Speaker 1: The volume td Tuddy taking it to the house in
Speaker 1: for six. Whatever you call a touchdown, one thing's for sure,
Speaker 1: touchdowns matter more at Draft Kings Sportsbook, an official sportsbook
Speaker 1: partner of the NFL. On the ground, in the air,
Speaker 1: from the special teams or defense, we don't care how
Speaker 1: they score them. We want to bet on touchdowns, and
Speaker 1: Draft Kings Sportsbook is delivering. Ready to place your first bet.
Speaker 1: Try betting on something simple like picking a player to
Speaker 1: score a touchdown or how many tds will be in
Speaker 1: a game. Go to DraftKings Sportsbook app and make your pick.
Speaker 1: The game I have in my eye on this week
Speaker 1: is Ravens Cowboys. I think both teams need that game badly.
Speaker 1: I'm a Cowboys fan. To very predictable start to the
Speaker 1: season for the Cowboys, but I'm really really excited for
Speaker 1: this weekend. Ready to do a touchdown dance of your own.
Speaker 1: New DraftKings customers bet five dollars to get two hundred
Speaker 1: dollars in bonus bets. Instantly score big with Draft Kings Sportsbook,
Speaker 1: the number one place to bet touchdowns. Download the DraftKings
Speaker 1: Sportsbook app and use code hoops. That's h oops, that's
Speaker 1: code Hoops for new customers to get two hundred dollars
Speaker 1: in bonus bets when you bet just five bucks only
Speaker 1: on DraftKings. The crown is yours. Gambling problem called one
Speaker 1: eight hundred gambler In New York call eight seven seven
Speaker 1: eight hope en why, or text hope n why to
Speaker 1: four six seven three six nine. In Connecticut, help is
Speaker 1: available for problem gambling. Call eight eight eight seven eight
Speaker 1: nine seven seven seven seven 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 jurisdiction.
Speaker 1: Void in Ontario. Bonus bets expire one hundred and sixty
Speaker 1: eight hours after issuance. For additional terms and responsible gaming resources,
Speaker 1: see DKNNG dot co slash ft ball. All right, welcome
Speaker 1: to Hoops tonight. You're at the volume. Happy Friday, everybody.
Speaker 1: I hope all of you guys had a great week.
Speaker 1: Got a jam packed show for you today. Got a
Speaker 1: little bit of NBA news today. Joel Embiid has signed
Speaker 1: a three year, one hundred and ninety three million dollars
Speaker 1: maximum extension, so he's now locked up for the next
Speaker 1: five years at an average annual salary of sixty million dollars.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna talk about that a little bit off
Speaker 1: the top. And then we're continuing with our power rankings
Speaker 1: today with number fourteen through number twelve season preview style,
Speaker 1: so we'll be doing season previews on the New Orleans Pelicans,
Speaker 1: the Golden State Warriors, and the Indiana Pacers. You guys
Speaker 1: have the drope before we get started. Subscribe to the
Speaker 1: Hoops Tonight YouTube channel so you don't miss any more
Speaker 1: of our videos. Follow me on Twitter at underscore Jason Lts.
Speaker 1: You guys, don't miss show announcements. Don't forget about a
Speaker 1: podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts under Hoops Tonight.
Speaker 1: Don't forget it's also helpful if you leave a rating
Speaker 1: and a review on that front. And then, last but
Speaker 1: not least, keep dropping mail bag questions in the YouTube
Speaker 1: comments so we can keep hitting them throughout the remainder
Speaker 1: of this year. All right, let's talk some basketball. So
Speaker 1: the Joel Embiid extension three years, one hundred and ninety
Speaker 1: three million, locked up for five years at an average
Speaker 1: annual salary of sixty million, and there's a couple of
Speaker 1: different angles to look at this from. I understand why
Speaker 1: Daryl Morey and the Sixers did this. The Sixers have
Speaker 1: been a disappointing team, right. They haven't achieved as much
Speaker 1: as certainly people in Philly have hoped for over the
Speaker 1: course of this last few years. Right. And it got
Speaker 1: a little weird last year, right, Like we had Joel
Speaker 1: Embiid showing up with Paul George to a playoff broadcast
Speaker 1: before that deal was done, which is like a legitimate,
Speaker 1: like kind of passive aggressive type of pressure move to
Speaker 1: be like we need more firepower. Right, And it's been
Speaker 1: a weird saga over the course of the Embiid experience, right,
Speaker 1: Like we had to hold Ben Simmons thing and how
Speaker 1: that went south. Obviously, Joel Embiid was very fond of
Speaker 1: Jimmy Butler and wanted him, and then he ended up
Speaker 1: getting a Tobias Harris ended up getting preferred over Jimmy
Speaker 1: Butler over the course of that summer, which ended up
Speaker 1: being something that Joel Embiid did some passive aggressive stuff
Speaker 1: kind of surrounding that move. Right. So you're basically it
Speaker 1: seems as though you're one trade and record like one
Speaker 1: bad season away from potentially a trade demand. Right. So
Speaker 1: locking up Joel Embiid helps that in two ways. One,
Speaker 1: it's a gesture of good faith. Right, You're offering an
Speaker 1: enormous amount of money to Joel Embiid after the specific
Speaker 1: season where most of your concerns about Embiid's floor came
Speaker 1: to the surface, right between him not even playing half
Speaker 1: the season and not being able to get his team
Speaker 1: out of the first round and looking like he was
Speaker 1: wearing down at the end of those Knicks games. Right,
Speaker 1: So it's an act of good faith after a season
Speaker 1: like that to offer him such a massive guarantee that
Speaker 1: builds cachet in that relationship. Right. And then the second
Speaker 1: piece of it is it makes his contract borderline untradeable
Speaker 1: in the sense that even where if Embiid were to
Speaker 1: request a trade it would be difficult to find willing
Speaker 1: trade partners at that point, which almost kind of further
Speaker 1: anchors Joel Embiid in Philly. Right. But I also understand
Speaker 1: the NBA fan base at large and how they would
Speaker 1: look at this and be like, what the hell are
Speaker 1: you guys doing, Because now you have, on average for
Speaker 1: the next four years, over one hundred and ten million
Speaker 1: dollars guaranteed tied up in Paul George and Joel Embiid,
Speaker 1: two players who are notoriously hurt all the time. I
Speaker 1: pulled this thatt this morning. In the last five years
Speaker 1: combined for those two guys, so ten total seasons, they've
Speaker 1: reached sixty games three times. Between the two of them
Speaker 1: combined over the last five years. They're notoriously unavailable, and
Speaker 1: with exception of little short bursts, both of them notoriously
Speaker 1: seem to go down a signific level in terms of
Speaker 1: their winning impact when they get to the postseason. Right. So, like,
Speaker 1: I think that's fair criticism, and I understand how people
Speaker 1: from the outside looking in would say that. But this
Speaker 1: is where we have to be honest about the reality
Speaker 1: of this situation. The Sixers are in the Joe l.
Speaker 1: Embiid business. There's really no version of that business that
Speaker 1: doesn't carry an enormous amount of risk. There's just as
Speaker 1: much risk in not extending him, because then what if
Speaker 1: he does end up requesting a trade, what if he
Speaker 1: does end up testing free agency. There's risk there as
Speaker 1: as well as well, even if you were to offer
Speaker 1: him a lower extension like hey, like, hey, we want
Speaker 1: to lock you up for five years, but you know
Speaker 1: we're not going to come in at that super max number.
