding without him of late, right,
that's the other thing.
Speaker 2: Well, no shit, because that he's the only guy that's
gonna do anything late in the game. And they're all
difficult shots. And then there are numbers like they're dead
last in turnover percentage in the clutch, and like, yes,
that squares with the eye tests because the ball just
moves side to side and nothing happens or sticks and
nothing happens. The ball handling issue has been apparent for
a while, like before the season. It's like, well they
Conley's old, Dillingham's not ready, Devincenzo's not a point guard.
Bones Highland, by the way, Bones Island is way too
important right now, which is another illustration.
Speaker 1: Of usurping Dillingham, Conley and Joe and Clark in the
rotation is kudos to Bones Highland, but also, how are
we here?
Speaker 2: How do we get here? So you've been trying to
trade de Vincenzo several times already in this exercise. Uh
is he the guy you move or does that for?
And what's he gonna get you? If you're looking for
a ball handler, you're kind of trading like for like
at that point, you I mean, are you trading like
for like, if it's more of a ball handler though, well,
I guess. I mean, but you're another guard that can
only positionally, I guess, is what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: And then, like I was gonna say, doesn't this square
away with? One of the other questions is what even
is their trade target ceiling? And so our video editor
Andrew had asked, like, what about some type of a
structure of Dante DiVincenzo for Kobe White? And I think
there need to be other stuff from Minnesota there who
cannot trade a first round pick? That got me thinking
as to what is their trade dead? Like could they
maybe get Kobe White? That feels like the higher end
of the could they get iodussum MoU? Does he give
enough of the ball handling? He fits their defensive motif
for sure, but does he give you enough of the
ball handling?
Speaker 2: There?
Speaker 1: Are you looking even lower end? Should they be in
on Dennis Shrewder, who I think he was dealing with
a hip injury recently, but he started to play a
little better and he'll get downhill at least should they
be looking at this Jose Alvarado? Do enough of the
ball handling? And also how how far you're the Timberwolves
Grant and everything you just said is important, and you're
looking at some of their losses. How far are you
willing to go to? Because they've been linked this is hysterical,
they've been linked to Giannis and it's just okay, that's
not that's that's a joke. But are you willing to go?
All right? Devincenzo's on the table, nas Read's on the table.
We have Tarren Shannon Jr. Maybe there is some second
draft appeal to Rob Dillingham. We will give you swaps.
Do you go out and are you trying to get
one of the disgrunt like a LaMelo on this What
if you could put literally everything I just said on
the table, nas Red, Devincenzo pickswaps Dillingham and get LaMelo?
How far? Like? Is that the level that you're willing
to go to for this team because it feels like
they don't need a player that good.
Speaker 2: I guess I kind of won. I think that's a
package you're putting out there for someone like Morant who's
trade value is lower. I don't I don't think all
that gets you to LaMelo? Do you? I think if
Charlotte's gonna be like, we can do so much better
for LaMelo.
Speaker 1: I want to make clear I would give up more
for LaMelo, But I have no idea that truck tricycle
of guards. I have no idea what they're no way
to go for.
Speaker 2: So it's interesting. I guess that's that's a good question,
Like do they need someone that good? I guess probably not,
but they clearly need someone that does something different. They
need either a conventional playmaking pick and roll point guard.
What they need is like Mike Conley from twenty sixteen
or whatever like that. That's that, But that guy's basically
like the best players to never make an All Star Game.
Speaker 1: Who'd you say, I'm just gonna name bulls Trey Jones?
Speaker 2: I mean, is he better than Yeah? He probably is.
The thing I was thinking about is, well, what if
what if the issue with the late game offense is
less about the guys handling the ball and the guys
that are off of it. They don't have value. And
that's like putting the crossairs on Rudy Gobert.
Speaker 1: Do you try to try his fifth Defensive Player of
the Year award right by by like just fundamentally altering
what your team is by trading him, putting nas red
in its center, dealing with the defensive fallout of him
and Randall being your front court, and then you go
get someone that just the combined effect of having Read
as the center in closing offenses and an additional playmaker
in the backcourt, probably which is in theory, that's who
you're trading Gobert for. Don't ask me who is out
there clamoring for Gobert and is willing.
Speaker 2: To give up like a starting level, game changing point guard.
I don't know who that is. But that's just another
way to approach the problem of your late game offense
is to just remove Rudy Gobert from the equation and
just bolster your backcourt playmaking, because like you will score,
You will absolutely score if Noz Reid is the five
and you have Anthony Edwards McDaniels, Randall and a better
point guard.
Speaker 1: You're saying it, that's interesting too, because Jane McDaniels has
done more ball handling with ant out, but like that's
been a part of his game, Like he just has
more on ball wiggle. That's tough. I can't, I given
how important he's been to the defense, I just can't envision.
Even if you put Rudy Gobert, even if there was
a team out there that would give him a ton,
I don't think that I could do it as.
Speaker 2: It would be like it would be like Mike Brown.
The discourse around Mike Brown replacing Thibodeau, like if you've
got a great offensive guard in there instead of Gobert,
It's like, I'm not sure the Wolves are better, but
they're different, you know. It's like I'm not sure the
Knicks are definitely better, but they'll be different. And that's
kind of all we're going for because we know where
we top out with with a Gobert centered team.
Speaker 1: What about Scottie Pippen r. Who's yet to play this season.
Speaker 2: If we're mentioning injured Grizzlies point guards, there we go
drop Brett, the only kid they have.
Speaker 1: I don't know if he gives you enough playmaking, probably
a touch more than dud But Cam Spencer, if we're
just gonna keep on the Grizzlies train, that that would
be another interesting name.
Speaker 2: We'll just keep doing word association. Pat Spencer. He's available,
I think, speaking of the speaking of emergences of white
point guards, Pat Spencer let's go final question on the
Wolves grant.
Speaker 1: Do they just cut their should they cut their losses
on Rob dilling him at this point or is the
return on him likely to be so just as a
standalone asset. Is it likely to be so low that
you would know we're gonna hold out and hope that
he turns a corner at some point.
Speaker 2: I think you have to go the ladder court, like
his value is so low right now that you would
just be moving off of a guy in his on
his rookie scale contract that there's some pot committed element
to this too, where it's like you gave up way
too much for him to give to lose him for
basically to just like say we're done. I think you
got to just ride it out.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to think of what I'm just name again,
if you could get Io dessume move for Rob Dillingham,
you wouldn't do it, Then you're gonna hold out.
Speaker 2: I think I hold out. I think I hold out.
Speaker 1: I'm doing it. I'm over it, I'm done. I just
don't I don't see enough of it on defense. And
then like the finishing at the basket is just trust
it at your own peril. I guess. I know he's young,
but they don't have they don't have the ability to wait,
and that brings into question where they should have made them.
We applauded them making that leap in the moment, it
just doesn't seem like it's panned out.
Speaker 2: It has not panned out.
Speaker 1: It's funny that you mentioned Pat Spencer because I bet
a lot of people think that the Warriors would have
the next best record in the Western Conference, but you
know what, Grant, they fucking don't the pH So my
first question for the Phoenix Suns is pretty basic, but
it's important. Should they be buyers or sellers?
Speaker 2: I I think I actually have an answer to this,
and it's not gonna make Suns fans happy. I think
they should be sellers. I think why this is? This
is great, right, what's happened has been great. It's been refreshing.
Jordan Not's got everybody playing hard. They're like Dylan Brooks
undeniably like changes how your team operates, and he's like
just he's you know, he's I can't stand watching him,
but I have to respect what he does to your team.
Speaker 1: He did almost joke away the game the other night,
with the up five right inside forty seconds to play
have the flagrant. But he's just the level of shot
making he's given them this year. I'm at the point
where I'm almost kind of sort of okay with him
wearing sung glasses indoors.
