Speaker 1: The volume. It's the most wonderful time of the year
Speaker 1: for getting in on all of the hoops, football and
Speaker 1: hockey action at Draft Kings Sportsbook. In the season of giving,
Speaker 1: we're being gifted college football and basketball, Pro football and
Speaker 1: basketball and pro hockey too. Almost twenty four to seven.
Speaker 1: So many games every day, so many opportunities to place
Speaker 1: your first bet. Try betting on something simple like picking
Speaker 1: a team to win. Go to the Draft Kings sportsbook
Speaker 1: Gap and place your bet. Current Super Bowl winners on
Speaker 1: DraftKings right now the Detroit Lions at plus two to
Speaker 1: sixty and the Kansas City Chiefs at plus four to
Speaker 1: twenty five. And here's a gift for all new customers.
Speaker 1: Bet five dollars to get one hundred and fifty dollars
Speaker 1: in bonus bets if your bet wins. Download the Draft
Speaker 1: King Sportsbook Gap and use code hoops that's h oops.
Speaker 1: That's code hoops for new customers to get one hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty dollars in bonus bets if your bet wins.
Speaker 1: When you bet just five bucks, Happy Holidays from DraftKings.
Speaker 1: The Crown is yours. Gambling problem called one eight hundred
Speaker 1: gambler in New York call eight seven seven eight Hope
Speaker 1: and why, or text hope and Why to four to
Speaker 1: six seven three six and Connecticut Help Us available for
Speaker 1: problem gambling call eight eight eight seven eight nine seven
Speaker 1: seven seven seven.
Speaker 2: Or visit CCPG dot org.
Speaker 1: Please play responsibly on behalf of Boothill Casino and Resort
Speaker 1: in Kansas twenty one plus. Age and eligibility varies by
Speaker 1: jurisdiction void in Ontario. Bet must win to receive award.
Speaker 1: Bonus bets expire one hundred and sixty eight hours after issuance.
Speaker 1: For additional terms and responsible gaming resources to dkang dot
Speaker 1: co slash b ball. All right, welcome to Hoops Tonight.
Speaker 1: You're at the volume heavy.
Speaker 2: Friday, everybody.
Speaker 1: I hope all of you guys have had a great week.
Speaker 1: It's mailbag day. Lots of good questions from you guys.
Speaker 1: Remember if you want to get your questions into next
Speaker 1: week's mail bag, drop them in the YouTube comments throughout
Speaker 1: the week underneath these videos. You guys know the joke
Speaker 1: before we get started. Subscribe to the Hoops Tonight YouTube
Speaker 1: channels you don't miss any more of our videos. Follow
Speaker 1: me on Twitter at underscore jcnlt so you guys, don't
Speaker 1: miss you announcement. So forget about a podcast feed where
Speaker 1: podcast our hoops tonight. Don't forget it's also helpful if
Speaker 1: you leave a rating and a review. On that front,
Speaker 1: we also have brand new social media feeds on Twitter, Instagram,
Speaker 1: and Facebook. We're releasing content throughout the year, and the
Speaker 1: last but not least, as I mentioned off the top,
Speaker 1: keep dropping the mail, bad questions and those YouTube comments
Speaker 1: so we can keep hitting them on Fridays. All right,
Speaker 1: let's talk some basketball. I had two or three people
Speaker 1: leave very similar questions along these lines, and this is
Speaker 1: a topic that I haven't had a chance to get
Speaker 1: to yet. So today's as good a day as any.
Speaker 1: First question. More and more people Nick Right, Bill Simmons, etc.
Speaker 1: Are advocating for a change of rules to make the
Speaker 1: NBA a better TV product. What's your take on that?
Speaker 1: Do you think the analytical approach leading to always more
Speaker 1: threes and dangers the game?
Speaker 2: We love?
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for your work. It's always been
Speaker 1: a pleasure to watch your videos. Good day from Australia.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for supporting the show. So there's
Speaker 1: three fronts that I want to get into here. One
Speaker 1: the TV ratings, two rule changes, and three what about
Speaker 1: all of these three pointers that we're seeing around the league,
Speaker 1: So let's take them one out of time one the ratings.
Speaker 1: There are a lot of reasons WHYBA ratings are down.
Speaker 1: Anytime you're dealing with an entity like the NBA that
Speaker 1: is as large and as complicated as it is, there's
Speaker 1: just too many moving parts to kind of like try
Speaker 1: to point it at one particular issue, right, And I
Speaker 1: bet that's been one of the annoying things for me
Speaker 1: is I think there have been a lot of people
Speaker 1: out I'm not calling anybody in particular out, but there
Speaker 1: have been a lot of people out there that I
Speaker 1: feel like are taking this issue as a vehicle with
Speaker 1: which to hammer at a specific narrative or something along
Speaker 1: those lines. I think that's silly, and quite frankly, I
Speaker 1: think a lot of people are glossing over what I
Speaker 1: think is the obvious reason ratings are down, which is
Speaker 1: that there's just an urgency problem. The NBA has a
Speaker 1: massive inventory. Right, there's eighty two regular season games, but
Speaker 1: in addition to that, we also let twenty of the
Speaker 1: thirty teams into the NBA playoffs, Right, and like, what
Speaker 1: ends up happening as a result of that, is like,
Speaker 1: you can play bad basketball sometimes for weeks on end
Speaker 1: and it just doesn't matter. I watched a Lakers team
Speaker 1: go off to a two to ten start and then
Speaker 1: make it to the Western Conference Finals. I've seen lots
Speaker 1: of teams have really bad stretches of basketball and it
Speaker 1: just doesn't matter. It's a fundamental difference between the NBA
Speaker 1: and the NFL, for instance, where you have a bad
Speaker 1: couple of weeks, it could ruin your whole season. Like
Speaker 1: kind of what's happening to the Atlanta Falcons this year, right, Like,
Speaker 1: get off to a six and three start and then you
Speaker 1: drop four games in a row and suddenly things look
Speaker 1: very different, right Like, you have a bad four game stretch.
Speaker 1: In the NBA, it literally means nothing, Like, you guys know,
Speaker 1: I'm off the Lakers this year as a championship contender.
Speaker 1: But like, theoretically they could still get into a six
Speaker 1: or seven seed, get out of the play in, maybe
Speaker 1: win a playing game and have a chance, right Like,
Speaker 1: everyone has a chance in the NBA. It's never too
Speaker 1: late to turn things around in the NBA. Remember Brian
Speaker 1: Winhorse at that whole speech about his like major takeaways
Speaker 1: since he's been covering the NBA, and one of his
Speaker 1: big takeaways was it's never too late. You want to
Speaker 1: know why it's never too late? Because we play eighty
Speaker 1: two games and we let twenty of the thirty NBA
Speaker 1: teams in. Now here's the thing that's always been a
Speaker 1: problem in the NBA. Even when it was you know,
Speaker 1: eighty two games and sixteen teams instead of twenty, it
Speaker 1: was still more or less the same issue. What has
Speaker 1: changed though, What has changed from when Michael Jordan was
Speaker 1: in the league in ratings were at their peak versus now?
Speaker 1: What has changed? All that has changed in terms of
Speaker 1: the surrounding circumstances are the sheer volume of options that
Speaker 1: people have to watch other things. I'm a diehard basketball fan,
Speaker 1: even myself with a smartphone. Now it's like, oh, Trey
Speaker 1: Young went over the top of that screen and jumped
Speaker 1: backwards into the guy. Now he's going to the foul line.