Speaker 1: Let's see if we can come in somewhere lower. That
Speaker 1: could just insult the guy. And now you're in the
Speaker 1: same boat. Right. There was risk in not going after
Speaker 1: Paul George this summer. It's very possible that if you
Speaker 1: do nothing this summer, you end up in the same
Speaker 1: type of situation where Joel Embiid is unhappy and potentially
Speaker 1: requests to trade. I'm sure if you injected truth serum
Speaker 1: into Daryl Moury and asked him, like, would you prefer
Speaker 1: to build around a star who always plays seventy five
Speaker 1: games and consistently goes up a level in the postseason,
Speaker 1: I'm sure he would. But that's not the deck of
Speaker 1: cards that Darryl Moury has been dealt. He took over
Speaker 1: as general manager of a team that is built around
Speaker 1: Joel Embiid. When you're building around Joel Embiid, there is
Speaker 1: inherent risk there. And as soon as you go out
Speaker 1: of the Joel Embiid business. Let's say you traded him
Speaker 1: this summer before you extended him when he's more tradable,
Speaker 1: then you immediately lose all relevance. I like Tyre's Maxy,
Speaker 1: good young player, but you're not getting Paul George without
Speaker 1: Joel Embiid. And without Paul George or Joel Embiid, you're
Speaker 1: a basement of the Eastern Conference type of team. So like,
Speaker 1: I get it, how from the outside looking in, we
Speaker 1: might look at it and go man one hundred and
Speaker 1: ten million guaranteed for the next four years on average
Speaker 1: annually tied up in two players that routinely miss like
Speaker 1: at least a third of the season and both struggle
Speaker 1: in the playoffs. I get why from the outside looking
Speaker 1: in that looks tricky, But if I was GM of
Speaker 1: the seventy six ers, I think I'd probably do the
Speaker 1: same thing, because as soon as you've decided we're building
Speaker 1: around Joel Embiid. This is kind of the reality of
Speaker 1: how this works. So to put it simply, Darryl Moury
Speaker 1: has made an extremely risky series of moves this summer,
Speaker 1: but his franchise is built around the riskiest star in
Speaker 1: the league. So it's kind of just the reality of
Speaker 1: the way you have to do business when you're building
Speaker 1: around Joel. And there's another side to this, coin that
Speaker 1: you have to factor in when you're having this conversation.
Speaker 1: As of right now on DraftKings, the Sixers have the
Speaker 1: third best odds to win the title. Now I don't
Speaker 1: have them quite that high, but I have them very high,
Speaker 1: and I have consistently said that Joel Embiid is one
Speaker 1: of the small handful of players in the NBA who
Speaker 1: is capable of legitimately going on a wrecking ball tour
Speaker 1: and just kicking everybody's ass and getting the trophy. Most
Speaker 1: gms aren't building around stars that have that type of upside,
Speaker 1: So maybe those gms can be more risk averse, but
Speaker 1: they're not winning the trophy anytime soon, right and beat
Speaker 1: is thirty years old. He has this short window here,
Speaker 1: probably in that thirty to thirty three age where maybe
Speaker 1: if everything goes right, you can win the title. After
Speaker 1: that you're fucked anyway. He's been hurt way too many times,
Speaker 1: the wear and tear in every on his body. He's
Speaker 1: not the kind of guy that's gonna be good at
Speaker 1: thirty seven, thirty eight years old, So you like you're
Speaker 1: there is no long term window here anyway. This is
Speaker 1: very much a short get it while you can type
Speaker 1: of window, so you might as well put all the
Speaker 1: support you possibly can behind him and see if you
Speaker 1: can get it done. The last example I would use
Speaker 1: for this is remember the Kauhi trade to Toronto, and again,
Speaker 1: like it's not exactly the same type of comparison, but
Speaker 1: it has some similarities in the sense that everyone around
Speaker 1: the league knew Kauhi wanted to go to Los Angeles.
Speaker 1: Everyone around the league knew if you traded for Kawhi
Speaker 1: that year and you weren't one of the LA teams,
Speaker 1: that it was a one year rental. There was like
Speaker 1: that tiny little crack of hope like maybe if you
Speaker 1: just wow him he might stay. But you can't do
Speaker 1: any better than Toronto did that summer anyway, and he
Speaker 1: still left. But here's the thing, Toronto made the trade.
Speaker 1: Kawhi did leave, and Toronto's been bad ever since, but
Speaker 1: they have the Larry O'Brian Trophy and that shit is forever.
Speaker 1: So like, if I'm Daryl Moray, you know how we
Speaker 1: all know how Daryl Mourray does business too. He's got
Speaker 1: his algorithm where he basically calculates a percentage chance that
Speaker 1: he thinks his team has to win the title and
Speaker 1: most of his decision making his geared towards trying to
Speaker 1: increase that percentage. There's a lot of potential bad outcomes
Speaker 1: for the Sixers this year. We all know that maybe
Speaker 1: Paul George plays fifty games and NB plays forty five
Speaker 1: games and they end up in the fifth or sixth
Speaker 1: seed and they lose a first round series. Maybe that's
Speaker 1: what happens, but there's also like a legitimate pathway here
Speaker 1: that ends in them holding the trophy. They're a lot
Speaker 1: closer to the trophy than most of the teams in
Speaker 1: the league, So once we acknowledge that they're in the
Speaker 1: high risk, high reward business, I think these moves make
Speaker 1: a lot of sense. You needed to substantially improve and
Speaker 1: beat supporting cast this summer. Going after Paul George was
Speaker 1: the only real way to do that. You need to
Speaker 1: cement Joel Embiid in Philly to make it so that
Speaker 1: you have multiple years to try to make this work.
Speaker 1: Extending him was the best chance to do that. And
Speaker 1: if I was gm of the six Ers, I would
Speaker 1: have done the same thing. So I think like it's
Speaker 1: easy to look at other situations around the league and
Speaker 1: to be like that situation's better, that situation's better, and
Speaker 1: you might be right, But Daryl Morey doesn't have the
Speaker 1: luxury of just cherry picking which situation he wants to
Speaker 1: be in. He's in Philly. He's got to deal with
Speaker 1: Philly's hand of cards, and I think these are the
Speaker 1: right moves within that context. All right, Let's get into
Speaker 1: our season previews, starting with number fourteen. The New Orleans Pelicans.