Speaker 2: I can't get there. I can't. It's gonna take more
than that for me to get there. Uh, it's a
scourge on our side. So yeah, well that's part of
the argument, is that, like he just the sunglasses. Yeah,
that's the entire argument. You have to trade him. I
just think he's his value is about as good as
it's gonna get at the moment. I think I don't
think he can play better than this, And I think
the Sons are sort of misreading where they are if
they think some of these performances that they've got, like
guys like Royce O'Neill have immense value, are playing really well.
Royce O'Neil's not helping Dylan Brooks to a lesser scent.
They're not helping you, like navigate every It's that the
shitty rest of this half decade is still there. Like,
despite the fact that the Sons are fun to watch
and pretty good, I think you still need to be
concerned with, like, how are we gonna survive through twenty
thirty with no picks? You know, and just like a
zero flexibility Bradley Beal's dead money on the books, all
this stuff like it, it would be painful. And if
I'm a fan, to be clear, if I'm a Suns fan,
I don't. I'm not thinking this way. I'm like, I
want to make the playoffs. This is fun. I like
this team. But if you're trying to like build a
championship operation, I think you have to look at where
you are right now as kind of found money, and
you need to flip guys like Brooks and O'Neill and
just virtually everybody just to soften the landing of the
next half decade.
Speaker 1: Basically count me among the Suns fans then, because they
don't need to, They don't need to buy to where
it's I mean, they can't. What are they going to
do to mortgage their future even more? Which would be
the question, who are the players on this team not
Devin Booker Division, that are going to net you more
than the equivalent of one first round pick. Is that
trade even out there right now?
Speaker 2: For Dylan Brooks more than the equivalent of a first
I'm not.
Speaker 1: Saying two first round picks, but someone's gonna like, would
the Lakers come in and offer their two thousand and
thirty two or two thousand and thirty one first round
pick for Dylan Brooks? I think one would.
Speaker 2: Lebron would vet to Lebron would say it's him or me,
and the Lakers would would.
Speaker 1: Probably choose Dylan Brooks. At this point, they would say,
you're not could you imagine them on the same team?
That'd be great, It would be great.
Speaker 2: Uh I I do think Brooks right now could get
you a first don't you Because that's the type.
Speaker 1: Of what is like, what is the type of first?
Speaker 2: Like?
Speaker 1: What does that do for the Suns? Though? Is My
point is, just if you trade Dylan Brooks for let's
say you get a first from I mean, and even
if you get that Lakers first, okay, cool, Like we're
just gonna half decade from an hour to be sitting
maybe pretty or that'll be the number twenty seven pick because.
Speaker 2: He's on the break. Grayson Allen maybe gets here.
Speaker 1: Just not Grace's not getting you a first round Like
I just he's he's so good. Now he dribbles now right,
every other next year he'll probably be bad. So I
think that contract that he's on, you're not getting a
first for him. It's you're more likely to get a
first for cong Gillespie. At this point, I think.
Speaker 2: That's ironic because I feel like that deal was signed
to be traded, like that's what we all thought. Him
and O'Neil both all they that's just matching money salaries,
and now they're.
Speaker 1: Both I'm closer here, Ryan Dunn, maybe get you a first.
I would even say probably not. The defense is intriguing there,
the full floor running and stuff. But so if I'm
the Suns, I'm more looking at, Okay, what is my
biggest need if we buy? Because what what is buying
look like for this team is it can you just
get zion for contracts? Sign me up for that? Then well,
because they don't, they can't trade first round equity. And
if the Pelicans are just we can turn Zion into
like Grayson Allen would be a good name here, it's
oh or Royce O'Neal. You're stacking contracts together. You put
shooting around to Jeremiah Fears and Derek Queen. If I'm
the Sons. I'm looking to do something like that before
I'm looking to sell.
Speaker 2: All right, here's here's the thing. The Suns are fifteen
and twelve as we record this just one of the
most pleasant surprises of the season. They're in the middle.
Basically like they're not the team I'm gonna invoke is
in a slightly different spot, but is still very much
defined by its midness, and that's the Bulls. So like,
would you if the Bulls were the Bulls are eleven
and fifteen, not that different. Their net rating is way lower.
They're like just objectively a worse team. But this feels
like we're telling the Bulls to like, hey, let's try
to get a little better, let's go for it, as
opposed to like, strip it down. Man, there's nothing here,
there's no future with this group. You've got to like,
you have to sell to me. That's the same logic.
The logic we've applied to the Bulls that they have
just disregarded forever is the same logic that's in play
with the Suns. You're in the middle. You do not
have a path to being great unless you strip stuff down.
And now if your argument is they don't have anything
that's gonna get them first, then all right, I guess
what do you do then? But I think you've got
to look at this as we're trying to be good.
We're trying to not be one of the worst teams
in the league or dead stuck in the middle for
the next five to seven years. I think that needs
to be the goal.
Speaker 1: Here's my problem. The Bulls have their own draft picks,
the Sons do not do. The Sons not have theirs,
So there's just an incentive I'm not telling I think
what it almost feels like we might be. The argument
should then be if that's how you feel about the Sons,
just in general, not you specifically, then they should trade
Devin Booker because what is like I've thought that for
a long time, which is fine, but knowing they're not
gonna do that, I'm kind of just that that, like,
maybe it's an off season thing. I'm sort of at
the point where you're good enough this season to be
fun and frisky if you can do something like there's honestly,
there's nothing if you're not gonna trade Devin Booker or
give him away, there's nothing that this team could give
up that would actually like count as a stupid move
at that, Like, what could they actually do that would
worse in their future? Outlook again non Devin Booker division.
And so if you could use just Jayalen Green and
other salary, is that going to get you as just
a Zion? Why not swing and see what happens the
worst case scenario? Okay, just move on from Zion.
Speaker 2: Well, Zion is a special case, right because you can
just move on if you don't.
Speaker 1: If you don't you with the bonus, I don't fucking care,
like this is that's what?
Speaker 2: Well, that would make them worse they now you have
the bonus on there with beals dead mind. Anyway, that's
enough on the Suns that you think where should we
go after this?
Speaker 1: You might think, Grant that we're going to go to
Golden State, but not yet we are onto the Memphis Grizzlies.
Do you want to pick a question for them? Please? Uh?
Speaker 2: Yes? Well, let's see. I like this question a lot
because it kind of ties to all of the ones
we have here. Do the Grizzlies not yet have their
primary building block? Do they have off? So?
Speaker 1: John's an awkward question, right?
Speaker 2: Yeah? So John Morant was that guy beyond any doubt.
It's just not that guy anymore. For all the reasons
we've talked about all year, the injuries, the decline in
like ability, that seems like a relevant one. He's not
as good as he was anymore. Uh. We also have
the contract status, no extension for him. That's the type
of thing. If you do have a building block, you
extend that player. What else the off court stuff, obviously,
it's all just kind of this this one, uh, one
big mess. Jared Jackson Junior not playing so hot. I
don't know if anybody's noticed, not making his threes, fouling
more like he used to, still not rebounding.
Speaker 1: Touches are down, even those joted.
Speaker 2: Scott right, should shouldn't they be up? Shouldn't it be
a Jalen Brown situation where he's just like, okay, your ball? Uh?
Those are the two you'd point to. Zachi Edi too,
I lauded forever and immediately got hurt after we recorded.
Speaker 1: Immediately after you lauded him too. It was within minutes.
Speaker 2: It was within minutes that the report game that he
was hurt. H So should we just not talk about
players anymore?
