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 sixty
Speaker 1: and the Kansas City Chiefs at plus four to twenty five.
Speaker 1: And here's a gift for all new customers. Bet five
Speaker 1: dollars to get one hundred and fifty dollars in bonus
Speaker 1: bets if your bet wins. Download the Draftking Sportsbook Gap
Speaker 1: and use code hoops. That's hops. That's code hoops for
Speaker 1: new customers to get one hundred and fifty dollars in
Speaker 1: bonus bets if your bet wins. When you bet just
Speaker 1: five bucks, Happy Holidays from DraftKings. The Crown is yours.
Speaker 1: Gambling problem called one eight hundred gambler in New York
Speaker 1: call eight seven seven eight hope and why, or text
Speaker 1: hope and why to four six seven, three six nine.
Speaker 1: In Connecticut, help us available for problem gambling called eight
Speaker 1: eight eight seven eight nine seven seven seven seven or
Speaker 1: visit CCPG dot org. Please play responsibly on toalf of
Speaker 1: Boothill Casino and Resort in Kansas twenty one plus. Age
Speaker 1: and eligibility varies by jurisdiction void in Ontario. Bet must
Speaker 1: win to receive award. Bonus bets expire one hundred and
Speaker 1: sixty eight hours after issuance. For additional terms and responsible
Speaker 1: gaming resources to dkang dot co slash b Ball. All right,
Speaker 1: welcome to hoops tonight here at the Volume. Happy Tuesday, everybody,
Speaker 1: help all of you guys are having a great week.
Speaker 1: Just have a quick show for you this morning. Since
Speaker 1: we only have one game last night, we're gonna go
Speaker 1: over my predictions for the first round of the Inn
Speaker 1: season tournament off the Top. Obviously, tomorrow and Thursday shows
Speaker 1: will be breakdowns of those games. We're probably gonna do
Speaker 1: some film in those shows as well. But today we'll
Speaker 1: be doing some predictions and then a bunch of you
Speaker 1: guys drop some really good mailbag question and the YouTube
Speaker 1: comments yesterday. We're gonna hit some teams, but there's also
Speaker 1: a lot of big picture basketball concepts that you guys
Speaker 1: brought up, so it's gonna be fun to kind of
Speaker 1: get into the weeds of the bigger concepts that make
Speaker 1: this league work. We're gonna hit that mail bag that
Speaker 1: we'll be out of here for the day, and then,
Speaker 1: as I said, we will be breaking down the Ncason
Speaker 1: Tournament games starting tomorrow. You guys know the joke before
Speaker 1: we get started, and subscribe to the Hoops Tonight YouTube channels.
Speaker 1: You don't miss any more of our videos. Follow me
Speaker 1: on Twitter at underscore JCNLTS. You guys don't miss ow announcements.
Speaker 1: Don't forget about our podcast feed. Wherever you get your
Speaker 1: podcasts on our Hoops Tonight, don't forget. It's also helpful
Speaker 1: if you leave a rating and a review on our
Speaker 1: podcast feed. We also bran new social media feeds on Twitter, Instagram,
Speaker 1: and Facebook for the Hoops Tonight channel where we're releasing
Speaker 1: more content. Make sure you guys follow us there and
Speaker 1: then keep dropping mail bag questions and those YouTube comments.
Speaker 1: We'll have another mail bag like we always do on
Speaker 1: Friday towards the tail end of this week and the last,
Speaker 1: but not least, Before we get started, I want to
Speaker 1: talk to you guys about game Time. They have the
Speaker 1: best ticket buying experience in my opinion. I've used them
Speaker 1: many times in the past. I highly recommend you guys
Speaker 1: check it out. And as fun as it is to
Speaker 1: watch the sports that we watch at home, there's nothing
Speaker 1: like being there in person, especially when it comes to
Speaker 1: concerts in comedy shows. So let's get up and let's
Speaker 1: get out and see a show. This year, game Time
Speaker 1: has an incredibly user friendly experience. You can check out
Speaker 1: in as few as two taps. You know exactly what
Speaker 1: you're spending because they have all in pricing, and you
Speaker 1: get a view of your seat within the apps, you
Speaker 1: know what you're getting with your money. They also have
Speaker 1: an awesome new feature called game Time Picks where they
Speaker 1: curate the feed. Instead of clicking on an event and
Speaker 1: seeing just thousands and thousands of tickets, you can see
Speaker 1: the best deals from that particular event, so that you
Speaker 1: can be in more efficient in your hunt for the
Speaker 1: best available ticket. Take the guess work out of buying
Speaker 1: tickets with game Time Picks. Download the game Time app
Speaker 1: and create an account and use code Hoops for twenty
Speaker 1: dollars off your first purchase terms apply again. Create an
Speaker 1: account and redeem code Hoops. That's hoops for twenty dollars off.