Speaker 1: A lot of turnover for them this summer. They lose
Speaker 1: Dyson Daniels, Najie Marshall, Larry Nants Junior, Jonas Valanciunas, and
Speaker 1: Cody Zeller. They had Javonte Green, an athletic wing who
Speaker 1: played for Chicago last year, Daniel Tice. They drafted Eves
Speaker 1: Missy in the late first round. He's like an athletic
Speaker 1: center prospect. And then the major move this summer, they
Speaker 1: traded for Jontey Murray, obviously giving up in that deal
Speaker 1: Dyson Daniels and Larry Ant Junior, as well as some
Speaker 1: draft compensation. He's one of my favorite players in the
Speaker 1: league and a guy that I desperately wanted the Lakers
Speaker 1: to get and a guy that I think Pelicans fans
Speaker 1: will love. So when we're talking about next season, Let's
Speaker 1: start with Dejonte. Dejontay brings an element to the Pelicans
Speaker 1: backcourt that they didn't have. Zion obviously brings like real
Speaker 1: downhill force to his game, but Brandon Ingram and c
Speaker 1: Jim McCollum didn't or don't, I should say they're still
Speaker 1: in the roster. They are finesse pull up shooters. They
Speaker 1: can get to the rim. Brandon got to the rim
Speaker 1: plenty mostly as part of screening actions. When the coverage
Speaker 1: has the ability for them to get by their defender
Speaker 1: and get into the basket area. Those guys can take
Speaker 1: advantage of that. But they're not like, face up with
Speaker 1: really good perimeter defenders and get dribble penetration type of guys.
Speaker 1: That's not what Brandon and CJ do. Dejonte's really good
Speaker 1: at that. De Jonte can beat good perimeter defenders off
Speaker 1: the dribble straight up. But he also has the same
Speaker 1: type of counter in pull up jump shooting situations that
Speaker 1: Brandon and CJ had. Brandon CJ both shot forty five
Speaker 1: percent on pull up jump shots last year. De Jonte
Speaker 1: Murray shot forty five percent on pull up jump shots
Speaker 1: last year. There were sixteen players in the NBA that
Speaker 1: attempted at least five hundred pu up jump shots last year.
Speaker 1: Dejonte's one point zero three points per possession ranked eighth
Speaker 1: on that list. He was a good, efficient, high volume
Speaker 1: pull up jump shooter. He was more efficient on pull
Speaker 1: up jump shots than Damian Lillard was last year. So like,
Speaker 1: there's a real drive and kick kind of element with
Speaker 1: Dejonte that you can get in terms of beating people
Speaker 1: off the dribble and getting people into rotation while also
Speaker 1: bringing that over the top shot making that has become
Speaker 1: a staple of what has made the Pelicans good over
Speaker 1: the years. Right, he made the fifth most clutch shots
Speaker 1: in the entire NBA last year because of his ability
Speaker 1: to knock down shots over the top. He's also a
Speaker 1: good passer. He averaged six assists per game playing next
Speaker 1: to Trey Young his last season in San Antonio before
Speaker 1: he came over to Atlanta, he averaged nine point two
Speaker 1: assists with just two point six turnovers. That's awesome, and
Speaker 1: more importantly, he just had the best off ball season
Speaker 1: of his career. He converted spot ups at one point
Speaker 1: one five points per possession. That's in the seventy ninth
Speaker 1: percentile out of the thirty seven players in the league
Speaker 1: to log at least three hundred spot up possessions, he
Speaker 1: ranked eleventh. That's really really good, and that's something that
Speaker 1: used to be weakness of his. Now I know there's
Speaker 1: some hesitancy surrounding him on the defensive end of the floor,
Speaker 1: and there's some reality there, like he was in all
Speaker 1: defense caliber guard when he was in San Antonio. Wasn't
Speaker 1: like that in Atlanta. But I'm a big believer in
Speaker 1: basketball culture, and Atlanta did not have a defensive minded culture.
Speaker 1: And so this is a Pelicans team that was top
Speaker 1: ten in defense last year. It's part of the identity
Speaker 1: organizationally from the top down if you get buy in again.
Speaker 1: And then there's also just the sheer amount of offensive
Speaker 1: talent on this team when you have Trey Murphy, Zion Williamson,
Speaker 1: Brandon Ingram CJ. McCollum. There's just a lot more ball
Speaker 1: handling and playmaking ability on this team than Atlanta had,
Speaker 1: which was a traditional four out, one in your turn,
Speaker 1: my turn type of offense between two guys. There's gonna
Speaker 1: be more resources that Dejonte can devote to that end.
Speaker 1: Of the floor. But yeah, like, if you're asking me,
Speaker 1: what are some of the swing factors around this deal
Speaker 1: as to whether or not it'll work extremely well or
Speaker 1: not as well, one of those major swing factors is
Speaker 1: going to be does Dejonte defend the way that he's
Speaker 1: capable of? And that's totally fair to bring up. But
Speaker 1: I do think that New Orleans is more set up
Speaker 1: to accentuate that part of Dejonte's game. I think New
Speaker 1: Orleans has a chance to be a devastating drive and
Speaker 1: kick team if they utilize Zion at the beginning of
Speaker 1: possessions to pressure the rim and make kickout passes. And
Speaker 1: by the way, Dejonte can do the same thing. There's
Speaker 1: now two layers to that. They have incredible spot up talent.
Speaker 1: De Jontay Murray one point one to five points per
Speaker 1: spot up possession. That's insanely good. CJ. McCollum one point
Speaker 1: three to two points for spot up possession. That was
Speaker 1: one of the best marks in the league last year.
Speaker 1: Trey Murphy one point one eight, Brandon Ingram one point
Speaker 1: oh eight. That's solid. Herb Jones one point oh nine.
Speaker 1: That's solid. The Pelicans as a team last year we're
Speaker 1: second in spot up efficiency in the entire league, and
Speaker 1: you just added another guy who can both capitalize on
Speaker 1: spot up situation and pressure the rim consistently. I think
Speaker 1: it's a legitimate offensive upgrade. Now where it gets weird
Speaker 1: is how does this all fit together? Right? Where does
Speaker 1: brandon Ingram fit into this? How do you start constructing lineups?
Speaker 1: There's a lot of talk because Daniel Tye is the
Speaker 1: only proven NBA center on the roster right now, and
Speaker 1: he's basically a backup. Right, there's a lot of talk
Speaker 1: of Zion starting at center. If they start Zion at center,
Speaker 1: your lineup is Cee, Jim McCollum, de Jontay Murray, Herb Jones,
Speaker 1: Brandon Ingram, and Zion Williamson. Like, that's a ton of
Speaker 1: offensive skill, obviously coming with some downsides, right, very small
Speaker 1: and weak defensively on that front line with the with
Speaker 1: your forwards, But on the other end of the floor,
Speaker 1: you're going to be very fast and borderline impossible to
Speaker 1: guard in space. There's a given a take, right, So, Like,
Speaker 1: I think it's worth trying throw it out there for
Speaker 1: twenty thirty games. See what happens if it ends up
Speaker 1: being an absolute disaster and your defense is not good
Speaker 1: enough and the offense isn't enough to make up for
Speaker 1: that gap, then you can get more aggressive about trying
Speaker 1: to make some sort of consolidation trade and try to
Speaker 1: turn one of these guys like cj Orbi into somebody
Speaker 1: that you can use on that frontline to anchor those units.
Speaker 1: But I think it's worth giving a try, and I
Speaker 1: think there's enough talent there that even if you dropped
Speaker 1: some games, like if you lost to Denver or you
Speaker 1: lost to like another big physical frontline like the Lakers,
Speaker 1: because you just don't have that size on the front line,
Speaker 1: but you're still, you know, fifteen and seven because your
Speaker 1: offense is incredible and you beat the shit out of
Speaker 1: everyone else. Like that's fine, You're floating along. That's a
Speaker 1: decision that you can make and deal with in February.