Speaker 1: Dre Cowhard's not really that I mean he's done. I've
appreciated he's a little bit more physical and like squishy
the on drives, even though the efficiency might not be
there yet on those looks. But I don't view him
as I view him as supplementary. Feels like I'm denigrating him,
but he's that's what he feels like, is oh, he's
your third, second or third most important player rather than
this is the guy around whom we structure our future.
Speaker 2: And so then if it's not, if it isn't Jaron
Jackson Junior, Like why isn't it, like are we because
I do think we have to mention he had a
tow injury, so surgery I think, and then also had
another injury prior to the season. Is this just he's
playing hurt and and in a way that's laudable because
Morant has been not helpful and like he's out there
trying to do what he can for the team. And therefore,
like that is cornerstone stuff, you know, that is building
block stuff? Or is Jackson? And I can't remember did
we both have him as an All NBA player last year?
Speaker 1: If we didn't, he was for before he was disqualified yet.
Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, he didn't qualify, but he was up there
for sure, and very much in the all the Defensive
Player of the Year conversation much of the year.
Speaker 1: Are we just?
Speaker 2: I mean, then again, inconsistency kind of year to year
has been a massive theme his career.
Speaker 1: He did qualify last year, I forgot. He only ended
up missing eight games.
Speaker 2: Okay, so I think one or both of us must
have had him on All NBA.
Speaker 1: I'm starting to think I didn't because I said before
he got disqualified.
Speaker 2: Did you just think he was disqualified and erroneously cut off?
Speaker 1: He did have. The latter half of the year was
pretty tough.
Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, right, because the beginning of the year, the
story was look at all this isolation scoring and then
everything on the offense. Right right.
Speaker 1: As to why I don't think that you can build around.
Speaker 2: Him, oh okay, go ahead, is.
Speaker 1: Because when you look at what he does defensively and
also his flaws on defense, he's not this super physical player,
and so if you now put him into the one A,
one B offensive, that's going to take a toll on
his body that was already kind of had scattershot availability
to begin with. But there are very few people who
can handle being the most important defender on their team
and then the best offensive option on their team. And
I just don't know that he is. I don't want
to say hashtag built for it, but just looking at
the way that he plays is if he was a
he's not used to being that physical of a player overall.
And if you insert the ball into his hands and
you look at the coverages he's going to see as
a result, and even the ISOs in him getting downhill,
that's physicality that he doesn't play with on the defensive end.
So why should we expect it to be okay on
the offensive end?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I just think, like I don't think Jackson's extension
is bad necessarily, but I also agree that, well, yeah
he's I feel really good about a team where he's
your second best player, Like I think that team's and
it has been the case, like that team has been
really good. It's been the Grizzlies a couple of times
when Moran was at that one A level and and
Jackson was kind of your one be or whatever.
Speaker 1: So what do you do?
Speaker 2: I guess, like, how do we tie some of these
other questions here? Like does that mean that everyone's on
the table to be traded because certainly Morant is and
are we extending that to Jackson? Are we extending that
to I don't know. Go down the list if you want.
Speaker 1: I think, if you're looking at it, maybe you just
view semi untouchables. It's Cowhard and Edie just because what
value would you get for him with all these injuries
and he's proven to be so impactful on defense. But
I'm not hanging up the phone if someone calls about
Jaron Jackson. I know the Grizzlies have been friskier of late,
but it's just I don't think this team. We just
answered the question, do we think that they have their
best player of their next championship contention era on the roster.
If the answer is no, then yeah you should. It'd
be cool, like how many teams can work backwards from right.
We found our second most important player, let's go out
there and get the first right right?
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's the hard part. I think I would listen
on Jackson. I wonder what I'm trying to think of.
He's like, theoretically, if you believe as an acquiring team
that the way he's played this season has more to
do with He's not fully back from the injury. Now
that cuts both ways because it's like, well is he
just is this what we have now? And the situation
in Memphis just doesn't seem great overall, Like what what's
the team that is? Like we are Jaron Jackson becomes
our second best player we were in.
Speaker 1: Bush second best. I don't know if he'd be their
second best, but I oh, maybe he's not a good
fit for the Spurs. He'd be interesting on the Spurs.
I would love him on the Pistons because you're gonna
have one of Duran or Stewart maybe both left over,
and so they're going to take care of your physicality
and so that would be something I could look at him.
And Detroit would be fantastic.
Speaker 2: M hm. Trying to think where else. I don't know Miami,
because we know that he was never better offensively than
when he was playing in the Laroche's system, and so
he maybe regains all of his offensive punch there and
then him and together I think actually does work. Although
like you you don't have like Bam might be when
you were talking about how like well you asked this
guy to be your number one defensive guy and the
best he's gonna be his second option on offense. You're
kind of describing Bam too in that, so it's like, yeah,
two of those guys amount to I would like to
see it personally, but you might.
Speaker 1: Just there is there too much redundancy with Scotty Barnes
in Toronto for them to make sense.
Speaker 2: I think if you believe in Jackson's shooting, then no,
But I if you it's it's like just just year
to year with Jackson if he's gonna be a good shooter.
So I don't like, you may get into a situation
where we're like making the joke of how like just
another Toronto like fits perfectly into Toronto's idea.
Speaker 1: Zach Low had mentioned that the Calves were hoping to
get in on a Jaron Jackson junior sweepstakes. I don't
know if this is their scaling ahead to next summer
when they can aggregate salaries. I don't The fit of
him and Evan Mobley can make a lot of sense,
but I'm not sure that there would be a less
intimidating physical dual bit from Gourd in the NBA.
Speaker 2: Yeah right, I mean you would have to bank on
Mobili and now feels like the wrong time to raise this,
like continuing to get to get better offensively and continuing
to be more physical like that was the story this
time last year, is how physical Mobili was And you don't.
I don't feel like anybody's like over the moon about
that anymore.
Speaker 1: I will say as the Grizzlies very quickly, if they
were to buy, I'd just be curious to see, like,
could they stack salary like Anti Davis on this team
with Jaris Jacks year Maybe makes some sense if you're
invested in Zachi e. That kind of just shortened your timeline.
But is there a Jamerant anti Davis challenge trade out
there or framework there that could work. I wouldn't hate it,
as Mama wouldn't hate it. But we have arrived grant
the Golden State Warriors. What is the first question we
should ask about the Golden State Warriors.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna go I'm gonna skip the original first question
because uh, we'll get to it. Yeah, is is the
run over? And if it is, if they believe that, like,
what what do you like? This is the biggest of
big picture discussions. What do you do like? So, by
by the run being over, I mean like you just
you can't win a championship. You can't even realistically contend
for a championship, which was a stretch coming into the
year when we were much more optimistic about them because
of the age of the core. If if that's where
we are and if you don't, I guess the one
answer is, well you trade free honest. Okay, well let's
take that off the table, like what is the move? Like,
are you how do you begin to deconstruct this thing?
And do you? I guess I'm putting it to you
because like it's is is it over? If it is,
what what's your what are your next? Like three steps?
Speaker 1: So the question of if if is it over? I
think it dovetails with the other question of what is
the level of player they would have to get for
us to say that it's not, because as of right now,
if they make no moves, it's over. Yeah, you're not.
It's clear that this team is not winning a title.
So to sort of backtrack it, I'm just gonna throw
players at you. What is the level of player they
need to contend? Derek White?
Speaker 2: I mean, so that's not Obviously that's not enough. I
don't think right Like, so just the way I the
way before you give me another name, The way I'm
gonna approach this is to look at it and say,
when they traded for Jimmy Butler, who I don't I
think is a is there a player realistically that they
could get that's better than that this season? Probably not,
especially with the way that he The way they played
after they got him was like, oh my god, this
team is The records were insane, right, it was like
fourteen and one with all three of Draymond, Steph and Jimmy,
and then that was still a second round out. Steph
got hurt, but that team wasn't gonna win a title.