Speaker 1: I have thirty seconds. Let me get on my phone.
Speaker 1: I might, you know, text one of my buddies, or
Speaker 1: talk shit on Twitter or scroll on Instagram. Right like
Speaker 1: you just there's just so much media at our fingertips
Speaker 1: that like it's a there's a lot less incentive to
Speaker 1: watch an NBA game that doesn't really matter in the
Speaker 1: big picture, And so like, the real reason why the
Speaker 1: NBA's ratings are down while the NFL ratings are still
Speaker 1: up is the NFL has a massive urgency factor and
Speaker 1: the NBA simply does not. And so as over the years,
Speaker 1: as our options and the sheer amount of different content
Speaker 1: out there that we can consume has been available, casual
Speaker 1: fans not us guys, We're gonna watch basketball no matter
Speaker 1: what because we're basketball fans, We're die hard basketball fans.
Speaker 1: But the casual NBA fan has less incentive than ever
Speaker 1: to watch a random regular season game because there's just
Speaker 1: other stuff that they can watch. And the point is is,
Speaker 1: like there are tons of factors, Like does the fact
Speaker 1: that the top four players in the league are all
Speaker 1: international players? Does that play a role?
Speaker 2: I think so.
Speaker 1: I think if there was a couple bigger American stars,
Speaker 1: I think there would be more enthusiasm. I absolutely think
Speaker 1: that that sort of thing could.
Speaker 2: Play a role.
Speaker 1: Like like, is uh is are there issues with officiating?
Speaker 2: Like?
Speaker 1: Yeah, absolutely are there? Like are there issues with the
Speaker 1: way the league is covered and the way that we
Speaker 1: market players. Yeah, absolutely all of these little things factor in,
Speaker 1: But I think the obvious big thing that everyone's glossing
Speaker 1: over is like there's just a lot of shit to watch,
Speaker 1: and the NBA doesn't. An NBA regular season game just
Speaker 1: doesn't matter all that much. Like we why do we
Speaker 1: watch the NBA as regular season fans? We watched for
Speaker 1: moments last night. I'm recording this on a on a Tuesday,
Speaker 1: when I, uh, when I was watching that King's Nuggets game,
Speaker 1: or I was watching like a Heat Pistons game earlier tonight.
Speaker 1: Like when you catch like a really entertaining regular season game,
Speaker 1: it feels like a treat. We hang out for the moments, man,
Speaker 1: like Yo Kitchen, Sabona's just had a great battle. Lebron
Speaker 1: and Steph just had a great battle, you know, Luca
Speaker 1: and and and Shaye just had a great battle. Like
Speaker 1: we're we're watching for those moments because we're big fans.
Speaker 1: But in terms of like the casual fan, they can
Speaker 1: kind of consume that moment as an Instagram reel or
Speaker 1: as a YouTube video, or or just watch the box score,
Speaker 1: see a few highlights. They feel like they get the
Speaker 1: gist of it and they don't really need to start
Speaker 1: paying super close attention to their team until they get
Speaker 1: to April, because they're probably gonna be there no matter
Speaker 1: how unbalanced their season is, no matter how often they
Speaker 1: look good or look bad, They're probably gonna be playing
Speaker 1: in April because we let twenty of the thirty teams in.
Speaker 2: See what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: So, like again, the topic number one, the TV ratings,
Speaker 1: there's a lot of people saying a lot of things,
Speaker 1: you know, Like I saw someone say like, oh, it's
Speaker 1: because of inside the NBA.
Speaker 2: I disagree.
Speaker 1: I think that the urgency surrounding the NBA in the
Speaker 1: competitive media environment we live in, plays a much bigger role. Okay,
Speaker 1: the second piece of it, rules changes. There's some fun
Speaker 1: ideas out there, you know, getting rid of corner threes,
Speaker 1: making dunksworth points. That's the big one Nick Wright talks about.
Speaker 1: I as a basketball fan, think that'd be fun, Like
Speaker 1: it'd be fun to watch, like rim confrontations that have
Speaker 1: that much value. It just will never happen because one,
Speaker 1: it's just it'll lead to a lot of injuries as
Speaker 1: guys are flying into each other at the basket. And
Speaker 1: then the second piece of it is it's like a
Speaker 1: little too subjective, right, Like what counts as a dunk
Speaker 1: is like it's a little bit subjective, and I think
Speaker 1: that would get complicated, there'd be reviews, it would just
Speaker 1: be difficult, right, So like, like I think there are
Speaker 1: some reasons why that wouldn't happen, but like, yeah, we
Speaker 1: think about how it'd be fun. It'd be fun to
Speaker 1: do this rule change, it'd be fun to do that
Speaker 1: rule change. Let's just say that Adam Silver conceptualizes a
Speaker 1: rule change. I'm not even gonna talk about what it is,
Speaker 1: but just this, imagine this theoretical rule change that makes
Speaker 1: the game more fun. That still doesn't solve the problem
Speaker 1: that there's eighty two games and twenty of the thirty
Speaker 1: teams get in like it's still at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, is an urgency problem. And then the last
Speaker 1: piece of this question, the three point shooting. I tend
Speaker 1: to think that there's a nostalgia element with this sort
Speaker 1: of thing, Like we're complaining about the three point and
Speaker 1: shooting now. But the truth of the matter is is
Speaker 1: if I actually made you guys sit down and watch
Speaker 1: a December slate in twenty fourteen or in two thousand
Speaker 1: and four or in nineteen ninety four, I have a
Speaker 1: feeling you're gonna watch a lot of bad basketball in
Speaker 1: that slate. We just as a result of us having
Speaker 1: the Internet at our fingertips and our ability to like
Speaker 1: bitch and moan in public, has made it like more
Speaker 1: of a public topic. But the truth of the matter
Speaker 1: is is like ever since the beginning of basketball, anytime
Speaker 1: there's been a league, there have been teams that played
Speaker 1: good basketball and teams that play bad basketball. So like
Speaker 1: the truth of the matter is, as it pertains to
Speaker 1: the threes, there are teams out there that take a
Speaker 1: lot of bad threes, but there are as also teams
Speaker 1: out there that take a lot of good threes, Like
Speaker 1: the Celtics take the most threes in the NBA. When
Speaker 1: I watch the Celtics, I like the way that they play.
Speaker 1: I think it's esthetically appealing. I was talking with my
Speaker 1: buddy Combo. He had me on his Good Drill podcast
Speaker 1: on Tuesday earlier this week, and he was asking me
Speaker 1: the same question, and one of the things that I
Speaker 1: talked about was like, let's all of you guys who
Speaker 1: actually play in some capacity, whether it's you play with
Speaker 1: your men's league, you play pick up, or you played
Speaker 1: in college or whatever it is when you are on
Speaker 1: the floor and like you beat someone off the dribble
Speaker 1: and you throw a nice kickout pass as you draw
Speaker 1: and help, and then that guy drives and he draws
Speaker 1: help and makes another kickout pass to the guy who
Speaker 1: makes an extra pass to the corner and he's wide open.
Speaker 1: He knocks down a three. It's such a great feeling.
Speaker 1: You're high five in each other on the way up
Speaker 1: the floor. You're like, great pass, great drive, great kick.