Speaker 1: Download game time today? What time is it? Game time?
Speaker 1: All right, let's talk some basketball. So four games. I'm
Speaker 1: just gonna get the first rounds and then we'll react
Speaker 1: to the later rounds as they come. Milwaukee over. You know,
Speaker 1: Milwaukee's just playing really well right now. When Orlando's down
Speaker 1: their two best players. The game is in Milwaukee, so
Speaker 1: no need to get too much further into that one. Obviously,
Speaker 1: Orlando has an athleticism advantage on the perimeter, but I
Speaker 1: don't think it'll be enough to make up for it,
Speaker 1: especially playing in front of that home crowd. I also
Speaker 1: think that Milwaukee, similarly to the Lakers last year, after
Speaker 1: an uneven start to the season, can stamp a level
Speaker 1: of legitimacy to their you know what, they've accomplished to
Speaker 1: this point to mid December by winning this in season tournament.
Speaker 1: I think they should go for it. I talked about
Speaker 1: this a little bit with Kevin o'connory yesterday. I went
Speaker 1: on his show, and I just I think the Ncason
Speaker 1: Tournament's awesome. My favorite team, the Lakers, aren't even in
Speaker 1: it this year, and I'm still super excited for it.
Speaker 1: I think anytime, as a competitor, you have an opportunity
Speaker 1: to compete for an accolade like this, that you should
Speaker 1: go for it. I think it's revealing and who you
Speaker 1: are as a competitor. I think it's revealing and how
Speaker 1: serious you are as a basketball team. I think everybody
Speaker 1: should be trying to win this thing, and I think
Speaker 1: Milwaukee's really going to try to go after it. Dallas. Okay, See,
Speaker 1: this game is basically a coin flip in a single
Speaker 1: elimination type of setting. That's the other thing I want
Speaker 1: to say off the top here, Like this is single elimination,
Speaker 1: anything can happen. The Celtics, who won the championship and
Speaker 1: the Lakers were both in the n Season Tournament last
Speaker 1: year and the Lakers ended up winning the whole damn thing.
Speaker 1: No one thinks the Lakers are better than the Celtics, right,
Speaker 1: So in single elimination there's more you're at higher risk
Speaker 1: of variables knocking you out, so anything can happen. I'm
Speaker 1: just giving you my best predictions, right, But again, for
Speaker 1: a game like this, I think Dallas is I think
Speaker 1: Dallas when OKAC doesn't have Chet, is a slightly better team,
Speaker 1: and so that is an advantage in Dallas's favorite. But
Speaker 1: the game is being played in Oklahoma City, so this
Speaker 1: could really go either way. I think I'm gonna go
Speaker 1: with Dallas. Though OKAC has struggled with rim decisions against
Speaker 1: them in the past, they have a lot of advantages
Speaker 1: in this particular matchup, especially on the offensive rebounding front
Speaker 1: as well as that rim protection. So in the coin flip,
Speaker 1: I will take Dallas and Atlanta New York should be
Speaker 1: a fun one. Atlanta's playing really good ball and they
Speaker 1: beat the Knicks earlier this year. But I also think
Speaker 1: New York has a defensive gear that they can get
Speaker 1: to in a big game, specifically that is better than
Speaker 1: they've shown this year. And when the chips are down
Speaker 1: and both teams are at their best, I think the
Speaker 1: Knicks are a little better on defense and I think
Speaker 1: they're a lot better on offense. So I'm gonna go
Speaker 1: with the Knicks. I think Golden State Houston. I think
Speaker 1: Golden State's a better team than Houston, and I think
Speaker 1: they're capable of going in there and strangling Houston's offense,
Speaker 1: but that crowd is going to be crazy and Houston
Speaker 1: is going to play super hard, so I kind of