So I think we'll go through some names, But like,
unless there's a player as good or better than Jimmy
Butler that you're adding to this core without removing Jimmy
Butler and obviously Steff, you know what I mean? Like that,
that that's the level it would have to be because
it wasn't enough last year with him, So you need
another step up of at least that size, which.
Speaker 1: Like I was that I think the uncomfortable truth might
be is maybe it's not about getting that player, but
are we at the point to where if you really
wanted to keep this window open, We're not just looking
at Kaminga and picks. What does Draymond and picks get you?
H Like, does that if you can use that, if
you can keep Jimmy Butler because the numbers the offense
isn't good when he plays without Steph. But I think
the Warriors are still like a plus eight per one
hundred in his solo minutes. If you get Anthony Davis
and you have Anthony Davis, Jimmy Butler and Steph, or
you better off than you are with Draymond, Jimmy Butler
and Steph.
Speaker 2: I think, without question.
Speaker 1: You and that they're in. Like we could go through
names all we want, but therein lies the problem because
if the run is over, I'm okay that twenty twenty
two title I think changed. I still think that the
way that the Warriors publicly conveyed what they're doing and
have tried to go about their business, they're just they
haven't been on the same page. If they were, okay,
kind of just fading off into the sunset of like
we're gonna be relevant while Steph is still here, but
we're not gonna win another title after twenty twenty two.
I'm okay with that, But everything they've done it feels
like it has been at war with themselves to where
they can't figure it out. And you want to give
the appearance that you're hashtag going for it. But at
this point, if you decide your run is over and
you don't want to put all these picks on the table,
I don't want to say I don't. I'm never okay
with it because it'd be fun to see Steph on
the biggest stage again. But if he's content and wants
to finish his career there where he won four titles
and turned into one of the ten greatest players of
all time, that's okay. Like the Warriors are still gonna
be a play in or slightly better team. That's kind
of is that? What does that do for you as
a Warriors fan? Though?
Speaker 2: Is there?
Speaker 1: Do you feel some sort of betrayal to the Steph
window or No?
Speaker 2: No, I think because the four Like, it's hard to
do better than four championships in a career. There's just
not a lot of situations that have yielded more than that.
So if that's it, that's fine. I you know, I
think the only sort of non negotiable for me is
that like, you can't whatever next iteration of this team
look whatever, it looks like Steph can't. It has to
involve Steph, I think. And maybe that means like he
plays next year and retires, but trading him would be
like as a fan, the blow that would be too
hard to take. Draymond is different one because you sort
of rip the band aid off on that front by
by losing Clay, right, so, like we know Clay is
as much a as part of the core as Draymon was.
That was a different situation because Clay Anthony Slater and
Tim McMahon had a good write up of it. It's
just like he was offended, he was hurt by the
way things went, and so he wanted to leave. And
that's fine. Draymond doesn't seem to want to leave, but
you know that's like bearable. I guess Steph is just
a different category, Like he's just the Duncan Dirk Kobe, like,
you can't. It can't be it that you can't be
in another Jersey type of thing. So if you want
to just ride it out and not contend with him there,
as long as he's okay with that, which like quietly
he's not, but he's just not the type of person
to like make it ugly that I can deal with that.
But yeah, part of it is just like that might
be the only option because even if you do trade
Draymond and you get Anthony Davis, I still don't know
if that's good enough. Right, Like we're talking about the
Thunder and the Nuggets and the Rockets and whoever you
think comes out of the East, the Knicks or Pistons
or Calves or whatever, Like, I don't know if they're
not better than all those teams, but.
Speaker 1: If you're going to so if that's the route that
they're being forced down, what do you do with Jonathan Kaminga?
What do you do with Brandon Prijemski? What do you
have these Geese Antos, Pat Spencer or Quinton Post. Do
you try to lean further in and you're getting a
little bit worse? Maybe, but it's what we're still trying
to plan or is it. I just don't know how
you juggle that aspect, because then what's the point of
trading Kaminga is do you get anything as a standalone
asset for Kamingo? I would argue at this point, if
I'm a team, I'm more interested in Brandon for Jamski
than I am Johnathan Aminga.
Speaker 2: But yeah, I mean you might not be wrong. Pajemski
has quietly shot it well enough lately that like you
could see him as a starting level player again. Yeah,
I don't know. We had this conversation maybe a week ago,
and just to illustrate like how quickly things have always
changed in the cominga conversation. Now, I'm just like kind
of where you were, which is like, is he just
an expiring salary?
Speaker 1: Is that?
Speaker 2: Is that what you you're excited to get as the
team that trades for him, Like maybe, because the alternative
is you see enough in there to believe he's a
twenty plus million dollar player with massive upside and you've
got this like free shot at looking at that next year,
and then you have to deal with his free agency
like that.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Maybe there's a team that thinks that way. It's hard
to it's hard to pick out who that would be
that would give up something of real value for that
for that opportunity. I think so the I don't know,
we're making this too long, but basically like I'd never
begrudge the Warriors for not like a lot of people are, like,
they've watched the cominga situation. They should There were fifteen
opportunities to move on from him where it was obvious
that they should have. I personally, you hurt, you lived
through it went back and forth a million times, and
I never now I feel like I have a like, Okay,
so he's just not going to be that player. It's
really hard to figure that out over the whole course.
And I sympathize with the Warriors being like and now
this was like certain factions of the brain Trust felt
very strongly, but differently. I think, you know, ownership believe.
Speaker 1: Chack Zach Staff did not. It does not. So it's
a disconnect.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, for sure. I don't hold it against the Warriors, though,
to wrap it for just taking this long to realize like,
oh shit, yeah he's he, ain't it. We should have
moved them, because you could have moved them for so
much more, you know, a million at a million different
stops along the way to where we are now.
Speaker 1: Our next team up. It's almost surprising we're talking about
them already. But the Dallas Mavericks our first question I
think is the obvious question, but it's kind of two
and one. Is trading Anthony Davis grant the right move? Yeah,
And I think there are two legs to this. What
is Anthony Davis's trade value right now given how he's
played when he's been available. But also the other question
I'll bring back to the NBA this thing is has
their tanking went to Officially they're closer to just being
in the play in than they are having the thirteenth
record in the Western Conference, And so I'm starting to wonder,
is not that they should go out and try and win,
but is it all right? Let's just regroup and we'll
figure all this out over the offseason.
Speaker 2: So the first part of the first leg, I guess
is the one that settles it for me, which is
like the question of his value, And I just don't
even with you know, I've had a couple injuries already
this year. One was fair protract like fourteen he missed
fourteen games with the cat whatever it was, it was,
it was a long stretch. Do you think Anthony Davis's
value is going up or down or staying the same
as time passes? Starting now? Down right, I think it's
down age if he has another little spat of injuries
this year, if he declined playing the five though.
Speaker 1: So maybe he wants out.
Speaker 2: Yeah, maybe maybe he's gonna push for it because he's
he's gonna go to his grave saying he's a four.
That settles it for me. And like that's while acknowledging
that like the idea of Kyrie and Cooper Flag and
Davis and some role players that I generally like is
like kind of intriguing, like for next year, I guess,
because I don't think you get real Kyrie until next year.
Speaker 1: Again, I don't know how real it is. But like
they've come up. They just beat the Pistons. They've been
pretty in offense and defense since Thanksgiving. Like that's I
think it's an eleven games or non game sample size,
so it's not the entire season. But the temptation of no,
I'm not double I will not you do not double
down or reinvest in this roster anyway, shape or form.