Speaker 1: It's like an infectious thing when you move the ball
Speaker 1: around and get a great three point shot. The same
Speaker 1: goes as a fan when you're watching your favorite team,
Speaker 1: like Warriors fans when you're watching and Steph draws two
Speaker 1: at the level and he drops it off to Draymond
Speaker 1: and like he hits kaminga cutting out of the baseline,
Speaker 1: but another guy helps and he swings it out to
Speaker 1: the corner and there's Buddy Heal and he knocks down
Speaker 1: at three. It feels great both as and as a player.
Speaker 1: But then there are there are a lot of bad
Speaker 1: threes getting taken. The classic one that I see a
Speaker 1: lot is like the early clock semi contested above the
Speaker 1: break three after a swing pass, like okay, I'm coming
Speaker 1: off a ball screen, there's a little bit of nail help.
Speaker 1: I just swing it over to the right, and the
Speaker 1: guy just takes like a moderately contested three with like
Speaker 1: twenty five seconds on the shot clock. Excuse me, like
Speaker 1: twenty five feet from the basket, but like fifteen seconds
Speaker 1: on the shot clock. When that happens, if it doesn't
Speaker 1: go in, it kind of feels like bad basketball, right
Speaker 1: like when you're playing with your buddies and someone takes
Speaker 1: an early three, Like even if it's kind of open,
Speaker 1: sometimes you're like, man, like, we could have moved it
Speaker 1: around a little bit, Like it just felt like we
Speaker 1: didn't have any rhythm and flow. Same thing happens when
Speaker 1: you're a fan. You can feel it. You can feel it.
Speaker 1: It's like it's like that government definition of porn. It's
Speaker 1: like you know it when you see it. That's kind
Speaker 1: of the way it is when you see a bad shot.
Speaker 1: You kind of are just like, ah, like I feel
Speaker 1: like we could have done a little better, Like we
Speaker 1: can get a moderately contested three seven seconds later and
Speaker 1: it's no issue. There are a lot of teams in
Speaker 1: the league, or I should say a few teams in
Speaker 1: the league. They're taking a lot of that type of three,
Speaker 1: and that is bad basketball. But again, at the top
Speaker 1: of the league, there's a lot of teams that take
Speaker 1: a lot of threes, that do it in a very
Speaker 1: pretty way, in a way that is esthetically appealing, in
Speaker 1: a way that is infectious for their team, in a
Speaker 1: way that I do consider to be good basketball. And
Speaker 1: so again, what I think is happening is we're seeing
Speaker 1: the bad basketball that's being played by some of the
Speaker 1: teams in the league, and we're constantly complaining about it.
Speaker 1: But the truth of the matter is there were five
Speaker 1: to ten teams playing really bad basketball in twenty fourteen.
Speaker 1: Same thing goes in two thousand and four, and the
Speaker 1: same thing goes in nineteen ninety four. I think it's
Speaker 1: a lot of nostalgia, a lot of like it's mid
Speaker 1: December and we're just coming up with stuff to talk about.
Speaker 1: Why because there's not a lot of urgency, because, like
Speaker 1: we talked about, off the top, there's eighty two games
Speaker 1: and twenty of the thirty teams get in, So like
Speaker 1: my thing is like the real thing that's going to
Speaker 1: fix all these problems is short in the season, and
Speaker 1: they're never going to shorten the season. So we have
Speaker 1: to appreciate at the NBA for what it is, which
Speaker 1: is an inventory sport. That's the difference between the NBA
Speaker 1: and the NFL. The NFL is an urgency sport. The
Speaker 1: NBA is an inventory sport. Even though the NBA ratings
Speaker 1: are so so so much lower than the NFL's, the
Speaker 1: revenue that the NBA generates is considerably closer relative to
Speaker 1: the NFL compared to the ratings situation. Why because they
Speaker 1: have a huge international footprint and they're great at monetizing
Speaker 1: the impressions that come from the NBA in all of
Speaker 1: the inventory that they have, there's just so many highlights
Speaker 1: and moments that they can get into because we do
Speaker 1: play eighty two games, and so again we got to
Speaker 1: just kind of accept the NBA for what it is,
Speaker 1: an inventory sport that's never going to have a great
Speaker 1: deal of urgency during the regular season. The only people
Speaker 1: that are really going to be watching at night and
Speaker 1: night out are people like us. But that doesn't mean
Speaker 1: the league isn't in a healthy spot. That's the thing, like,
Speaker 1: don't confuse a ratings dip with an unhealthy league. Those
Speaker 1: are two very different things. The NBA has a ratings dip.
Speaker 1: They just signed a massive new TV deal. There were
Speaker 1: a lot of people. I remember Klay Travis bitching about
Speaker 1: it NonStop. Oh, this NBA rights bubble, it's gonna blow up,
Speaker 1: It's gonna blow up. He was saying that ten years ago.
Speaker 1: Here we are, we got another massive deal. So, like,
Speaker 1: I'm not particularly concerned about it. I think that there's
Speaker 1: an urgency issue. But I think that same urgency issue
Speaker 1: has been there since the beginning, and all that really
Speaker 1: has changed is we just have more options in The
Speaker 1: NBA is losing out on some of that attention. But
Speaker 1: I still think that the NBA is in a very
Speaker 1: very healthy spot. All right, let's move on to our
Speaker 1: next question. My question actually involves kam He's my favorite
Speaker 1: player of all time, so my opinion on him might
Speaker 1: be slightly biased. I like yourself, I try to stay
Speaker 1: as objective as possible. I've heard you called him, I've
Speaker 1: heard you call him a slightly above average defender before.
Speaker 1: I also heard you say players like Steph are slightly
Speaker 1: above average. I just want to know how you defend
Speaker 1: that Kevin Durant can do everything on defense, which schematically
Speaker 1: is a coach's dream. You want to run small ball,
Speaker 1: Katie is capable of playing center as long as the
Speaker 1: opposing center doesn't have a deep post bag. You want
Speaker 1: to play drop, He's more than capable of playing on
Speaker 1: the perimeter. He's also one of the best help defenders
Speaker 1: in the league. You've said this several times yourself. He's
Speaker 1: capable of being in two places at once, protecting the
Speaker 1: rim and recovering to the corner. He's, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: a pretty damn good one on one defenders. If you
Speaker 1: want to switch him, he's more than capable. I just
Speaker 1: don't see how Steph and him are comparable on the
Speaker 1: defensive end. Yes, Steph has improved from his earlier years
Speaker 1: as a defender. However, with his physical limitations, he's simply
Speaker 1: not capable of impacting the defensive end the way that
Speaker 1: Katie can. So a couple of things like I think
Speaker 1: Katie and Steph are two very very different types of
Speaker 1: defensive players. Like Steph to me, is a very limited
Speaker 1: defensive player in terms of his athletic traits, but a
Speaker 1: guy that has competed on that end at a much
Speaker 1: higher level than most small guards in the league, and
Speaker 1: so he has become a slightly above average. Kevin Durant
Speaker 1: has the physical tools to be Anthony Davis or close.
Speaker 1: Maybe not Anthony Davis, but close in terms of his
Speaker 1: length and his ability to be in multiple places at once.
Speaker 1: At many points in his career, he has demonstrated that,
Speaker 1: but it hasn't been an area where he's like he's
Speaker 1: devoted the majority of his resources, right, Like that's the thing.