Speaker 1: I mean, the Knicks are in the same boat with
Speaker 1: this Julius Randall thing. It's like, yeah, it's a little clunky,
Speaker 1: don't know how he fits in the grand scheme of things,
Speaker 1: but like what's the rush. Send them all out there,
Speaker 1: let him hoop, see what happens. Basketball's more art than science.
Speaker 1: I talk about this all the time. Like sometimes you
Speaker 1: just put a bunch of guys together and it just
Speaker 1: magically comes together, and all of a sudden, it's like,
Speaker 1: holy shit, what are we watching? And when you've got
Speaker 1: this kind of talent, it's at least worth throwing these
Speaker 1: guys out there and just seeing what happens. Now. On
Speaker 1: the defensive end, it is hard to build any sort
Speaker 1: of traditional look without a real defensive anchor, a guy
Speaker 1: that can defend in ball screens in some way, whether
Speaker 1: it's a high drop or a deep drop or whatever
Speaker 1: it is that you want to do, and then that
Speaker 1: can also help control the defensive glass. It's challenging to
Speaker 1: do without a real center, but there is talent there.
Speaker 1: You have a lot of length, you have a lot
Speaker 1: of speed, especially on the perimeter right. You got a
Speaker 1: lot of guys that can guard at the point of attack.
Speaker 1: So like, if you don't have a giant guy underneath
Speaker 1: the basket that can drop in ball screens and defend
Speaker 1: a grab defensive rebounds, then as a team you have
Speaker 1: to positionally be ready to protect the paint. What that
Speaker 1: means is one, you got to can the basketball and
Speaker 1: control dribble penetration. Another way, you could do that too.
Speaker 1: By switching ball screens, you can shut off dribble penetration.
Speaker 1: But it's going to be so much more important on
Speaker 1: the backside for guys to make their rotations quickly, because
Speaker 1: if you're going to protect the rim, it's not going
Speaker 1: to be vertically because you don't have real interior size.
Speaker 1: It's got to be positionally, meaning it's about guys on
Speaker 1: the backside. When people do get beat off the dribble,
Speaker 1: those guys have to be quick and precise in their
Speaker 1: rotations and positionally put themselves between the ball handler and
Speaker 1: the rim where they can either take a charge or
Speaker 1: at least force that guy to veer off into a
Speaker 1: different direction. Right, So it's going to be a really
Speaker 1: difficult job. And then on the defensive glass, everyone's got
Speaker 1: to fly around, everyone's got to box out, everyone's got
Speaker 1: to crack down from the wings. And then the last
Speaker 1: piece of it is when you have opportunities to use
Speaker 1: that speed against interior size, you have to take advance
Speaker 1: of it. That's spreading teams out and driving kicking them
Speaker 1: to death. And then when you see opportunities to get
Speaker 1: out and transition and beat slow foot and bigs up
Speaker 1: the floor, again, like we always talk about styles make fights,
Speaker 1: but it's usually which style wins the fight. If there's
Speaker 1: a big team playing against a small team, if the
Speaker 1: big team is better at doing big guys stuff then
Speaker 1: the small team is at doing small guys stuff, then
Speaker 1: the big team will win and everyone will be like, man,
Speaker 1: they're just too small to guard us. But if the
Speaker 1: small team does more small guy stuff and does it
Speaker 1: more impactfully than the big team does, then you'll come
Speaker 1: out of that game and you'll be like, man, they're
Speaker 1: just too slow for us. Those are the pushes and
Speaker 1: pulls that you have to win. That said, like, this
Speaker 1: was a team last year that was top ten in
Speaker 1: defense and top ten and rebounding. I'm not sure if
Speaker 1: they can get there without a real starting center in
Speaker 1: the fold. So it feels like this inevitably ends with
Speaker 1: Brandon Ingram being traded for front court depth. But it's
Speaker 1: just really hard to find willing trade partners there. So
Speaker 1: this is like a really funky team that's around a
Speaker 1: built around a very funky traditional or non traditional i
Speaker 1: should say, foundational star in Zion. So it's really hard
Speaker 1: to predict what the Pelicans are going to look like
Speaker 1: this year. Right now, I'm going to say a playing team,
Speaker 1: but this team has a very wide range of outcomes
Speaker 1: for the season, and I think the Pelicans are on
Speaker 1: the short list of teams that I think we're going
Speaker 1: to learn the most about in the first month or
Speaker 1: so of the season. All right, next number thirteen, the
Speaker 1: Golden State Warriors little bit of roster turnover. They lost
Speaker 1: Chris Paul Dariosarch and Klay Thompson. They added Kyle Anderson,
Speaker 1: Buddy Healed, and Anthony Melton. Offseason for the Warriors actually
Speaker 1: reminds me a lot of the twenty twenty two offseason
Speaker 1: in that you're finding discounted role players, but not necessarily
Speaker 1: that are more talented than what you have, but just
Speaker 1: fit Warriors basketball better, Right, Like that twenty twenty one
Speaker 1: team that was like Kelly Ubray and Kent Bazemore and
Speaker 1: Brad Wannamaker. It's like, it's not like those guys are
Speaker 1: demonstrably better than Otto Porter, right or Na Manna Bielitsa.
Speaker 1: It's more just that those guys fit better into what
Speaker 1: Golden State was trying to do, right. That's what I
Speaker 1: like about these three guys. Kyle Anderson very good defensive forward.
Speaker 1: You can play both on and off the ball. Of
Speaker 1: all of the guys that Minnesota tried on Luka Doncic
Speaker 1: in the Conference finals, I thought Kyle was by far
Speaker 1: their best option. He's particularly good at bigger forwards that
Speaker 1: like to use size and strength to get to spots,
Speaker 1: but he's also a good off ball player. He's got
Speaker 1: great length, He's a very smart defender, and then on
Speaker 1: the offensive end. I think he'll thrive as a playmaker
Speaker 1: and Golden State system, he had four point two assists
Speaker 1: to just one point two turnovers last year. He was
Speaker 1: one of only fourteen players in the entire NBA to
Speaker 1: play at least twenty minutes per game but to log
Speaker 1: and assist a turnover ratio of at least three point
Speaker 1: five to one. He's an efficient playmaker, and as we know,
Speaker 1: in Golden State system, they usually have two dribble handoff
Speaker 1: folcrums that are non shooters. When they're flowing from side
Speaker 1: to side with action right Dreymonald dribble over into a
Speaker 1: dribble handoff with Padjemskik or Steph coming off one side,
Speaker 1: and then that guy comes off and throws a swing
Speaker 1: pass to the second guy usually Loony or Trace Jackson
Speaker 1: Davis or something like that, and it's like that guy
Speaker 1: turns and he runs the next dribble handoff, and usually
Speaker 1: one of those guys ends up drawing their screen defender
Speaker 1: out onto the ball handler of Steph or Pods or
Speaker 1: Clay whoever it was last year, and then there's a
Speaker 1: slip opportunity there, and then that guy needs to make plays.