But I get the not the allure, but sort of
the resignation of well, if this is where we are
in the standings right now, look at where we got
Cooper Flag from. Anyway, why why would you move Anthony
Davis is if even if you think he's gonna get worse, though,
do you think the offers get meaningfully different or worse
leading into February fifth versus over the summer.
Speaker 2: Well, it's kind of like the honest thing we talked about,
where I guess it's a little well, what's this contract.
So he's got the player option in twenty seven to
twenty eight, So if you trade him now, the team
that gets him gets this year the following year. Yeah,
it is kind of similar to honest, whereas if you
trade him next year.
Speaker 1: Sorry, if if Anthony Davis is threatening to decline that
player option, go ahead, buddy, go ahead. Who's giving you
sixty something million dollars away? Well?
Speaker 2: What's the eligible four though? I feel like I put
this in my notes somewhere. So he's eligible for four
years two seventy five.
Speaker 1: Not kidding you shouldn't get it. He should get it.
Speaker 2: He's gonna ask for it, and that's well, I guess
that doesn't answer the question of his values fluctuation going forward,
because that's just always going to hang over that's hanging
over it now and it will continue to right. I
don't think it's we could kind of. I don't think
it's more complicated than even if you don't think his
value is super high right now, it's highly unlikely to
me that it goes up as time passes, because what
like what would be the scenario is he just he
stays fully healthy the rest of the year and plays great.
I guess that's possible. I wouldn't bet on that though,
So like I guess to me, Cooper Flag just offers
you cover for anything, and like we did, we also
had the did is as the tanking window closed? I
mean yeah, maybe, but also this is the only pick
you got for a long time? Yeah, you might like
something better? Is like is there go ahead?
Speaker 1: Who has their Charlotte has their twenty twenty seven pick?
Speaker 2: Right, LaMelo, let's do it?
Speaker 1: No for what like Anthony? But like I mean one,
I mean that's the other question I had.
Speaker 2: Where is it?
Speaker 1: Is it?
Speaker 2: Well?
Speaker 1: Should they I won't throw that. Should they swing on
a young ball handler? Then if they're not going to
tam like Lamello would fall at the young ish or
do you is it should they be looking at a
second draft?
Speaker 2: Guy?
Speaker 1: I'm not I don't know what they should do, but
I default towards get what you can for a d
and you should lean into No, you're not gonna have
a record that's on the Nets or Wizards level, but
just lean into this being the developmental year. Don't bring
Kyrie back he's not or if you want to bring
him back, bring him back the last ten games or whatever,
if he's healthy enough, and you could recalibrate over the summer.
When you no longer own your you have to max
and if look, if you're not going to trade Davis,
shut him down that because I don't think he's gonna
do anything this season to improve his trade value.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean how different. It's very different. But like
them and the Suns are both kind of like I
guess they're moving in different directions. So now I just
think you have Cooper Flag, you have this pick, and
you don't have other picks. I don't I'm not saying tank, yeah,
something like you're talking about, like, let's let's kind of
middle You can't you gotta trade Davis. I want to
circle all the way back to the original question. I
think you have to trade him that.
Speaker 1: You're not gonna get Arlette would be interested in Anthony Davis.
To the point that they would give you back your
two thousand.
Speaker 2: Well, there's nothing about Charlotte's recent transactional history that is
just there would at all be interested in someone like
Anthony Davis.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I don't know what else you could maybe
offer Charlotte one of your distant first that you still
have to get that back. But we've already shown that.
What if Cooper Flag's is just too good and Tanking
doesn't like I don't think he's the He's been among
the reasons that they're not the worst team in the
league right now but by next year. So yeah, maybe
not getting your own pick back I don't think is
as big of a priority as it might be for
certain other teams, just because of Cooper flag prediction. Very quickly, then,
does Anthony Davis get moved by the trade deadline.
Speaker 2: I'll say yes, Why not? That's more interesting.
Speaker 1: I will say yes, and it will not be to
the Pistons because I do not understand that even a
little bit. Here's another team we're going to talk about, Grant,
the Utah Jazz, And I think this is the cliche question,
but we got to ask it again. Are they winning
too much? Once more?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean just for statistical purposes, Yeah, Dallas getting
flag out of the last draft suggests that well you
know who knows. But you don't want to rely on
the math that got the math slash vision that landed
Cooper flag in Dallas. If you're the Jazz again, though.
Speaker 1: Well you do when your pick might go to Okay, see,
because well.
Speaker 2: That's right, they will top eight, so they lose it
if they're too and that might be the biggest do
they have if.
Speaker 1: They have the eighth worst record of boy and we.
Speaker 2: Were promised, we were promised there would be no shenanigans.
Speaker 1: And the Bucks are coming for him fast, So.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's a disaster. If you lose the pick
out right, you've definitely the answer is you've definitely won
too much that like that can't happen, can it? You can't.
Speaker 1: I don't think we need to spend more. The answer
is yes, and it's been sometimes it's been fun. But
the answer is you need to figure out moving forward.
You don't want to embrace shenanigans. But you can't be
better than this many teams like you got. You gotta
figure out how to be worse than the moving forward
like but you know what's scary, Grant When you look
at the teams below them, Hornets, Nets, Kings, Pacers, Clippers,
Pelicans' Wizards. The Hornets feel like the only team that
could possibly be But maybe the Kings tricked themselves into
thinking that they could be better and do something at
the deadline. But yeah, that's where Utah gets iffy. The
one thing they could do, which is our second question.
We have to ask it, what does the Godfather offer
for Lowry market? And look like what is the you're
you're running the Jazz And just as a baseline, the
combined number of first round picks or prospects, just putting
a number like how many do you need to get?
And I think everyone just gonna point has the preface
to say it has been banying got four and if
the Jazz want to take back bad money, that needs
to be the floor. I just don't know, Like I
don't Detroit's the team everybody wants to mention, even san Antonio.
I just don't see those teams coming in with X amounts.
So it's twofold. What's the minimum for you that it
takes to even consider moving Lowry? And are you at
the point where not you move him for whatever, But
are you reaching def con tis to okay, like we
like if he's not okay, being shut down, like we
need to do something here because we are winning too much.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's an interesting aspect of it. I I think
he's I think we talked about this early like he's
I think he's better than Baine. And so if there's
no CACP or Cole Anthony type contracts coming back, then
you could talk me into three or four ish first
round assets. But if they're and I don't know how
you structure this without some kind of bad money coming back,
probably because Mark Gonna makes so much, Like then we're
at five, then we're at the Baine level as the baseline.
And you know for sure that it's not just people
saying it's like that's what the jazz are gonna point to,
right like that, that's what the market says a guy
like this is worth or someone similar to this. So
I if you're sending me back bad money, I need
five first first round assets or the equivalent. Sorry. And
also I'm Danny Ainge, so I'm starting the bidding at eight.
And just because I know I got to anchor and
then you.
Speaker 1: Could talk about how you almost got right or whatever,
or I I'm probably a little bit more. It obviously
depends on the quality of assets. But I think if
someone's coming in and has four and you have to
take back bad money that's only on the books for
two more years or something, I'm having a discussion. I
just don't. I don't think that offer is gonna be
their mid season It feels more like an off season thing,
if anything. Which is my other question for them would
be should they sell high on any of the other
young guys. And you know how I feel about this,
because I would be looking at, hey, what could we
get for Cann't they George right now? I'd also be
looking Teller Hendricks has probably at as an idea. Unfortunately,
I love Taylor Hendricks. I don't know what to do
about Walker Kessler. They've reportedly been rebuffing interest even as
he's injured. I think the teams that were named were
the Lakers and the Pacers and the Raptors. I'm just
if I'm the Jazz, I'm kind of short of Ace Bailey.