Speaker 1: Like there's a version of Cade's career where he obsessively
Speaker 1: commits to the defensive end and he's the best two
Speaker 1: way player in the league. But instead he kind of
Speaker 1: over indexed on offense and he still has had a
Speaker 1: top twelve career in history of the NBA. But like, again,
Speaker 1: like that's the difference. It's like Steph is a guy
Speaker 1: to me who like had serious limitations on that end
Speaker 1: and through obsessive work became above average defender. To me,
Speaker 1: Kevin Durant is a guy that has Tier one defensive
Speaker 1: tools but just didn't use them all the time throughout
Speaker 1: his NBA career. For the record, I think he's had
Speaker 1: an amazing defensive season this year.
Speaker 2: Hey, Jason huge fan of the show.
Speaker 1: I've been watching for a long time and it's great
Speaker 1: seeing how the show has been evolving. Being a clinical psychologist,
Speaker 1: I'm super interested in what's going on with Ben Simmons.
Speaker 1: Keeping in mind he started off his NBA career as
Speaker 1: one of the biggest prospects of the last decade and
Speaker 1: having a lot of success throughout his first years. It's
Speaker 1: been hard to watch to see. It's been a hard
Speaker 1: watched to see him decline. To me, it seems as
Speaker 1: if he's lost all of his confidence in his shooting
Speaker 1: and even layup ability. On many nights he looks unplayable
Speaker 1: on the offensive end due to his lack of willingness
Speaker 1: to even consider attempting a shot. I was of the
Speaker 1: impression that each team must have a professional psychologist that
Speaker 1: specialized in this type of issue, helping athletes get their
Speaker 1: mind back on track when going through phases like this.
Speaker 1: Given how much money he makes, the Nets should be
Speaker 1: super invested in getting him back on back to being
Speaker 1: at least some type of offensive threat. But it feels
Speaker 1: like they've resigned. They have resigned and simply accepted that
Speaker 1: this is not an area of his game that they
Speaker 1: will benefit from just interested in your thoughts on this.
Speaker 1: So I'm not going to sit here and pretend like
Speaker 1: I don't think the mental aspect has played a role
Speaker 1: for Ben Simmons.
Speaker 2: I think it has.
Speaker 1: But I think the majority of what's gone wrong for
Speaker 1: Ben Simmons in his career's health, Like you know, the
Speaker 1: truth of the matter is is it's not really like
Speaker 1: Ben never learned to shoot, or Ben couldn't make layups.
Speaker 1: At the bigger issue as Ben can't move anymore. When
Speaker 1: Ben was at his peak, he was like one of
Speaker 1: the most athletically dominant forwards in the league. He was
Speaker 1: a guy that you would put on the other team's
Speaker 1: best guard and he could completely shut them down. He
Speaker 1: was a guy that was like a freight train in
Speaker 1: transition kicking out to three point shooters. He had such
Speaker 1: an athletically imposing build. And since it's mostly been back
Speaker 1: stuff and like nerve stuff from what I understand, But
Speaker 1: since then, he just hasn't been his mobile and I
Speaker 1: think that has probably affected his skill development. Do I
Speaker 1: think that Ben would have ever become a sniper type
Speaker 1: of shooter. No, but like chances are if he had
Speaker 1: stayed healthy, he would have had more opportunities over the
Speaker 1: years to work on his skill, and he probably would
Speaker 1: have become a little bit more of.
Speaker 2: A viable option there.
Speaker 1: But like to me, by far, the biggest impact that
Speaker 1: led to the derailing of Ben Simmons's career was his injuries,
Speaker 1: specifically with his back, and just how that affected his
Speaker 1: ability to work on his game. Mailback, simple request, how
Speaker 1: are the MAVs shooting above the break three pointers?
Speaker 2: This season? So far?
Speaker 1: It looks to be better this season, but I don't
Speaker 1: have the stats to back that up. So last year
Speaker 1: as a team, they ranked seventh in the league and
Speaker 1: above the break three point percentage at thirty seven point
Speaker 1: four percent. This year is a team, They're at thirty
Speaker 1: eight point eight percent, which ranks fourth in the NBA.
Speaker 1: So yes, they are a little better than last year.
Speaker 1: The big one to me though, is PJ Washington is
Speaker 1: shooting forty nine percent on above the break threes. You
Speaker 1: guys might remember in the NBA Finals that was one
Speaker 1: of the big things that went wrong for the MAVs,
Speaker 1: specifically PJ. Washington and Derek Jones Junior. Derek Jones is gone,
Speaker 1: brought in different guys, Klay Thompson, and Quinton Grimes are
Speaker 1: both shooting over forty percent on above the break threes
Speaker 1: this year.
Speaker 2: But PJ.
Speaker 1: Washington was the guy that they needed. And I talked
Speaker 1: a lot last summer about how I expected PJ. Washington
Speaker 1: to be in the damn gym all summer working on
Speaker 1: that above the break jump shot, and he clearly did.
Speaker 1: Forty nine percent is a real positive uptick for him
Speaker 1: year over a year. Can you make an advanced basketball
Speaker 1: analysis for dummies segment from time to time where you
Speaker 1: break down the situations but explain the concepts or terminology
Speaker 1: to use in your analysis. So I'd be down to
Speaker 1: try this, but I like, there's just so many different concepts.
Speaker 1: So what I would like for you guys to do again,
Speaker 1: like when you put in your comment, if you put
Speaker 1: mail bag with a colon at the beginning of the comment,
Speaker 1: that's like a big shining light that tells me that's
Speaker 1: a mail bag question, which helps me when I'm scrolling
Speaker 1: through like two hundred comments, right, so like mail bag
Speaker 1: and then just put like can you please explain this?
Speaker 1: So like if you hey, can you please explain you know,
Speaker 1: how like a can you please explain how stack pick
Speaker 1: and roll? Works, or can you please explain how can
Speaker 1: you please explain what a post split is and how
Speaker 1: that works? Like you, if you want me to do that,
Speaker 1: just put it in the mail bag and just put
Speaker 1: play a mail bag. Can you please explain whatever? And
Speaker 1: then I will add that as a segment into our
Speaker 1: mail bag to our Friday mail bags. I think that's
Speaker 1: an easy way to do that, and then you guys
Speaker 1: can direct me into the stuff that you specifically want
Speaker 1: to see explained. This is one troll, but it's just
Speaker 1: something I need to clarify. Someone goes out on the Lakers,
Speaker 1: you can't be from LA or be a real Lakers fan.
Speaker 1: I would just assume you are an LBJ fan.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I was born and raised in Tucson, Arizona. I don't
Speaker 1: have any loyalty to any NBA team. I root for
Speaker 1: the Lakers because Lebron James is my favorite player. When
Speaker 1: I was in when I was like early teens, I
Speaker 1: ended up watching Lebron James playing in the early portion
Speaker 1: of his career and watching Lebron. I grew up in
Speaker 1: a a baseball football family, and watching Lebron cause me
Speaker 1: to fall in love with basketball. And then I also
Speaker 1: got super lucky and I got super tall unlike the
Speaker 1: rest of my family, and like that kind of like
Speaker 1: sent my life down that trajectory. But like Lebron has
Speaker 1: is the one player in the league right now that
Speaker 1: I have kind of a sentimental attachment to, simply because
Speaker 1: he was the guy that literally altered the trajectory of
Speaker 1: my life. Like I fell in love with the game
Speaker 1: watching Lebron in two thousand and six try to take
Speaker 1: the Pistons down and lose in seven games. That was
Speaker 1: when I first started watching him, and then I, you know,
Speaker 1: like again, I became a huge basketball fan. But like
Speaker 1: Lebron has always been like my favorite player centering around that.