Speaker 1: Or if Kyle Anderson in this case, is dribbling at
Speaker 1: that second side action and the defender's top locking, meaning
Speaker 1: that defender is not allowing the use of the screen,
Speaker 1: he's forcing a backcut. You need a guy that can
Speaker 1: consistently make those backcut passes. I mean, Kyle Anderson's gonna
Speaker 1: do that really, really well. He scored well on the
Speaker 1: role last year. He got one point twenty seven points
Speaker 1: per possession on rollman possessions. That's very good. And he's
Speaker 1: also just a good ball handler in general. I'm actually
Speaker 1: gonna be really curious to see if the Warriors run
Speaker 1: more inverted ball screens with Steph as the screener. They
Speaker 1: did a little bit of this over the last few
Speaker 1: years with Andrew Wiggins, but Anderson is a better decision
Speaker 1: maker and a better ball handler in that spot. And
Speaker 1: so I'm actually really curious to see if we get
Speaker 1: a lot of that where it's like Kyle Anderson dribbling
Speaker 1: the ball while Steph just screens for him. Because Steph's
Speaker 1: man is not going to help on a Kyle Anderson
Speaker 1: drive and so so if he does, Steph's gonna get
Speaker 1: wide open on the slip, and if he doesn't, Kyle's
Speaker 1: going to turn the corner and get right downhill to
Speaker 1: the rim. As soon as Kyle gets right downhill to
Speaker 1: the rim, because the guy set in the screens not
Speaker 1: helping Kyle's defender, He's gonna get downhill and be able
Speaker 1: to wreck havoc. As a playmaker at that point, I
Speaker 1: think it's going to be a really useful player on
Speaker 1: a discounted deal. Buddy healed Klay Thompson last year gave
Speaker 1: you eighteen points, three rebounds, and two assists on fifty
Speaker 1: eight percent true shooting, and he had his worst defensive
Speaker 1: season in a long time, and he wasn't very impactful
Speaker 1: in the glass. Buddy healed twelve points, three rebounds, three
Speaker 1: assists on fifty eight percent true shooting, but he played
Speaker 1: fewer minutes. If you extrapolate both players out to per
Speaker 1: thirty six, Clay was about twenty two points per thirty
Speaker 1: six minutes, Buddy was at about seventeen, so not quite
Speaker 1: the amount of scoring production. Here's a couple more key
Speaker 1: numbers for you guys, Klay Thompson one point one zero
Speaker 1: points per possession in off screen situations, one point zero
Speaker 1: nine points per possession in spot up situations, one point
Speaker 1: one one points per jump shot. Buddy healed zero point
Speaker 1: eighty seven points per possession off screen, so not as efficient,
Speaker 1: but he was much much lower volume. He was doing
Speaker 1: a lot of like ghost screens for Tyrese Haliburton, which
Speaker 1: register actually has Rollman possessions on Synergy. But that was
Speaker 1: like one of Indiana's most impactful actions last year, and
Speaker 1: it still functions essentially as like a movement shot in
Speaker 1: his screening action. And then one point zero one points
Speaker 1: per possession and spot up situations. That's pretty mediocre, but
Speaker 1: he did shoot the ball well one point one to
Speaker 1: one points per jump shot. So here's the thing. Buddy.
Speaker 1: Buddy's smaller, and he's overall a less impactful movement shooter
Speaker 1: than Clay is, but Buddy Yield is three years younger
Speaker 1: and costs about half as much in guaranteed money. Also,
Speaker 1: Klay Thompson is very clearly on the downslope and had
Speaker 1: his first big drop off last year. It was his
Speaker 1: first time failing to hit twenty points per game since
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen, it was his worst defensive rebounding season since
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen, and overall I thought he struggled defensively last year.
Speaker 1: So essentially, you got a player who can roughly approximate
Speaker 1: what Klay Thompson does with about half as much guaranteed
Speaker 1: money and less risk of age related decline. The other
Speaker 1: part of it, too, is I think he's more willing
Speaker 1: to accept a smaller bench role right like Clay, Even
Speaker 1: in his bench games, still played about twenty nine minutes
Speaker 1: per game. There were only three times all season last
Speaker 1: year that Klay Thompson did not play twenty minutes. The
Speaker 1: last day of the regular season against the Jazz in
Speaker 1: a game they didn't need him, the fifty two point
Speaker 1: loss against Boston because everyone was sitting the bench in
Speaker 1: the second half, and then the Minnesota game where he
Speaker 1: got ejected in the first couple of minutes. That's it.
Speaker 1: Because Clay was like under the expectation that he needed
Speaker 1: to play a lot, and there would have been issues
Speaker 1: if Steve Kirk cut his minutes way down and they
Speaker 1: needed him to play for what it's worth. But like
Speaker 1: if there was a reason to play someone else, Kerr
Speaker 1: wasn't going that route, not in any sort of like
Speaker 1: substantial sample size. That is, now you'll be able to
Speaker 1: get away with like heavily oscillating buddy, heals minutes from
Speaker 1: high to low based on the matchup without having to
Speaker 1: worry about fallout in team chemistry. I think that's an advantage.
Speaker 1: So like, obviously you don't want to lose Clay, but
Speaker 1: if you're going to, you did pretty well to try
Speaker 1: to replace that archetype. And there's another element to that.
Speaker 1: D Anthony Melton another guy who plays a similar position,
Speaker 1: a rock solid starting caliber guard when he's healthy. Going
Speaker 1: back to his twenty twenty three season, that was the
Speaker 1: last time he was healthy, he played seventy seven games.
Speaker 1: He actually played seventy plus games in each of the
Speaker 1: two seasons before last year, So if you're looking for
Speaker 1: optimism around Anthony Melton's health, you could hope that last
Speaker 1: year was an outlier in recent years, but d Anthony
Speaker 1: Meltain in twenty twenty three one point one to two
Speaker 1: points per spot up possession. That's really good. He was
Speaker 1: an efficient on ball creator. He ran two hundred and
Speaker 1: forty eight pick and rolls for two hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: nine points. That's one point zero four points per possession
Speaker 1: including passes. That's really good. He's a high level jump shooter.
Speaker 1: He shot thirty nine percent from three on five attempts
Speaker 1: per game, one point one to three points per possession overall.
Speaker 1: On jump shots, he shot forty one percent on catch
Speaker 1: and shoot jump shots in that twenty twenty three year.
Speaker 1: And he can knock down jump shots off the dribble.
Speaker 1: He hit like forty or fifty I can't remember exactly
Speaker 1: off the top of my head, but he hit a
Speaker 1: bunch of pull up jump shots that year as well.
Speaker 1: I've talked about this a lot, but I view him
Speaker 1: as like a like a like a slightly poor man's
Speaker 1: version of Contavious Callwell Pope, but with more off the
Speaker 1: dribble pop. And that's like the main difference. Kcp's more
Speaker 1: of like a movement shooter. D Anthony Melton is a
Speaker 1: guy that can actually like put the ball on the
Speaker 1: floor and make plays. I think he's a guy that's
Speaker 1: actually gonna have some success running action coming off of
Speaker 1: screens in Golden State system. He rebounds well for guard,
Speaker 1: He's a good point of attack defender. I think he's
Speaker 1: just a rock solid player provided that he's healthy. So
Speaker 1: as long as he has healthy, that's that to me
Speaker 1: is a big get. So you got three quality rotation players,
Speaker 1: all for about thirty million dollars annually combined, all uneasily
Speaker 1: tradable contracts. So like, given the lack of options that
Speaker 1: were available to Golden State this summer, I actually thought
Speaker 1: they did about as well as you possibly can while
Speaker 1: maintaining their ability to make a move during the season. Now,
Speaker 1: looking at last year's team, I actually thought the Warriors
Speaker 1: performed well relative to the talent they had on the roster.