I'm just open to anything at this.
Speaker 2: I mean, I think in theory I am too, But
with the So let's say, chanty, let's use George as
the example. If you're willing to move him, it's got
to be a pick focused package, I guess.
Speaker 1: And then the hope is this fact you like better?
Speaker 2: Yeah, well then that's the thing, like how many prospects
are you going to get? Who by? Is it year three?
It's year three? Like how many? Right? Is it three?
I can't even remember?
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's.
Speaker 2: Like how many guys are gonna be are gonna develop
into better players than Keant George? Yeah you're three right now?
Like that, Like we we agree he's an imperfect player.
We don't really know anything because the Jazz aren't. The
Jazz are better than expected, but they're not like a
good team. So what do his numbers really mean? A
lot of question marks? But like twenty four and seven
and it's like the main offensive guy other than marketing,
Like how many guys are getting their third year gonna
eclipse that? So if you're trading George, it's because you
think you're gonna do better than that with whoever you're
bringing back. Like that's I was one aking it. I'm
just saying that's a pretty high bar.
Speaker 1: Yeah that's fair, But like if it was something like
Tary Easan and you're getting a low end first round
pick for Aki.
Speaker 2: I'm just kind of deciding that I guess you're you're saying,
as the Jazz, like, we don't think George is oversimplification,
but like, this isn't like winning play. We don't believe
this translation.
Speaker 1: This isn't something that we want to I mean, the
numbers of twenty two and seven or whatever it is,
with some improved shooting and just decision making. We don't
want to invest thirty million dollars a year. We already
have Lowry, we have Ace Bailey. This isn't someone that
we trust and we're gonna pay Walker. That's the other
thing here, too, is that if you're planning on paying
Walker Kessler, who is fantastic room protector, you've paid Lowry
market if you don't want to get rid of him,
it's I don't care they want to pay them, go
right ahead. I just don't know where that's going to
leave them. So from the Jazz's perspective, I almost argue
this wasn't a question we had. But if you don't
want to do any of the uncomfortable things that we
just discussed it's time to get off the fucking pot, guys.
And then you go make a trade, go make the
consolidation trade. And it's like this season might be the
perfect It's well, you can't do that this season. Why
you might lose your.
Speaker 2: Break anyway, right, Yeah, the added bone, you might like,
whatever you trade for, you might want to just mentally
add in the pick that you aren't losing now, because
you're gonna be worse than you save that pick from
going to the thunder. And part of the package.
Speaker 1: Portland Trailblazer is Grant. Can you take us to a
question for them?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I just want to know if the return of
the guards solves things for them. Drew Holliday has been
out schoo Henderson has yet to play. Is a mother
of all hamstring injuries. Apparently they're the worst three point
shooting team in the league. Danny Avvia has ascended partly
out of necessity. And it's just like the on ball
star Now, I wonder if that's something that might look
even better if you had better point guard play with
the shooting improve There was a stat I had for
something else I wrote that they're they're like twenty fifth
in wide open three point percentage, So it may.
Speaker 1: Not just be that is that bad.
Speaker 2: It's not good, and it may not be that. And
what it says is that even it's just like generating
more open threes might not be the solved because they
don't make them even when they're open. So it's not
just the lack of guards setting up shooters, it's that
the shooters suck. Uh not not the worst, not the
least logical argument.
Speaker 1: So I don't know that.
Speaker 2: Maybe, yeah, that's the short that's the short question is
is the issue here just that they don't have enough
playmaking guards. That's why the offense is no good. That's
why the shots aren't falling in. And when they get
them back, the Blazers are what we thought they were,
which is way better than five hundred, and they haven't
been that.
Speaker 1: I mean this as a compliment relative to the trade deadline.
I find them so thoroughly uninteresting because I just need
to see the scoot element of it and if it's now,
if you if they want to sit here and say
because anything they do, it might be oh, what could
we get for Robert Lee was the third could we
get matist Thibel's expiring contract can we turn him into anything?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: They want to be the team that goes out there
and says, we like LaMelo, Now you've got my attention.
But can you make that decision when one, Scoot's probably
in that package and two based off what you haven't
seen yet this year, and so I just need to
see Scoot Henderson play before I have. This team has
actually been pretty fun to watch. I know fans have
been pretty peeved about the way the defensive effort from
Tamani Kamara and Denny Avdia points. I think Denny Avvida's
offensive role is just almost too central at this point
to expect him to be a as good as he's
been defensively. I just want to see them, honestly, let's
clear some more minutes for young Hansom at this point.
I don't think that they need to be invested in
the season to the point that they're acting like buyers,
but I do need more information on them before I'm saying, well,
what should they actually like? They're in theory they're not
the toughest team to talk about, but just not having
the Scoot Henderson sample size is really bothering me, right,
because what are you supposed to tell them to do
at the trade deadline other than stay there because they're
not gonna They're not. I don't think they would go
consolidate into a bigger name. And then I also don't
think that they're gonna make a half measure move. And
then are they gonna like, oh, we're just gonna get
rid of Jeremy Grant. There's a team that wants him
all of a sudden. I don't know it, just this team.
The most critical question I think they might answer is
who even is their most likely player to be traded Grant?
Speaker 2: I mean, if Grant made a little less, it might
be him, because he's played so much better as a starter.
I actually think it is him. Do you think Robert
Williams is the name that comes to mind? Just the
salaries smaller, it's easier to you know, easier. You said,
r W three, that's the name I was gonna pick. Yeah, Grant,
I apologize, Yeah, I mean Grant. It's a lot easier
to imagine him being traded. Grant being traded this year
than last year when it was just like this. This
is one of the worst contracts in the league. Still
not a great contract, but he's he's he's been more
like we thought he would be. I think it is
Williams though, right, if not just because the salary. He's
actually healthy at the moment. I haven't like checked in
the last thirty seconds, but I've seen him play basketball
recently and he looked pretty good. So you might want
to strike while the iron's hot. There also, just you
have clinging.
Speaker 1: I sometimes I wondered if his dwop wreath in a wig,
but yeah.
Speaker 2: PLA's pretty different. I forgot, I almost got. I was
gonna start listing the other centers you want to play
in clinging and Hansen uh and I was gonna forget
wreath and I would have felt terrible about that. So
thank you for bringing him up.
Speaker 1: Do you know what that so regulator as Could they
get a first for Drew Holliday, I would say absolutely
not or any of the other veterans. I mean, who
can Denny Abby accounts as a veteran, They probably get
first for him.
Speaker 2: You get a couple, I would say, do you.
Speaker 1: Know what be the most uncomfortable questions? Do you think
that they have the center of the their center of
the future on the roster just looking at what don
Vin Klingen's offensive value is we don't know enough about
young Hansome to say no, But that would be the
uncomfortable question if you wanted to ask it.
Speaker 2: Klingon is a tricky one because I do think what
I think I've said in the past, like he's got
he's got a couple superpowers, but he's got some real deficiencies,
so I'm not sure about that. I think the main thing,
and you alluded to this, I would really like to
know what Avdia looks like with Scoot, like, because what
kind of player is Scoot gonna be in a situation
where like no, Ovidia should probably have the ball, like yep,
more than half the time if we're talking about initiating
the offense.
Speaker 1: And by the way, looming over all this, even if
we wanted them to go consolidate for veteran Florida Damian
Millard is gonna be playing basketball next season. I'm not
saying they need to structure their entire team around him,
but you can't be in the rotation though.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, Also they have those all those bucks picks too,
so like.