Speaker 1: Like again, it happened when I was a kid, so
Speaker 1: you can imagine there's like a sentimental type of deal there.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I've been upfront about that from the beginning,
Speaker 1: even to Lakers fans, like I root for the Lakers
Speaker 1: because of Lebron. I have no attachment to the Lakers.
Speaker 1: And when Lebron's retires, like I won't have a single
Speaker 1: team that I actively emotionally root for. I'll have teams
Speaker 1: that I like as a fan and dislike as a fan.
Speaker 1: Like not within the realm of any sort of emotion,
Speaker 1: if that makes sense. Question for the mailbag, why is
Speaker 1: the Lakers GM incompetent and doing absolutely nothing for the Lakers?
Speaker 1: What is his actual role for the Lakers? So I
Speaker 1: do think Rob Polinka is not very good at his job.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: I think it's impot when you say something like that
Speaker 1: that you explain why. I think there's a lot of
Speaker 1: like this guy sucks kind of thing going on where
Speaker 1: people just say it. And I think it's important when
Speaker 1: you make that sort of assertion that you back it
Speaker 1: up with evidence is the wrong word, but provide the
Speaker 1: reasoning behind your analysis, right, because evidence is difficult because
Speaker 1: it's not really it's a very subjective thing. And so
Speaker 1: like there's a certain amount of this where it's like,
Speaker 1: I'm sure if you asked Rob, he would probably make
Speaker 1: a case that defends all the decisions that he made.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: My case for why I don't think Rob is good
Speaker 1: at his job centers around the concept of his basketball
Speaker 1: vision from the beginning when Rob first got the job.
Speaker 1: I should say, after Magic Johnson left, let zoom in
Speaker 1: on the lebron ad Era first, he wants a third star.
Speaker 1: It doesn't work out, so then he goes and he
Speaker 1: gets a bunch of these like pretty big athletic role players, right,
Speaker 1: Like that's the Danny Green. Danny Green, it's you know,
Speaker 1: Avery Bradley, it's JaVale McGee, Dwight Howard.
Speaker 2: It's just this like big athletic team, right.
Speaker 1: And then you're like, okay, well we want to get
Speaker 1: another ball handler. So you flipped Andy Green for Dennis
Speaker 1: Schroeder or whatever. But after that season, it's like, now
Speaker 1: we're flipping all of these role players for Russell Westbrook.
Speaker 1: And then it's like, now, let's try building a team
Speaker 1: around offense. Here's Malik Monk, here's Carmelo Anthony, and now
Speaker 1: there's like no centers or forwards on the roster, and
Speaker 1: it's like, well, now let's try this.
Speaker 2: Now, let's try that.
Speaker 1: There's no coherent basketball vision, like if you asked me,
Speaker 1: and I'm not saying that I should be a GM there.
Speaker 1: That's a very very complicated job. There's a lot more
Speaker 1: that goes into it. But I have a basketball vision,
Speaker 1: like I have a belief in the way that I
Speaker 1: think basketball works, and it tweaks slightly as I take
Speaker 1: on new information each passing year, covering the league. But like,
Speaker 1: I'm a believer that you need to be athletic on
Speaker 1: the perimeter. You need big, functional athletes on the perimeter
Speaker 1: because this is a game that is played in space
Speaker 1: and in transition. Right, Like, I don't know what Rob
Speaker 1: Polinka's basketball philosophy is because every year he's done something
Speaker 1: different and so there's no coherent like this, I don't
Speaker 1: know what Rob Polinka thinks about the game of basketball,
Speaker 1: which I feel like I should right when I watch Boston.
Speaker 1: I know what Brad Stevens' basketball vision is. He wants
Speaker 1: guys that can dribble, shoot, pass, and defend on the perimeter.
Speaker 1: So like even the guys that are like coming off
Speaker 1: the bench for them, the Samhuser's and Peyton Pritchards, they guard,
Speaker 1: they defend, they can play, read and react basketball. There
Speaker 1: is a very specific type of player that you see
Speaker 1: them go after Oklahoma City Sam Presty, same sort of thing.
Speaker 1: You can tell Sam Presty has a basketball vision and
Speaker 1: that every draft pick that he brings in seems to
Speaker 1: fall into that same vision. In that same kind of
Speaker 1: belief system surrounding the game. Golden State, over the last
Speaker 1: two gms, they've had there's been a consistent basketball culture,
Speaker 1: a basketball vision that you see there. The second big
Speaker 1: thing with rob is a strategic mistake that I again,
Speaker 1: there's a bunch that you can get into right Like,
Speaker 1: there's a boatload of mistakes over the years, like letting
Speaker 1: Brook Lopez walk for absolutely nothing, letting Julius Randall walk
Speaker 1: for absolutely nothing. Trading all of your best role players
Speaker 1: for Russell Westbrook was a huge mistake, but even more recently,
Speaker 1: the idea of oh, we're gonna wait to make the
Speaker 1: right deal. Well, you've been waiting two years to make
Speaker 1: the right deal, and now Lebron's about to turn forty
Speaker 1: instead of turning thirty eight. It's very possible that last
Speaker 1: year in April, when Lebron was playing like one of
Speaker 1: the top three or four players in the league, that
Speaker 1: that was the last time that he will ever be
Speaker 1: that good. And so any benefit you gained by waiting
Speaker 1: for the better trade has been undercut by Lebron's older
Speaker 1: and slower Now, is that was an I've those of
Speaker 1: you guys have been watching the show. I have preached
Speaker 1: that exact same take for years. Now, what's the point
Speaker 1: of waiting, like you might get someone a little better.
Speaker 1: But Lebron's really good right now? Why aren't we doing
Speaker 1: this right now? Lebron and Ad were playing at such
Speaker 1: a high level last April. It's very possible that if
Speaker 1: they had put in their draft picks and made some
Speaker 1: sort of ceiling raising move that they get that they
Speaker 1: make a run. It's very possible they led the majority
Speaker 1: of that Nugget series. Two Jamal Murray shots turn the
Speaker 1: series around. It's I'm not saying they would have beat Denver,
Speaker 1: but they might have had a much better chance had
Speaker 1: they been more aggressive last year. So it's been the
Speaker 1: lack of a coherent basketball vision, tons and tons of mistakes,
Speaker 1: and then now just the complete botching of the Lebron
Speaker 1: James tail end of his prime. I think that it's very,
Speaker 1: very important for the Lakers to have synergy between their
Speaker 1: coaching staff and their front office. They absolutely need to
Speaker 1: get Rob Polinka out of there and get somebody in
Speaker 1: there that's not an agency figurehead, that's not a personality type,
Speaker 1: but is rather just a basketball mind, a grinder, someone
Speaker 1: who has a vision, someone who understands what wins in
Speaker 1: the modern NBA and is willing to build that vision
Speaker 1: out over years and years as a culture builds within
Speaker 1: connection and against synergy with the coaching staff to make
Speaker 1: sure you're on the same page as you build a
Speaker 1: basketball culture for the future. And until they do that,
Speaker 1: until Genie Buss empowers a basketball mind and not a
Speaker 1: buddy of hers, it's going to continue to be an issue. Anyway,
Speaker 1: I'm off my sobbocks. Next question, does increased three point
Speaker 1: volume also correlate with higher offensive rebounding rates? If so,
Speaker 1: do you think the greater chance for a second possession
Speaker 1: is a meaningful stat when it comes to shot selection?