Speaker 1: They won forty six games. They finished ninth in offensive rating.
Speaker 1: That is a testament to Steph Curry's greatness because given
Speaker 1: the talent on that roster for them to finish top
Speaker 1: ten in offense, even during Steph's slump to end the
Speaker 1: year his final twenty five games in that span, they
Speaker 1: were eighth in offense, which just goes to show you
Speaker 1: how impactful Steph is offensively, just when he's running around,
Speaker 1: even when he's not making shots. He can fuel an
Speaker 1: above average offense with below average talent even without making shots.
Speaker 1: That's incredible. But it was abundantly clear throughout the year
Speaker 1: last year that the Warriors were not as good as
Speaker 1: their record ship like. They were twenty four and five
Speaker 1: against teams that were below five hundred. That's the same
Speaker 1: record that Oklahoma City had against teams that were five
Speaker 1: hundred or below or below five hundred, I should say,
Speaker 1: so they took care of business against the bad teams,
Speaker 1: but they were just nine and twenty one against teams
Speaker 1: that were in the top ten in point differential. According
Speaker 1: to Cleaning the Glass, they had a minus two point
Speaker 1: seven net ratings, so they got outscored by two point
Speaker 1: seven points per one hundred possessions in those matchups that
Speaker 1: ranked twenty second in the NBA. Charlotte, Memphis, San Antonio, Portland, Utah, Detroit, Atlanta,
Speaker 1: and Chicago all had better net ratings against teams in
Speaker 1: the top ten in point differential last year than Golden
Speaker 1: State did. So that screams to me, this team doesn't
Speaker 1: have enough talent, but has excellent leadership because anytime a
Speaker 1: win was realistically achievable, those guys got the job done
Speaker 1: through excellent coaching and leadership from Steph Kurr. But when
Speaker 1: they ran into teams with real firepower, they got exposed
Speaker 1: for being a roster with severe limitations. So that to
Speaker 1: me is like a special shout out to Steve Kerr
Speaker 1: and Steph Curry last year because given the circumstances, given
Speaker 1: the Draymond suspension, given the amount of talent they had
Speaker 1: around them, that looks like a thirty five win team
Speaker 1: to me, and they got forty six wins. So like
Speaker 1: I thought, they squeezed that sponge for everything it was
Speaker 1: worth last year. And that's why it's so dumb every
Speaker 1: single time we do the whole like, oh, they missed
Speaker 1: the playoffs thing, it's like, usually there's reasons for that,
Speaker 1: and like, look, Steph didn't play very well down the
Speaker 1: tail end of the season, but it wasn't for lack
Speaker 1: of trying. He was leaving it out there every single night.
Speaker 1: This wasn't like you know, UCA and last year, the
Speaker 1: year before the final run, where at the tail end
Speaker 1: of the year, every time he watched him on TV.
Speaker 1: It was an I sore like they were trying like
Speaker 1: hell to get in. They just didn't have the talent
Speaker 1: to get it done. So we talked about the three
Speaker 1: new free agent signings the summer. Let's talk about what
Speaker 1: needs to happen in the house for the Warriors to
Speaker 1: return to the middle tier of the Western Conference, to
Speaker 1: get back in with those groups, that group that has
Speaker 1: like Dallas and Minnesota and the Lakers and Memphis and
Speaker 1: all those teams in the middle of the West. How
Speaker 1: do they get back into that group. I have three things. One,
Speaker 1: Brandon Pajemski needs to take the next leap as a
Speaker 1: shot creator. He had an awesome rookie season, finished fifth
Speaker 1: in Rookie of the Year voting. He shot the ball well.
Speaker 1: He was Golden State's second best on off guy in
Speaker 1: terms of differential behind Draymond. They were six point two
Speaker 1: points per one hundred possessions better with Pademski on the
Speaker 1: floor versus off the floor. He was excellent fit in
Speaker 1: their five out offensive attack. He made good decisions consistently,
Speaker 1: he kept the ball moving, and he's already a solid
Speaker 1: defensive player at the guard position. But Golden State needs
Speaker 1: more offensive production out of that off guard spot in
Speaker 1: supportive steph. POD's got over fifteen points in a game
Speaker 1: just nine times last season, and it really comes down
Speaker 1: to just being more aggressive. And I get it. For
Speaker 1: the record, I get it in his circumstance why he
Speaker 1: didn't come in as a rookie into the Golden State
Speaker 1: Damn Warriors and just start jacking up shots, I get it.
Speaker 1: I'm not blaming him for last year. I'm talking about
Speaker 1: what he needs to do moving forward. He shot over
Speaker 1: forty percent on one hundred and two pull up jump
Speaker 1: shots last year, and a bunch of them were threes,
Speaker 1: so he was at one point one to two points
Speaker 1: per pull up jump shot. That's insane. As a matter
Speaker 1: of fact, out of the one hundred and thirty five
Speaker 1: players to attempt at least a hundred pull up jump shots,
Speaker 1: Pods ranked eighth eight out of one hundred and thirty
Speaker 1: five guys inefficiency. I actually view that is a bad
Speaker 1: stat and the main reason why is it means he's
Speaker 1: being too picky. He needs to take more of them.
Speaker 1: He needs to take more pull up jump shots and
Speaker 1: he needs to take more floaters. Those are the two
Speaker 1: shots that I think when he's getting downhill on screens
Speaker 1: and he sees opportunities to get to that floater, he
Speaker 1: needs to take it more and more and just every
Speaker 1: time he gets a little bit of separation and he
Speaker 1: needs to let that thing fly off the dribble. Brandon
Speaker 1: pe Zemski averaged twenty points per game at Santa Clara.
Speaker 1: He's got real scoring chops, and I think that this
Speaker 1: team actually needs him to unleash them. When I talk
Speaker 1: to Warriors guys that cover the league, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of buzz. There's some disagreement about Pazemski. There's some guys
Speaker 1: that aren't very high on him, but the people that
Speaker 1: I trust are actually very high on the The people
Speaker 1: that watch him every day think he has legitimate all
Speaker 1: star upside, and I just want to see how much
Speaker 1: closer you can get to that in this season two.
Speaker 1: Jonathan Kamina needs to learn how to channel his abilities
Speaker 1: more consistently in a winning text. Kamika showed real scoring
Speaker 1: upside last year. He had twenty three twenty point games,
Speaker 1: did a lot of damage and transition, and in those
Speaker 1: baseline cuts out of that classic Golden State tic tac
Speaker 1: toe or Steph draws two short roll man baseline, defender
Speaker 1: steps over, Kaminka cuts out of the baseline, he gets dunk.
Speaker 1: A lot of stuff like that. But he also showed
Speaker 1: real upside as a post scorer. He was consistently getting
Speaker 1: around his defender or just going through his defender. He's
Speaker 1: getting to the foul line a bunch. Really. The main
Speaker 1: thing that nuked his efficiency in the post was turnovers.
Speaker 1: He turned the ball over on thirteen percent of his
Speaker 1: post ups, which was to be expected start the year.