Speaker 1: They should be a honest team. That's what they should do,
is they should well, I mean, that's not the craziest idea,
but Gianness and Dame you reunite in Portland. But I'm
just saying, like they they've got that like just in
their back pocket, and those might end up being some
of the most valuable draft assets there are. And so
I guess the silver lining of not having any scoot
of via information is that, like you can kind of
slow play this for at least another year and feel
okay about it. You know who can't slow play it
because they don't know how the Sacramento Kings grant and
we haven't. This is like a lightning round situation for them.
So we're gonna go through the questions of just trying
to answer it's almost trade deadlines of perlatives for them. Okay,
So I'll start which veteran is most tradable, not most
likely to be tradeable, but what veteran on the team
is most tradable.
Speaker 2: I think it's pretty clearly Derozen just because length the contract,
what is it a ten million dollar guarantee for next season?
So and he's also the one that like is easier
to imagine being like even a bench weapon on like
a good playoff team. Sore more places to land, lower commitment,
lower asking price just makes him I think he's the
most tradable, easiest to move. What do you think?
Speaker 1: I think you might be right. I want to say
it should be Sabonus, but I think he's probably just
the best veteran. That doesn't necessarily make him the easiest
to move, so the only other The other nomination would
probably be I mean, do Kean Allis count as a
veteran in the league long enough? Malik Monk would probably
be my second nomination.
Speaker 2: Yeah, who's least tradable of those vets?
Speaker 1: I think it's honestly, I think it's Is it zach Lavine?
It's it's I think it's zach Lavine. But the caveat
here would be if zach Lavine is willing to decline
his player option kind of like Rudy Gobrett and then
sign a cheaper deal, I think he gets a lot
more appealing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, teams, he's an easier fit. Sabonis is like changes
how you play. Levine is just like, I hope you
make shots. We know he's not going to guard there,
you go right.
Speaker 1: Just if he doesn't agree, you've turned me into a
SA bonus defender on this podcas yes, which is incredible.
Speaker 2: It's been my goal all along. He's a great he
seems like a great guy. Like veteran. I think he's great.
Speaker 1: Which veteran should they want to trade the most.
Speaker 2: I think Sabonis because in theory, he gets you the
most in return, so like, if you're blowing it up,
you want the most picks and stuff back that you
can get. And I also think moving on from him
allows you to kind of build the team however you want.
As long as he's there, you're going to be built
a certain way.
Speaker 1: My issue with that is by trading him, you're not
really opening up runway for any of the guys that
you would want to see get more minutes. The latter
like Maxim Reina Sure, who's already playing while he's injured.
Speaker 2: I'm not making any moves with the idea of like
we've really like Nie Clifford and Keegan Murray and Reno
are interesting players that like getting them more minutes can't
be a major concern because none of them are are
stars or any like anything clothes.
Speaker 1: I honestly think they should want to trade DeRozan the
worst the most. I just don't I don't love the
fit there, and he's was shooting better from three this year,
but he still doesn't take enough of time. I know
he hit the clutch three against the game ban and
help losing anyway h versus Portland the other night. But
I think he's the player that they should want to move.
He just doesn't fit, Like what is he to them?
Especially when you have Russell Westbrook and Dennis Shrewder on
this team. I just I don't love it. If they
could move Russell Westbrook, maybe I would say him. Should
they be in the distressed star market? I think this
is our final question because or was it? Did I
skip one?
Speaker 2: Oh? Yeah?
Speaker 1: How many picks will get them to move some bonus? Uh?
Two enough?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I think two twos plenty two might be the
most you can hope for because it's a big contract
and like I said, he's tough to build a rounds and.
Speaker 1: That's why I would keep him. Which means, should they
be in the distress, would you be mad if they
went out there and got a LaMelo ball?
Speaker 2: Oh No, not at all. I think that that would
be if they'd be one of the.
Speaker 1: Twenty twenty six pick and get like a distressed star.
I don't love jaw there, I don't love Trey, but
if it's a mellow maybe even if it's Zion, I
don't really know what that looks like. But fuck it'
I think.
Speaker 2: And that's kind of on brand too, Like I mean,
like Levine and DeRozan are a little different, but like
they names matter. The size of the name matters for
sure for them.
Speaker 1: How many total vets should they aim to move over?
Under two and a half? And the answer is over
over right all of them? Do you trust them to
do that?
Speaker 2: Though more than I have in the past, But partly
that's just because the writing is so on the wall.
Like I think Scott Perrys, like, for whatever you think
about him, like he has to be seeing this clearly right.
Also he didn't. He's not responsible for any of this,
so he has the ability to kind of just say, like,
I'm cleaning up someone else's mess.
Speaker 1: Are you ready to take us to the Los Angeles
Clippers very quickly? Start? What's the first question or the
question he'd ask.
Speaker 2: Why not just trade Harden and Kawhi and be done
with it?
Speaker 1: Because you don't control your own draft picks.
Speaker 2: What if you could get him though, uh yeah, right,
I think that's the right answer. Let's move though to
the Zubots of it all, because that might be like
in the most and unimprobable versions of the future, how
you get one of those or picks back? Should they
be trading or looking to trade Zubots.
Speaker 1: I guess if you can get two first round picks
for Vita Zubots, I would do it. And it's sort
of just I know, who is the team that I was,
Why should the Sons do it? It's just like the
Sons don't have anyone that's gonna get you multiple first
round picks. And if you told me they got two
first round picks for Dylan Brooks, we're having a different conversation.
You can get two first round picks for Vita Zubots,
just do it, because you're building your team in the
image of flexibility anyway, And so the Sons aren't doing
that either. They're just married to whatever. It's like kind
of on the cap sheet until Kingdom come. At this point,
that's where I'm kind of at with the Clippers, and
I would absolutely be offering all of my late twenty thirty,
twenty thirty one, twenty thirty two, picks and zubots to
get my own picks back, if you can get any
of them back. I'm absolutely offering that. But is there
any name that could get you to say, you know what,
it's okay for them to they put they put first
round picks on the table to go after a name
that should not be on the table.
Speaker 2: Correct, Yeah, yeah, because the quality of name that you're
getting with what they have to trade just isn't high enough,
especially as bad as they've been. They'd be like, what
are you? How is this guy gonna save us? Like
MPJ is a name that comes to mind, like.
Speaker 1: This might surprise you. Even if they could get LaMelo Ball,
I probably just said, no, I'm keeping the picks. Those
are so far and that's me.
Speaker 2: Right, that's But also at least at least he's young
enough to where you could pitch him as all right,
this is the tenth pole star going forward. Don't know
what we're gonna put around him, but you know, he's
different than I guess he's not that much younger than MPJ,
but like you know what I mean, at least he
gives it's a bleak future man like for them, So
at least he would give you something to market. You
could say he's exciting the local kid, all all the
all the good angles that teams throw out there when
they're trying to pacify a fan base.
Speaker 1: Who do you think would be of Kawhi Harden, Zubots,
who's most likely to get moved? Because I think if
you pick the most likely to get move player on
this team, it's going to be like John Collins or
Derek Jones of that ilk of the.
Speaker 2: Bigger of the big three names. Harden's tempting because he's
relatively speaking, he's pretty reliable and healthy and producing. I
still think it's Zubots only because that's the guy I
think you're getting the best stuff for just considering production, age,
contract everything like that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think I think you're right. It does doesn't
feel like James Harden might be easier to move than
Kuhi at this point or no.
Speaker 2: I think yes, just because you know what you're getting
to a greater extent, I'm that's such a I think.
I I don't know. It depends on that, because like
if you're adding Kawhi to an almost contender, it's like
this guy in a conference, Like what if we make
the conference finals? And we have like real Kauhi for
five of those games, like do we just win a title?
Like with Harden? You can't see that, right, So I
think for certain teams Harden, but for certain teams Kawhi.