Speaker 1: view that game as another coin flip, but I'll go
Speaker 1: with Golden State at this point. So again, I think
Speaker 1: New York and Milwaukee should both relatively easily dispatch of
Speaker 1: Atlanta and Orlando. Atlanta game might be a little closer,
Speaker 1: but I think the Knicks will win. And then Dallas
Speaker 1: OKAC and Golden State Houston. As by virtue of the
Speaker 1: Western Conference and its depth of talent, I think both
Speaker 1: of those games are basically coin flips, but I'll go
Speaker 1: with Dallas and Golden State for now, and then I'll
Speaker 1: give my predictions on the later round games when we
Speaker 1: get to them. All Right, a lot of really good
Speaker 1: questions from you guys today. Let's get into it. Hey, Jason,
Speaker 1: I'm sure you're tired of MAVs fans in your comments,
Speaker 1: but something I've noticed is that Luca is playing more
Speaker 1: off the ball. It looks to be a real development.
Speaker 1: At least a quarter of the way into the season,
Speaker 1: he's at much lower usage rate than usual, and especially
Speaker 1: since he's coming back, and it looks back to MVP
Speaker 1: candidate form, He's been averaging a thirty point triple double
Speaker 1: on a thirty percent usage rate, which is the lowest
Speaker 1: of his career since his rookie season. Also, the percentage
Speaker 1: of his shots that are unassisted that sixty six percent,
Speaker 1: which is down from it being between seventy eight and
Speaker 1: eighty six percent in twenty twenty one to twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1: Not saying he's Steph Curry or anything, but I can
Speaker 1: do to try and slow the change of narratives of
Speaker 1: him being a selfish ballhog. Lol. First of all, that's
Speaker 1: I appreciate you going into the trouble of doing all
Speaker 1: that research. This is something that I've noticed with the
Speaker 1: eye test, just periodically throughout the season, just a little
Speaker 1: bit more using Luca off the ball, not just as
Speaker 1: like a guy to run action, but as a screener.
Speaker 1: He's coming off in advantage situations a lot, a lot
Speaker 1: of like seals around the elbow where they're trying to
Speaker 1: generate rim protection with his size fighting for position rather
Speaker 1: than trying to do it off the dribble coming off
Speaker 1: of off ball action, rather than having him just dribble
Speaker 1: into a ball screen We're gonna talk a little bit
Speaker 1: further about this in a warrior's question that we have.
Speaker 1: I think it's two questions down the list, but like
Speaker 1: there's this obsession with the idea that like it's like
Speaker 1: motion offense or like spread pick and roll, and it's like, really,
Speaker 1: motion offense includes a lot of the same concepts of spread,
Speaker 1: pick and roll, just in a design that is supposed
Speaker 1: to keep everybody involved. And so like, you can still
Speaker 1: be Luca and be what makes Luca great without needing
Speaker 1: to dribble the ball off the floor slowly into a
Speaker 1: ball screen every single time. And so they're still gonna
Speaker 1: do that. Like, I don't think Dallas needs to ditch
Speaker 1: that look. I think that's a valuable look, especially when
Speaker 1: you're trying to strangle the pace of games. But it's
Speaker 1: good to be able to do both. You want to
Speaker 1: be able to be like, hey, we're a little stagnant,
Speaker 1: this isn't working. Let's go to more of our ball
Speaker 1: and player movement stuff. Or it's like, hey, we got
Speaker 1: a matchup. We really like, let's just keep spamming this
Speaker 1: because Luke is killing this guy. You know. Having the
Speaker 1: ability to go back and forth is going to be
Speaker 1: the path to the promised Land for the Dallas Mavericks.