Speaker 1: So interestingly enough, I just wanted to do like a
Speaker 1: little tiny bit of research for this one. Top ten
Speaker 1: and three point volume right now per one hundred possessions Boston, Charlotte, Chicago,
Speaker 1: Golden State, Brooklyn, Minnesota, San Antonio, Phoenix, Oklahoma City, Miami,
Speaker 1: Top ten and offensive rebound percentage so percentage of their
Speaker 1: own misses that they recover Houston, Toronto, Memphis, Charlotte, Atlanta, Utah, Portland,
Speaker 1: Golden State, New Orleans, Orlando. So Charlotte and Golden State
Speaker 1: are the only two teams that are on both lists.
Speaker 1: So again, I haven't done any sort of substantial research,
Speaker 1: but on the surface level, it looks like there's not
Speaker 1: much correlation between high volume three point teams and offensive rebounding.
Speaker 1: So again, there are gonna be data departments in some
Speaker 1: of these teams that could do more detailed research, but
Speaker 1: that's just my kind of quick research there that looks
Speaker 1: like there's not too much.
Speaker 2: Of a correlation.
Speaker 1: This is a fun one. Hi to Jason and so
Speaker 1: the rest of your team. My driving buddy, you're the
Speaker 1: voice that keeps me saying driving home after work and
Speaker 1: all these and all this chaotic traffic every day.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: I've been following your channel since you began with the volume,
Speaker 1: and I'm just a fan of your love and colledged basketball.
Speaker 1: Plus we are probably very close in age, so our
Speaker 1: point of view off in a line easily love the show.
Speaker 1: Keep up the good work. Thanks again for the kind words.
Speaker 1: My question is about a basketball scheme that has recently
Speaker 1: been brought up by the Thinking Basketball channel. They recently
Speaker 1: uploaded a video talking about how the Grizzlies are not
Speaker 1: running pick and roll, but instead having their ball handler
Speaker 1: driving into space and then everyone just rotating around. Accordingly,
Speaker 1: Draymond Green also mentioned it in some postgame interview, said
Speaker 1: that he almost never has seen it before.
Speaker 2: I have seen some.
Speaker 1: Comments saying it was an early level college basketball concept,
Speaker 1: but myself never having never been following college basketball scene,
Speaker 1: so I also never saw this either. Do you know
Speaker 1: anything of this scheme? I would I if so, I
Speaker 1: would love to hear your thoughts on this. So okay,
Speaker 1: let's go quickly into just some of the realities here. So,
Speaker 1: the Grizzlies do still run screens, they just don't do
Speaker 1: it nearly as much. To give you an idea, the
Speaker 1: Grizzlies run only twenty pick and rolls including passes per game.
Speaker 1: That's the fewest in the MBA. To give you any idea,
Speaker 1: the Calves run the most in the league. They run
Speaker 1: forty four per game. Twenty seven of the thirty NBA
Speaker 1: teams run at least thirty one ball screens per game.
Speaker 1: Golden State, Denver, and Memphis are the only three teams
Speaker 1: to run less than thirty. But Golden State and Denver
Speaker 1: are both top five in handoffs. Memphis is dead last
Speaker 1: in handoffs two so to put it very light, to
Speaker 1: put it very simply, Memphis runs the fewest two man
Speaker 1: on ball possession like two man game on ball possessions
Speaker 1: in the league. So like Dho's ball screens, things along
Speaker 1: those lines, they do it the least. Okay, the way
Speaker 1: that Memphis offense works, it's a lot. They do run
Speaker 1: some screening action. They run a lot off ball action.
Speaker 1: Like a lot of times they'll have John Murray bring
Speaker 1: the ball up the right side of the floor and
Speaker 1: they'll be running a set to get Desmond Bain coming
Speaker 1: off of something right. And then again, they do still
Speaker 1: run ball screens. They run twenty of them a game. Again,
Speaker 1: not as frequently as other NBA teams, but they do
Speaker 1: still do it.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: The primary method of initiation or Memphis centers around dribble penetration.
Speaker 1: This is unique to the superstar that leads this team.
Speaker 1: The vast majority of players in the NBA have no
Speaker 1: chance keeping Ja Morant in front. Why do we run
Speaker 1: ball screens? This is an important kind of like separate
Speaker 1: topic here. Why do we run ball screens? We run
Speaker 1: ball screens to give our ball handlers an opportunity to
Speaker 1: get downhill. That's literally why we do it. And so
Speaker 1: if I can get downhill without a ball screen, then
Speaker 1: there's just no necessary there's no need for me to
Speaker 1: get a screener involved, right, that's the idea.
Speaker 2: It's a jamarant superpower.
Speaker 1: But the interesting thing enough, interestingly enough, though, it is
Speaker 1: a system that they run with all their units, Like
Speaker 1: they'll do it with their bench groups too, and they'll
Speaker 1: do it with all the players. Like if Scotty Pippen
Speaker 1: Junior catches on the top, he's just gonna look to
Speaker 1: attack off the dribble, Marcus Smart catches on the top,
Speaker 1: he's just gonna look to attack off the dribble. And
Speaker 1: then from there, everybody in their off ball positioning just
Speaker 1: stays fluid. So like if Ja Morant is driving off
Speaker 1: the left wing, and Desmond Bain's in the corner, and
Speaker 1: you know, Jared Jackson is kind of flashing to the
Speaker 1: high post, and there's let's call it Jalen Wells in
Speaker 1: the left wing as Jaws driving, Desmond Baine will cut
Speaker 1: out of the corner along the baseline to try to
Speaker 1: make himself available under the basket. Jalen Wells will wheel
Speaker 1: to the left corner. Everyone just kind of stays in
Speaker 1: motion around because of the simple fact that it's difficult
Speaker 1: to track man and ball right as a help side
Speaker 1: defender if you're standing still it's easier for me to
Speaker 1: track the ball handler. If you're in motion, it's harder
Speaker 1: for me to track the ball handler. You get the point, right,
Speaker 1: So the gist of it is they basically just get
Speaker 1: the defense in rotation via Ja Morant and everyone else's
Speaker 1: but mainly John Moran's dribble penetration, and they play drive
Speaker 1: and kick basketball out of it.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: Other teams have to use screening actions or different methods
Speaker 1: of attack to try to get the defense in rotation,
Speaker 1: but it still is more or less the same concept.
Speaker 1: You don't need a screen as much when John Morant
Speaker 1: is involved. They are really really good at getting dribble
Speaker 1: penetration too, Like they generate the most spot up opportunities
Speaker 1: in the league. Why because they get great drible penetration,
Speaker 1: although they are terrible at converting those spot up possessions,
Speaker 1: as we talked about in the Monday Show. They're also
Speaker 1: fourth in baskets made off of cuts per game. The
Speaker 1: interesting thing is is like they're fifth in offense, but
Speaker 1: I checked it for resilience. They're only eleventh in offense
Speaker 1: against the top ten defenses, which is not bad, but
Speaker 1: not as good as they are in the large sample
Speaker 1: but then they also went into Boston and beat the Celtics.
Speaker 1: And like, if you were asking me, like, oh, Jason,
Speaker 1: what's the type of problem that this type of offense
Speaker 1: could run into? Is like, what if you get some
Speaker 1: a team that really can contain the ball well? And
Speaker 1: the two teams I would look at there are Boston
Speaker 1: and Oklahoma City. Right, Boston and Oklahoma City lots of
Speaker 1: good perimeter defenders. What if they just contained the ball.