Speaker 1: He's getting a lot of single coverage. He was cooking everybody.
Speaker 1: Second part of the year. They started bringing that second
Speaker 1: defender to his left hand side, and he just wasn't
Speaker 1: reading that defender really well. That comes obviously with repetition.
Speaker 1: But his impact didn't match up with his production Compared
Speaker 1: to his actual counting stats. He wasn't as good. Wasn't
Speaker 1: as good in the plus minus categories. Zero point ninety
Speaker 1: nine points per spot up possession because he kind of
Speaker 1: struggled to space the floor when he was off ball.
Speaker 1: Zero point ninety seven points per catch and shoot jump shots,
Speaker 1: So those numbers aren't good enough. He's a bit of
Speaker 1: a ball stopper, a little bit of a clunky fit
Speaker 1: on offense and then on defense. A lot of really
Speaker 1: good moments, a lot of really bad moments, typical for
Speaker 1: young players. Like I talk about this all the time
Speaker 1: with young players when it comes to replicating successes and
Speaker 1: diminishing mistakes, meaning like, oh, I fucked up, let's try
Speaker 1: to not do that again, or oh this is working,
Speaker 1: let's keep doing it. Like a lot of times, young
Speaker 1: players will do something easy for a basket because of
Speaker 1: a simple basketball read, and instead of going back to it,
Speaker 1: they'll do something random on the next possession. Like veteran players,
Speaker 1: they'll spam something until it stops working. They know, if
Speaker 1: I run this lane, if I set the screen and
Speaker 1: I slip out of it like this, if I do
Speaker 1: if I move the ball quickly, it'll get its way
Speaker 1: back to me. Like all these like little details about
Speaker 1: how to replicate successes in minimize failures, they take time.
Speaker 1: That is a classic young basketball player issue. So the
Speaker 1: question is how fast will Jonathan Caminga make those progressions
Speaker 1: into being more of a winning basketball player. I'm not
Speaker 1: worried about his production. I think he averaged something like
Speaker 1: sixteen points a game last year. If you average sixteen
Speaker 1: points a game this year that'd be great within the
Speaker 1: context of doing all of those little things more consistently
Speaker 1: and minimizing mistakes. And then, lastly, can Steph return to
Speaker 1: four last twenty five games last year? Those of you
Speaker 1: guys who've been following the show, I've read these stats
Speaker 1: a million times, But last twenty five games last year
Speaker 1: twenty two point eight points per game, forty two percent
Speaker 1: from the field, thirty eight percent from three. That's just
Speaker 1: not superstar production anymore out of Steph Curry, and it
Speaker 1: was part of the reason why they struggled against the
Speaker 1: top teams. The example I always use is that twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one team that was an equally limited funky roster,
Speaker 1: but they went ten to fifteen against the top ten
Speaker 1: point differential teams. That's a forty percent win percentage, whereas
Speaker 1: last year they had a thirty percent win percentage against
Speaker 1: the top ten teams. So Steph was able to lift
Speaker 1: them over the top for a ten percent increase in
Speaker 1: win percentage based on his super duper star level of play.
Speaker 1: He was playing like the best player in the world
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty one, So how close can he get
Speaker 1: back to that form is going to be one of
Speaker 1: the major swing factors of this season. For the record,
Speaker 1: I believe he will. I think we're going to get
Speaker 1: a major bounce back season from Steph. I think he's
Speaker 1: too competitive. I think he knows his team needs him,
Speaker 1: and I think he knows what it takes. I have
Speaker 1: a feeling that when we get through ten games or
Speaker 1: so of the year, Steph's going to be back up
Speaker 1: around twenty seven points per game on roughly forty five
Speaker 1: percent from the field and forty percent from three. That's
Speaker 1: what I think we're going to get. And just like that,
Speaker 1: just that, just that goes a long way towards returning
Speaker 1: this team to the middle of the Western Conference. So,
Speaker 1: in summary, I think Golden State is firmly in the
Speaker 1: play in picture again this year, but in a different
Speaker 1: way than last year. Last year, I thought they outkicked
Speaker 1: their coverage to barely scrape into the plane. I think
Speaker 1: this is a better roster. I think they have more
Speaker 1: veteran role players that fit the scheme better on both
Speaker 1: ends of the floor, and I think Steph's going to
Speaker 1: be better. But I also think they're well positioned to
Speaker 1: make an aggressive move should the opportunity arise at some
Speaker 1: point this year. So for right now they're playing team,
Speaker 1: but they have some real upside if they can get
Speaker 1: a deal done at some point this year. Our last
Speaker 1: team for the day at number twelve, the Indiana Pacers.
Speaker 1: Not too much roster turnover. They lost Doug McDermott, lost
Speaker 1: Jalen Smith, brought in Cole Swider and James Wiseman, so
Speaker 1: basically trading out of bench wing that won't play and
Speaker 1: their third string center is basically all they did. So
Speaker 1: they're more or less running it back with the same
Speaker 1: roster as last year. But let's take a quick look
Speaker 1: back at last year because it's a confusing team in
Speaker 1: the sense that they have these really impressive metrics that
Speaker 1: also just didn't seem to really amount to anything when
Speaker 1: it was nut crunching time. So in the regular season,
Speaker 1: the five man lineup of Tyrese Haliburt n Anger, Nemhard
Speaker 1: Aeronnie Smith, Pascal Siakim and Miles Turner their starters, they
Speaker 1: had nine hundred and twenty two possessions according to Cleaning
Speaker 1: the Glass plus seven point five net rating. That's really good.
Speaker 1: They were actually very good defensively. They had a one
Speaker 1: to oh eight defensive rating. And they rebounded really well.
Speaker 1: They grabbed seventy five percent of their opponent's missus. That's
Speaker 1: a really good number. In the playoffs, two hundred and
Speaker 1: eighty eight minutes played between those five guys plus fourteen
Speaker 1: point one net rating a one twenty nine offensive rating.
Speaker 1: Those are insane numbers in the large sample. But a
Speaker 1: couple of concerns popped up. One. Their rebounding didn't hold.
Speaker 1: They gave up an offensive rebound on thirty one point
Speaker 1: two percent of opponents misses in the playoffs. That is bad.
Speaker 1: And then the big one, they got absolutely annihilated in
Speaker 1: clutch situations. They went two and five. Overall. Their offense
Speaker 1: got strangled. They went down to a one to oh
Speaker 1: one offensive rating when the game was within five points
Speaker 1: with at least five minutes left or with less than
Speaker 1: five minutes left one oh one. Think about that. Their
Speaker 1: offensive rating, i said earlier, was one twenty nine with
Speaker 1: those five guys in the postseason in the large sample.
Speaker 1: So they were like really good until it got to
Speaker 1: the end of games, and then they could not score.
Speaker 1: And then their defense got thrashed too. For as good
Speaker 1: as their defense was in the large sample in the
Speaker 1: regular season, they had a one to twenty one defensive
Speaker 1: rating and clutch situations in the postseason, And that's really
Speaker 1: the main reason why I'm lower on the Pacers than
Speaker 1: most people. I think their regular season engine is real
Speaker 1: Tyres Halliburton is one of the best large sample offensive
Speaker 1: engines in the league. Does everything that I want in
Speaker 1: an offensive engine. Consistently throws kick ahead passes in transition.