Speaker 1: This is the only troll we're responding to today, and
Speaker 1: it's not because these a troll. It's just because I
Speaker 1: want to clarify something that I have to periodically clarify
Speaker 1: because people don't pay attention to some of the criteria
Speaker 1: that I release earlier in the season. Not having the
Speaker 1: Knicks in the top ten of power rankings when their season,
Speaker 1: when they're season long, net rating and record are at
Speaker 1: the top of the league. They are the best offense
Speaker 1: in the NBA, and their recent stretch has been elite.
Speaker 1: This is just bad analysis. So again, our power rankings
Speaker 1: are not intended to be contender rankings or just a
Speaker 1: clear in a vacuum set of who the best teams
Speaker 1: in the regular seasons have been. It is a opportunity
Speaker 1: for us to shine a light on teams who are
Speaker 1: playing well as of late. So it's kind of like
Speaker 1: a combination of like three factors, like one, who's having
Speaker 1: the best regular season? Two, who's been playing the best
Speaker 1: in the in like the last two weeks or so.
Speaker 1: In three, Hey, here's a team we haven't had a
Speaker 1: chance to talk about in a little while they're kind
Speaker 1: of up for debate around that nine to ten spot.
Speaker 1: Let's get him in there right. So, like, that's kind
Speaker 1: of the purpose of my Power rankings. I understand that
Speaker 1: that's different than a lot of people do, but to me,
Speaker 1: I want to have that Power Rankings list be an
Speaker 1: opportunity for us to celebrate teams that are playing good
Speaker 1: basketball in the regular season, even over small bursts sometimes
Speaker 1: so at the bottom of the rankings. This week, the
Speaker 1: Miami Heat were team that I wanted to shine a
Speaker 1: line up. We hadn't talked about them a lot. I
Speaker 1: had watched a few of their games in the previous week.
Speaker 1: They'd been playing better basketball. I wanted to shine a
Speaker 1: light on them. The other team that the teams that
Speaker 1: were kind of like fighting for that nine to ten
Speaker 1: spot for me were like the Knicks the Warriors in
Speaker 1: the Heat. The Warriors have eight wins against teams that
Speaker 1: are five hundred or better and the Knicks have five
Speaker 1: wins against teams that are five hundred are better. That
Speaker 1: was what gave Golden State the edge for me, and again,
Speaker 1: I just wanted to shine the light on Miami. New
Speaker 1: York is considerably higher than that in my contender rankings,
Speaker 1: which are strictly meant to reflect my belief on who
Speaker 1: has the best chance to win a championship. So again,
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna periodically do that after Monday shows, just
Speaker 1: to remind people that we have a criteria in a
Speaker 1: system that we use here and just for the people
Speaker 1: that missed it earlier in the season. Next question, I
Speaker 1: don't have Warriors use pick and roll more often? Seems
Speaker 1: like when they stick to Steve Kerr's motion offense, they
Speaker 1: get bogged down and can't generate anything. When they stick
Speaker 1: to simple pick and roll, it seems like everything opens up.
Speaker 1: We saw this in their win versus the Rockets, heavy
Speaker 1: pick and roll with Kamina and Wiggins, then their loss
Speaker 1: versus Minnesota motion offense return, then in their win versus Minnesota,
Speaker 1: back to more pick and roll. Am I missing something?
Speaker 1: Is Steve Kerr missing something? Thinks Love the show? This
Speaker 1: is something that I've seen a certain segment of Warriors
Speaker 1: fans complaining a lot about over the last couple of years,
Speaker 1: and I really think it's silly and frankly kind of
Speaker 1: a misunderstanding of a basic basketball principle, which is that
Speaker 1: which is what I talked about earlier when we were
Speaker 1: talking about Dallas in the motion offense. If you have
Speaker 1: a guy like if you have a five out setup
Speaker 1: and you got Draymond at the top of the key,
Speaker 1: and you have let's call it Brandon Pajemski on the
Speaker 1: right wing and Steph Curry in the right corner, and
Speaker 1: you're running your flow from side to side, you're thinking
Speaker 1: of it as a motion offense, a bunch of guys moving, cutting, screening,
Speaker 1: blah blah blah. Yes, but at its core it's the
Speaker 1: same concept of what's happening in a pick and roll. Right.