Speaker 1: Memphis went into Boston and got to win. They haven't
Speaker 1: played Oklahoma City yet, but I would like to see
Speaker 1: Oklahoma City in the type of matchup as well, because
Speaker 1: Oklahoma City, it's like, what if Keason Wallace is on
Speaker 1: the ball and there's just a bunch of athletes around
Speaker 1: him and they're just they're just good at containing and
Speaker 1: then it becomes an issue.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: And the other thing too, is like if you've got
Speaker 1: really good rim protection, Memphis just has a lot of
Speaker 1: guys that aren't good shooters, and so you can sit
Speaker 1: in the paint and you can do a lot to
Speaker 1: kind of offer help in those sorts of situations too.
Speaker 1: So like it's one of those things where like I'd
Speaker 1: like to just see a lot more of it before
Speaker 1: I take any sort of strong stance. But it is
Speaker 1: a very interesting play style. I played a bunch of
Speaker 1: different offensive systems in my time playing organized basketball. Ironically,
Speaker 1: the only time I ever played in a system like
Speaker 1: this was my last year playing in high school. So
Speaker 1: my senior year, our head coach at that time, Tim Batton,
Speaker 1: he had a system. We had a guard, a really
Speaker 1: really fast guard, and we played a driving kick system.
Speaker 1: So we would do four out with a big in
Speaker 1: the opposite block and then basically like there was no screen,
Speaker 1: was like, just beat that dude off the dribble and
Speaker 1: we play driving kick, and that was that was what
Speaker 1: we ran for the majority of that season. But it's
Speaker 1: not something I ran in any other place that I played,
Speaker 1: and kind of like what Draymond was saying, it is
Speaker 1: a pretty uncommon offensive style. But the reason why is
Speaker 1: because not many teams have John Morant, and so most
Speaker 1: of the time you just kind of feel comfortable with
Speaker 1: your best ball, with your best ball, like on ball
Speaker 1: defenders being able to contain the ball well enough to
Speaker 1: kind of render that type of offense useless, right, But
Speaker 1: like John Morant's a superpower. It's kind of like how
Speaker 1: you know with It's kind of like with teams like Denver,
Speaker 1: they play a very different offensive style than most teams
Speaker 1: in the league because they have Nikola Jokic and Nicole
Speaker 1: Jokich just unlocks of different capability that other teams don't have. Right,
Speaker 1: But very very interesting question, and I'll continue to try
Speaker 1: to build out my understanding of Memphis offense and try
Speaker 1: to help break it down.
Speaker 2: For you guys over the course of this season.
Speaker 1: There's a large portion of Warriors fans who have been
Speaker 1: calling for Steve Curtiy fired ever since the twenty twenty
Speaker 1: two to twenty twenty three seasons struggles. I'm not among them,
Speaker 1: but I am curious to hear your take on his
Speaker 1: role in the Warrior struggles ever since they won the
Speaker 1: championship in twenty two. Its three guard lineups, favoritism of
Speaker 1: older players like Chris Paul and Klay Thompson, and unwillingness
Speaker 1: to play bigs or younger players have all been called
Speaker 1: into question. Where are you on Steve Kerr and the
Speaker 1: job that he's done coaching the Warriors the last three seasons,
Speaker 1: including this one. Thanks, love the show and always appreciate
Speaker 1: you answering our mail back questions. Thanks for the support
Speaker 1: and thanks for the kind words. So here's the thing.
Speaker 1: I'm always hesitant to get on the coach when there
Speaker 1: are roster flaws, like we can we have to call
Speaker 1: it what it is. This roster does have issues as
Speaker 1: it pertains to shot creation beyond steph and interior size. Right,
Speaker 1: that's just the reality of this roster. So like Steve
Speaker 1: Kerr is always trying to confront those problems, right, And
Speaker 1: whenever there's a flawed roster and you have a basketball
Speaker 1: mind trying shit to try to fix it, he's gonna
Speaker 1: have to take some risks. And it's very easy to
Speaker 1: play the results and be like like I don't think
Speaker 1: this is working, or like like, man, he should have
Speaker 1: just done this instead, And it's like you don't think
Speaker 1: he's sitting there thinking like, man, I don't know what
Speaker 1: to do.
Speaker 2: Let's try this.
Speaker 1: This might work, but it's like he could have tried
Speaker 1: something different and it might have failed just as much,
Speaker 1: simply because there are some roster limitations there, Like there
Speaker 1: are things that I disagree with, for instance, like I
Speaker 1: do think that playing a super super long rotation can
Speaker 1: affect player's rhythms sometimes I think that's a realistic criticism.
Speaker 1: But at the same time, there's a flip side to
Speaker 1: that coin, which is the Warriors compete really really hard
Speaker 1: and play really really fast, and it's just hard to
Speaker 1: ask a nine or eight man rotation to do that
Speaker 1: compared to an eleven or twelve man rotation. Right like that,
Speaker 1: there's two sides to that coin, and so it's a
Speaker 1: more complicated discussion than just Steve Kerr is doing the
Speaker 1: wrong thing. I disagree with benching Draymond. I understand why
Speaker 1: they did it to try to open up opportunity for
Speaker 1: Jonathan Kamingo with the starters and hopefully inflate his trade value.
Speaker 1: Here's the thing, your starter's got your butts kicked by
Speaker 1: the Mavericks starters, and in the large part because they're
Speaker 1: five best players on the floor and you have one
Speaker 1: of your best players sitting on the bench. That's a
Speaker 1: decision that I disagree with. But also smart coaches have
Speaker 1: a tendency to audible and do what they need to
Speaker 1: do when the time calls for it. I don't think
Speaker 1: Steve Kerr is gonna leave Raymond on the bench for
Speaker 1: much longer. I wouldn't be surprised if he's back starting
Speaker 1: within the next game or two, Like, I don't think
Speaker 1: that's a decision he's going to stick to. To me,
Speaker 1: it's totally okay for coaches to try shit when they're
Speaker 1: dealing with flawed rosters. To me, it's about adaptability. Can
Speaker 1: you accept when something's not working and make an audible right.
Speaker 1: To JJ Reddick's credit, for the Lakers, he's been trying
Speaker 1: this switching scheme. I really like switching as a fundamental
Speaker 1: back basketball concept. But in order to switch, because there's
Speaker 1: so many disadvantageous rebounding situations and disadvantageous io post up situations,
Speaker 1: you kind of need like five guys that are all
Speaker 1: pretty big and athletic, and the Lakers just aren't big
Speaker 1: and athletics, so they probably shouldn't be switching. They should
Speaker 1: probably be keeping Anthony Davis and Lebron James at the
Speaker 1: rim as much as possible. But to JJ Reddick's credit,
Speaker 1: he tried it for twenty something games, and he's been
Speaker 1: slowly kind of tweaking the system and going back to
Speaker 1: traditional ballscreen coverages where they're asking their guards to chase
Speaker 1: over the top. It's like, again, you try shit, Sometimes
Speaker 1: it works, sometimes it doesn't.
Speaker 2: You have to be adaptable.