Speaker 1: Anytime somebody's open up the floor, he's throwing those kickhead passes.
Speaker 1: They're so valuable because defensive transition is always geared looking
Speaker 1: up the floor, looking back towards the ball handler. When
Speaker 1: you throw it over their head, they all turn to
Speaker 1: go identify where the ball is, and that opens up
Speaker 1: opportunities for trailers. It's also opportunities to attack and slash
Speaker 1: or get wide open threes before the defense is set.
Speaker 1: So like those kickhead passes are great. And then when
Speaker 1: he gets into the half court, he's just like an
Speaker 1: incredible playmaker out of ball screens. If you die on
Speaker 1: the pick or you duck underneath, he's a deadly pull
Speaker 1: up jump shooter. If you die on the pick, but
Speaker 1: he gets downhill, he's a deadly floater shooter. If you
Speaker 1: switch the screen. He routinely toasted bigs in ISOs last year,
Speaker 1: and then he's one of the best passers in those
Speaker 1: situations that you'll meet with the early phases, when it
Speaker 1: was Buddy Healed and Miles Turner just picking and popping
Speaker 1: all season long, and him just routinely hitting that guy
Speaker 1: wide open for three or when it was a lot,
Speaker 1: a lot more like traditional ball screens post deadline, he's
Speaker 1: reading Obi Toppin or Pascal Siakam out of the weak
Speaker 1: side corner. Whenever his man steps over to tag the roller.
Speaker 1: He just routinely made the right read every single time.
Speaker 1: It generated all these high efficiency shots for all of
Speaker 1: these players that, like a lot of these players were
Speaker 1: mediocre players elsewhere in the league. Boston didn't want Aaron E. Smith,
Speaker 1: the Knicks had no use for Obi Toppin. These are
Speaker 1: guys that turned into like legitimate large role contributors for Indiana,
Speaker 1: like Tyres is the master at just getting defenses into
Speaker 1: rotation so that guys can capitalize on it. Dockham was
Speaker 1: a really nice fit that juiced him up on both
Speaker 1: ends of the floor. A lot of upside there. But
Speaker 1: when things slow down and get stuck in the half court,
Speaker 1: and defenses are more attentive to detail and more physical
Speaker 1: on the ball and fly around in rotation better they
Speaker 1: can struggle. Tyres Halliburton shot three for fifteen in clutch
Speaker 1: situations in the playoffs and had seven turnovers to his
Speaker 1: eight assists. Now, one thing I'll say is I thought
Speaker 1: that Tyres, before he heard his hamstring, had more athletic
Speaker 1: juice to get separation from elite defenders. And that's the case, right,
Speaker 1: Tyres was so good in the clutch before he hurt
Speaker 1: his hammy, So like, maybe that translates better at the postseason,
Speaker 1: but there is a certain amount of that, Like, it
Speaker 1: really looked like they ran into a brick wall when
Speaker 1: they got into some intense playoff situations. Now, but Jason,
Speaker 1: they made it to the Eastern Conference finals last year.
Speaker 1: I think a healthy Knicks team beats them in five,
Speaker 1: and I think a healthy Bucks team beats them in six.
Speaker 1: The Bucks were a tough matchup for the Pacers were
Speaker 1: a tough matchup for the Bucks, and they gave them
Speaker 1: a lot of issues. But I think if Giannis and
Speaker 1: Dame are one hundred percent healthy in full, go for
Speaker 1: a playoff series I think the Bucks probably get the
Speaker 1: job done, so like, yeah, they made the conference finals,
Speaker 1: but they were extremely fortunate in getting here. So the
Speaker 1: question is, how can the Pacers enter into that next
Speaker 1: tier of teams? How can they get into that tier
Speaker 1: because like starting on Monday, I'm covering teams that legitimately
Speaker 1: have a championship ceiling if things go right. I don't
Speaker 1: think this Pacers team does. So how do they get there?
Speaker 1: I think they need an upgrade at the two or
Speaker 1: the three. Aaron Ne Smith and Adrian m Hardn are
Speaker 1: two really solid basketball players, and I think they are
Speaker 1: definitely championship level rotation players, but ideally they should be
Speaker 1: coming off the bench. For you, you need more high level
Speaker 1: closeout attacking out of those spots, and you need better
Speaker 1: contested rebound. This was a team that did not rebound
Speaker 1: well in the postseason. If you can basically imagine aaron
Speaker 1: Ne Smith but like a six ' eight version of
Speaker 1: him with a little bit more off the dribble pop,
Speaker 1: I think just that if you did a substantial upgrade
Speaker 1: to one of those two spots, I think that goes
Speaker 1: a long way, like kind of like with the Knicks
Speaker 1: did bringing in Michale bridges as an upgrade at the
Speaker 1: three dramatically increases their ceiling. A player of that type
Speaker 1: of caliber at the two or the three, I think
Speaker 1: moves the Pacers into those discussions. And they have the
Speaker 1: means to make that type of deal. They have a
Speaker 1: young player that doesn't seem to fit their long term
Speaker 1: vision and Ben Matherin. They have draft picks to spend,
Speaker 1: they have lots of mid level salaries that can be
Speaker 1: combined to get to a higher level player. And then
Speaker 1: the last piece of it is just Tyree solving that
Speaker 1: playoff puzzle. He was a little bit weird in this
Speaker 1: playoff run. A lot of high highs, but a lot
Speaker 1: of low lows. He had seven games where he didn't
Speaker 1: even take fifteen shots. He had four games where he
Speaker 1: didn't even take ten shots. There was like a little
Speaker 1: bit of like a he either hazard or he does
Speaker 1: in on this particular night kind of thing. And that's
Speaker 1: just part of the puzzle of the playoffs. You get
Speaker 1: attacked on the defensive end a lot, and on offense
Speaker 1: everything gets way harder and you have to maintain that
Speaker 1: consistency throughout that four round setup. Now, to be clear,
Speaker 1: the Pacers to me feel like the next great Eastern
Speaker 1: Conference Titan. Remember how like Milwaukee, Miami, and Boston kind
Speaker 1: of ran the East over the previous half decade. I
Speaker 1: feel like the Pacers are going to be in that
Speaker 1: type of group for the future. But I feel like
Speaker 1: they're one more roster shakeup, in a little bit more
Speaker 1: player development away from actually making that a reality. So
Speaker 1: for this season, I just have them as the best
Speaker 1: team that doesn't have a real chance to win the
Speaker 1: title this year at number twelve. All right, guys, that
Speaker 1: is all I have for today. As always, I sincerely
Speaker 1: ap pursuit you guys for suporting me and supporting the show.
Speaker 1: We'll be back on Monday, getting in to number eleven
Speaker 1: in our next tier of teams that can win the championship.
Speaker 1: If things go right, I will see you guys then
Speaker 1: the volume. What's up guys? As always, I appreciate you
Speaker 1: for listening to and supporting OOPS tonight. It would actually
Speaker 1: be really helpful for us if you guys would take
Speaker 1: a second and leave a rating and a review. As always,
Speaker 1: I appreciate you guys supporting us, but if you could
Speaker 1: take a minute to do that, I'd really appreciate it.