Speaker 1: In a pick and roll, Steph brings the ball up
Speaker 1: the floor, gets a screen, hopefully gets his defender and
Speaker 1: trail position, hopefully brings the big up to the level
Speaker 1: of the screen so that he can hit the guy
Speaker 1: slipping to the basket. If they don't show at the
Speaker 1: level of the screen with a screen defender, then Steph
Speaker 1: can come off and look to shoot right. So that's
Speaker 1: the advantage of the of the pick and roll. There's
Speaker 1: one other advantage as it pertains to deal with dealing
Speaker 1: with top locking in denial, but which we'll get to
Speaker 1: that in just a second. But if you zoom in
Speaker 1: on a motion offense. If Brandon Pajamski runs down in
Speaker 1: screens in like a Chicago action for Steph coming out
Speaker 1: of the corner, and it flows into a dribble hand
Speaker 1: off with UH, with UH Draymond Green at the top
Speaker 1: of the key, it is still fundamentally the same concept.
Speaker 1: Steph's defender in all likelihood is going to be trailing
Speaker 1: him over the top of the screen. Draymond's defender is
Speaker 1: going to show at the level of the screen. Draymond
Speaker 1: is going to slip out of it. So even though
Speaker 1: it's a chicag I Go action instead of a spread
Speaker 1: pick and roll, the same fundamental concept of a two
Speaker 1: man game is taking place. It's actually technically more of
Speaker 1: a three man game because you're setting a screen for
Speaker 1: Steph before at the beginning. So like let's look at
Speaker 1: the Warriors split cuts. Okay, you make a post entry
Speaker 1: to Draymond, then Brandon Pajemski makes the post entry Steph
Speaker 1: Curry's at the top of the key. Pajemski sets a
Speaker 1: screen for Steph coming off towards the ball handler to
Speaker 1: try to get him a look or the opposite of that. Right, Well,
Speaker 1: let's talk it through. Steph's defender probably going to chase
Speaker 1: Steph in a lock and trail right his defender screens
Speaker 1: for him when he's his teammate screens for him. That
Speaker 1: screen defender is likely going to show on Steph, and
Speaker 1: if they botch that, there's an opportunity to slip for
Speaker 1: the screener. Again, fundamentally, the exact same concept that happens
Speaker 1: in a pick and roll. It's just happening within the
Speaker 1: flow with everybody involved. So this is where it gets
Speaker 1: a little more complicated. When you're running Steph off ball.
Speaker 1: There are downsides. Those downsides tend to be things like
Speaker 1: being really handsy and holding Steph top blocking, meaning like
Speaker 1: STEP's in the corner and he's getting ready to come
Speaker 1: off of that Chicago action. What if his defender just
Speaker 1: literally sits on Steph's top side so that he has
Speaker 1: no choice but to backcut into the lane. Right, Like,
Speaker 1: there are a denials, physical off ball defense. All those
Speaker 1: sorts of things can disrupt the motion offense, right, But
Speaker 1: the same can be said about the pick and roll.
Speaker 1: So the idea would be, Okay, they're denying Stephan the ball,
Speaker 1: we're having trouble getting him the ball in the motion offense. Okay,
Speaker 1: let's get him the ball in the back court and
Speaker 1: have him dribble up the floor into a ball screen. Okay,
Speaker 1: now he has to navigate ball pressure. That adds a
Speaker 1: layer of fatigue on the ball as Steph has to
Speaker 1: navigate ball pressure up the court. You think the same
Speaker 1: team that would top block and grab and hold and
Speaker 1: be super physical with Steph off ball, it's just going
Speaker 1: to let him dribble the ball seamlessly up the floor
Speaker 1: into action. No, they're probably going to ball pressure him
Speaker 1: be physical the same sort of issues, Right, And there's
Speaker 1: also a downside that with that, which is the rhythm
Speaker 1: of the flow of the entire offense. If Steph runs
Speaker 1: that Chicago action and he comes off and it's not open,
Speaker 1: there's all of these counters and additional layers to it
Speaker 1: so that they can keep flowing from side to side. Right,
Speaker 1: in the event that you're just running spread, pick and
Speaker 1: roll every time down the floor, you're basically admitting that
Speaker 1: no one else is going to be in rhythm. You're
Speaker 1: basically admitting that this is now the step show. Whereas
Speaker 1: if you're trying to make sure that you have some
Speaker 1: consistent contributions down the roster. Everyone's got to get touches,
Speaker 1: everyone's got to get opportunity. And by the way, the
Speaker 1: last time in the playoffs I saw them lean super
Speaker 1: heavily into ball screens. If you remember, it was in
Speaker 1: that Lakers series in the second round. That was a
Speaker 1: series where they didn't get any consistent contributions down the roster.