Speaker 1: And the bottom line is is like, let's let's synthesize this,
Speaker 1: simplify I should say this Steve curR issue down to
Speaker 1: one topic. How did you guys feel about the Warriors
Speaker 1: going into the season? Like, did you guys view the
Speaker 1: Warriors as a team that was going to be in
Speaker 1: the upper portion of the conference all season? Because they've
Speaker 1: had relative to expectation, they've had a pretty damn good
Speaker 1: start to the season. Like if I told you they're
Speaker 1: going to be fourteen and eleven before the season, you
Speaker 1: wouldn't have been surprised at all. You'd have been like,
Speaker 1: this feels like a fourteen and eleven roster, right. But
Speaker 1: because they got off to a hot start and kicked
Speaker 1: everybody's butt for a few weeks at the start of
Speaker 1: the season, it like tweaked everybody's expectations and now we
Speaker 1: think they're underachieving. But the truth of the matter is
Speaker 1: is just start ranking players around the league. Every team
Speaker 1: out there has two or three Any team that's competing
Speaker 1: for a title has two or three players that are
Speaker 1: in the top thirty forty players in the league. And
Speaker 1: the Warriors have won. It's just really, really difficult to
Speaker 1: compete on a talent level in that sort of circumstance. Hey, Jason,
Speaker 1: love your show. I'm going to try to rapid fire
Speaker 1: through these because I got to be out of here
Speaker 1: in just a few minutes. Hey Jason, love your show.
Speaker 1: What does OKC style of defense look like against an
Speaker 1: offense like the Celtics the thunder play and aggressive ball
Speaker 1: pressure passing lane, Steel's blitzing style of defense. Boston is
Speaker 1: at their best when teams blitz and or double and
Speaker 1: put two on the ball, which allows them to drive
Speaker 1: and kick and get defenses into rotation. I've thought about
Speaker 1: this a lot too, and I'm really really excited to
Speaker 1: watch ok S versus Boston. I was looking, there's one.
Speaker 1: There's one coming up in like the next like month
Speaker 1: or so. I think it's uh, I think it's like yeah,
Speaker 1: I think it's like in the next month or so.
Speaker 1: And it's like not even not even on national television,
Speaker 1: which is like crazy to me because that game just
Speaker 1: needs to be on national television. But we'll be covering
Speaker 1: it when the time comes. But yeah, that's that's the thing.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 1: So he's really aggressive and they and they kind of
Speaker 1: like to be in rotation. Boston is one of the
Speaker 1: best teams in the league at beating teams that are
Speaker 1: in rotation, so it's going to be kind of like
Speaker 1: a unstoppable force versus a movable object. Let's see what happens.
Speaker 1: But I'll definitely get into great detail on that game
Speaker 1: when we finally get to see it. Jason, why do
Speaker 1: you insist Yokich is the best player in the world
Speaker 1: even though Yannis demonstrates the same ability to pass and
Speaker 1: play make is a better score is better off ball offensively,
Speaker 1: is an elite ball handler, and his EON's better defensively.
Speaker 1: I know it's hard to admit you're wrong, but there's
Speaker 1: literally no case for Jokich. Riyanis metrics are not a
Speaker 1: reliable way to evaluate player performance. With all due respect,
Speaker 1: I just disagree with it about everything you said. He
Speaker 1: does not pass as well as Jokich, not even close.
Speaker 1: He doesn't play make as well as Jokich, not even close.
Speaker 1: He's not a better scorer than Yokich. Joll Kich is
Speaker 1: a much better scorer in my opinion, especially when things
Speaker 1: slow down in the half court. Jo Kich is a
Speaker 1: much better off ball offensive player jokicch I would argue
Speaker 1: is a better ball handler too, although I can at
Speaker 1: least see that one closer. The one thing I agree
Speaker 1: with you is, yeah, you're right, Giannis is EON's better
Speaker 1: than Yokic defensively. But I think I disagree with just
Speaker 1: about everything else you said. Another great Jason, what do
Speaker 1: you think Detroit needs to be a top five team
Speaker 1: in the East. Their ceiling looks higher with Thompson back
Speaker 1: in the lineup. Would you be targeting a stretch forward
Speaker 1: or more high motor center to pair with Ivan Cunningham
Speaker 1: did a little bit of Pistons talk in the show
Speaker 1: on Tuesday morning, so you guys, Pistons fans will want
Speaker 1: to get back over and see that. The big thing
Speaker 1: that I'm looking at here is I want upgraded versions
Speaker 1: of Malik Beasley and Tim Hardaway Junior. That game against
Speaker 1: the Heat is such a great example of what happens
Speaker 1: when you put aggressive shooting next to Caid. Kate is
Speaker 1: just so good at hunting shooters. You stole that game
Speaker 1: by just finding the hot hand and Tim Hardaway Junior
Speaker 1: over and over and over again.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: So it's one of those things where like if you
Speaker 1: go go into the draft and you start looking for
Speaker 1: off ball scoring like six seven to six nine wings
Speaker 1: that defend, rebound and can knock down an open shot,
Speaker 1: but like aggressively knock down an open shot. Those are
Speaker 1: the kinds of guys that are going to really raise
Speaker 1: the ceiling of this group. And it kind of coincides
Speaker 1: with their plans, right Like upper lottery draft picks, that's
Speaker 1: where you get like star prospects, right, but in that
Speaker 1: mid lottery and that like seven to fifteen range, that's
Speaker 1: where you can find some pretty high level role players.
Speaker 1: That's where Detroit needs to start hunting for that type
Speaker 1: of off ball talent.
Speaker 2: Would winning the.
Speaker 1: NBA Cup solidify their game for regular season MVP for
Speaker 1: Yannis or Sga or is that a non factor and
Speaker 1: they will likely not outmatch the yoker the joker. Here's
Speaker 1: the thing, It's going to be a total season case,
Speaker 1: but there's no doubt that an MVP for Giannis Orche
Speaker 1: would be a feather in that cap when the time comes.
Speaker 1: Two more quick ones. A bit of a random question
Speaker 1: based on the video, but the Spurs currently have exactly
Speaker 1: a five hundred record but aren't even in the play
Speaker 1: in as a Spurs fan, I would like to know
Speaker 1: would it be better for them to have a round
Speaker 1: of a round playoff experience or first round draft pick
Speaker 1: this year. In general, I'm a big believer in building
Speaker 1: basketball culture, meaning like it would absolutely be better for
Speaker 1: you to try to win and try to get into
Speaker 1: the playoffs and try to compete even if you don't
Speaker 1: think you can win the title, because it's part of
Speaker 1: the culture. Like winning has to be the number one goal,
Speaker 1: it needs to be the entire identity of your franchise.
Speaker 1: And the only way you can do that is if
Speaker 1: you intentionally go about the process of winning every single day,
Speaker 1: even if it might hurt your draft position by one
Speaker 1: or two points. It's one thing if you're not going
Speaker 1: to make the playoffs and you're not even close to
Speaker 1: making the playoffs and you're just trying to tank, but
Speaker 1: like if you're on the fringe, I always think you
Speaker 1: should go for it. Last question, what are your thoughts
Speaker 1: on the new All Star game format? Is the All
Speaker 1: Star Game dead And for those of you guys that can't see,
Speaker 1: They're gonna split the guys into three teams and then
Speaker 1: like one of the young teams play and then they're
Speaker 1: basically gonna do like semi finals and finals games to forty.
Speaker 1: It's a good idea, but it's only gonna work if
Speaker 1: the guys compete, So whether or not they compete will
Speaker 1: end up being the determining factor, and there's only one
Speaker 1: way to find out. We gotta try it optimistic, but
Speaker 1: we'll see when we get there. All right, guys, that's
Speaker 1: all I have for today, is always it. Sincerely appreciate
Speaker 1: you guys for supporting me and supporting the show. We
Speaker 1: will be back on Monday morning without power rankings.
Speaker 2: I will see you guys.
Speaker 1: That the volume