You know, like, don't you think don't you think there's
a difference between Kawhi for sure?
Speaker 1: No, depending on the.
Speaker 2: Team, Like Harden might get you into the playoffs, like
because he's gonna be there every night and he's gonna
run your offense and you'll be solid, but Kauhi is
like the oh shit, like the variable.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna give you a terrible answer, but I think
it's the right one. James Harden's contract is just so
much more workable than Kauwhi. It's sure neither of them
are long, but James Harden only being partially guaranteed next
year and then also just not making I think, was
he twelve fifty million less than Kawhi right now? Yeah,
matching salary for Kawhi Leonard, who's like, okay, the sixers
with you all and be sure like now now we're talking,
But so many teams would struggle to get to that number, right,
that's fair? We have one team left Grant. Can you
give us a question for the New Orleans Pelicans?
Speaker 2: Why did they trade the Let's see, Uh, Derek Queen
really good, Jeremiah Fears really promising statements. Well, I'm preambling
to the question what kind of assuming they're gonna make trades,
which who knows what kind of players should they be
putting around them? And related, Uh, why wouldn't you just
keep Trey Murphy? Because I think I know what your
answer is gonna be to what kinds of players they
should put around those ways?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm just I'm loading up on shooting around those
two if I can get Michael Porter Junior, Corey kisper
Dante divend like it's do any who wants Zion? I mean,
I guess the Blazers don't have any, so that they
name them as a Zion? Who did I name is
a zion destination to Phoenix? Give me great? Give me
all your shooters? Yeah, and that's exactly like you would
prefer them to be all we want a bunch of
three and d But as a right now, just give
me all of your shooters, which does It's well, why
would you trade Trey Murphy? Then? And the fact of
the matter is you shouldn't What gets you to do that? Though? Grant, like,
what is the is it the is three first round picks?
Is that the benchmark of all right, we're having this discussion.
Speaker 2: I think that's that's where it starts. And I think, like,
isn't he the non super duper star that should have
like the best market because who who doesn't get better
with Trey Murphy and who's not.
Speaker 1: Probably him Ord Tyler Kohlich I think would be, but he.
Speaker 2: Loved Tyler Coleck. That's crazy, Why would you even say that? Yeah,
I think it's three youth relatively speaking, the shooting, the
possibility that, like I've always thought that his three point
percentage for his career never feels as high as it should,
just because like every shot he shoots seems like it's
going to go. And I think there's a scenario where
he gets somewhere else where shot creation better. It's just
a more functional environment, and he is a forty percent
shooter like consistently, which he actually hasn't been. Yeah, I
think everybody should want Trey Murphy, everybody like, and so
three first is what I think it should take. And
maybe that's just why the Pelicans shouldn't trade him unless
they can get four, which feels like, is anyone really
gonna do that? I don't know.
Speaker 1: Maybe over the offtion, but the mid season stuff is
always tough to kind of think, Okay, well, what are
they gonna do? The other question that I think needs
to be at well too quick, what's a fair return
for herb Jones? Are you expecting more than one first
round pick for him?
Speaker 2: No? Like if you the over unders should be said
at one and a half, because I think I think
it's probably under that. But there's no way they trade
him without getting a first right, like flip flip it around.
I just it's hard to imagine that.
Speaker 1: Maybe something I don't real the Cavs do this because
they have two picks they could trade and then Jalen Tyson,
is that like too rich? If you're throwing other oh
they're over the second aprin nevermind that doesn't work.
Speaker 2: Also, I kind of like Jalen Tyson.
Speaker 1: Uh yeah, Jaleen Tyson's kind of like the Jimmy Butler
of Caleb Martin's right now, that's and Karislebertz or whatever.
I enjoy it. Uh, I think I'm gonna go over
because if they trade him, I think that's why they
trade him, because if I'm going to be getting a
first round pick for Herb Jones, I might question why
I'm trading Herb Jones all like that. That offer will
be there in the summer because he's under contract for
so long.
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, the Zion ding.
Speaker 1: Are you just trading Zion for whatever?
Speaker 2: I mean? So hold on, I want to be precise
on this. So they cause I never remember the guarantee situation.
I think you can correct me if you know. So
zero dollars guaranteed for next year, which means they can
after this season just say we're good and he can
and wipe it off the books. So I think they
should it shouldn't they know? They should not just move
him for whatever, I think, because that flexibility matters. I
think that, and maybe you just re sign him for
way less, you know, after you don't pick up the guarantee.
That's not.
Speaker 1: See. I disagree.
Speaker 2: I'm just you can't, okay, let's let me let me.
Speaker 1: I don't.
Speaker 2: You can't just take back long term money for him,
like it can't. It can't just be like picks. Well shit,
I don't know, he's so why why?
Speaker 1: But first of what is the extra flexibility? I mean,
I know this franchise is notoriously cheap, but like, what
is this what is that.
Speaker 2: You're gonna pay Queen, You're gonna pay fears at some point?
Speaker 1: Okay that I'm all for looking ahead, but that's getting
like a little too out of the game. But I'm
just if you even if you're taking back bad money,
it's probably because someone gave you a pick or a player.
If I could get like I like, if you could
just get a stab in the dark prospect or draft pick,
just move him. You're not gonna be good enough anytime
soon to where whoa we just took on two extra
years of player? Why no, no, no, that's too. It's
it's time. And if he blossoms somewhere else because he
stays healthy or something, let's maybe look at the you know,
the medical department up there, like the strength and strength
like that might be something to dig into. I just
it's time, and it's I'm it's not because you know,
I think the world of Zion when he's healthy, but
it's over, Like this is over. So why are we
I don't see the value in just if you have
the ability to just get rid of him clean ties
for nothing over trading him for something anything, I'm taking
the ladder.
Speaker 2: So are you of the mind that if you're the Pelicans,
he cannot be on your team next year? However that happens,
Like so if you don't get because it's so like
the cutoff would seem to need to be positive value
of almost any measure, like just marginally, like if it's
three seconds and you gotta do the salary somehow, I
guess right, Like is that enough because you know you're
no matter what?
Speaker 1: Well, follow up question, have they traded the rights to
their twenty twenty seven first round pick? All who can
say I'm doing it Like it's I'm just doing it.
It's I'm trying to put is the contract out there
that would make you well, no, no, no, no, we're
not trading maybe Joel and Beads And that might be
the only one because it's well, if it's Paul, if
it's Paul George, it's you know, I think that's over
in two years. That's fine. He might decline his player options.
He doesn't want to be here anyway. There's just if
you're getting any sort of compensation, No, I'm not trading
Zion for Paul George straight up. That doesn't even technically work.
Maybe it works, who hell knows, but no, I'm not
doing that. But if you can get something, just do it.
Is that still the Nike slogan? Just do it? Oh?
Speaker 2: Just trade them? That's the new one right.
Speaker 1: Where is your favorite Zion destination? Is a question we
have from regulator very quick, Oh.
Speaker 2: San Antonio, why not just for fun see what it
would look like for this year? For me, I'd agree.
Speaker 1: Grant, Can you take us out of here please? We
apologize for rushing at the end, but we are pressed
for time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's on me. I had a heart out. Thanks everybody.
If we had a robust comment section, enjoyed it. Thanks
for commenting, Thanks for jumping on with us. Please everyone
listening watching rate Review, subscribe, Make sure that you are
checking us out. If you're checking us out on YouTube,
give us a thumbs up there, leave us a comment there.
High points. We love the high points. We don't know
what they are. We want all of them. Yea, join
our discord links for that and YouTube and podcast descriptions.
All your friends, so your enemies, shouts Franklin Lakina apologies,
jaredy