Speaker 1: Klay Thompson in particular, really struggled in that series, in
Speaker 1: large part because the Warriors just went to a lot
Speaker 1: of spread, pick and roll. Now that team was so
Speaker 1: damaged offensively down the roster, with how much Clay was struggling,
Speaker 1: with how much Jordan Poole was struggling, that may or
Speaker 1: may not have been their best option in that specific situation.
Speaker 1: There was also some game plan stuff the Lakers were
Speaker 1: doing that was disrupting it. But the point is Steve
Speaker 1: Kerr wants to stick with the motion as much as
Speaker 1: possible because one, fundamentally, it's the same concept as a
Speaker 1: ball screen, it's just coming out of real ball in
Speaker 1: player movement. And two, it provides the best opportunity to
Speaker 1: continue to keep everyone involved. I would also argue that
Speaker 1: the motion offense generates a lot of really easy shots
Speaker 1: in a way that kind of flies under the radar.
Speaker 1: How many times a game do you see Steph just
Speaker 1: sprint from under the basket out to the perimeter and
Speaker 1: the guy who's guarding his screener is just standing why
Speaker 1: or the guy who is guarding a screen or just
Speaker 1: goes with Steph and the screeners just standing wide open
Speaker 1: under the basket. That happens like five or six times
Speaker 1: a game. Like that's ten to twelve points that you're
Speaker 1: getting every game by running the motion offense. Like any
Speaker 1: sort of perceived increase in efficiency from spread pick and
Speaker 1: roll is kind of countered by that. Now, again, as
Speaker 1: I talked about with Dallas, you want to be able
Speaker 1: to do both because certain situations call for it. But
Speaker 1: there's a very specific reason why Steve Kerr is doing both,
Speaker 1: and it's because you need to be able to do
Speaker 1: both in order to win a championship. And again, like
Speaker 1: one of the things is like it would be nice
Speaker 1: to have a second option in those situations, so that
Speaker 1: you can run spread pick and roll with Steph, but
Speaker 1: you could also run st a spread pick and roll
Speaker 1: with the second player or two man game with those
Speaker 1: two guys. It action at the top of the key,
Speaker 1: just like him and Kadi used to run right. You
Speaker 1: want to be able to do both and then when
Speaker 1: you run your motion, if you've got a second high
Speaker 1: level threat in the motion, that increases the efficiency of
Speaker 1: that offense there as well. Hey, Jason, obviously no stats
Speaker 1: can fully capture the nuances of what leads to wins
Speaker 1: and losses. But what would you say are the best
Speaker 1: metrics that correlate with success in today's NBA huge fan
Speaker 1: of the show thinks, So, I am really really anti
Speaker 1: catch alls. I have a feeling, my personal belief is
Speaker 1: that basketball is far too complicated to be able to
Speaker 1: just like distill everything down to one specific number to
Speaker 1: capture an entire side of the floor. There's a lot
Speaker 1: of complications that are involved there, So like I look
Speaker 1: more at some of the more some of the more
Speaker 1: detailed data surrounding like specific basketball situations. So a five
Speaker 1: on five game has so many basketball battles, so many
Speaker 1: basketball situations taking place that it's too difficult to distill
Speaker 1: down to one number. But in any one spot on
Speaker 1: the floor, there are one excuse me, there's one or
Speaker 1: two things that are happening that are less complicated that
Speaker 1: are a little bit easier to quantify. That's where I
Speaker 1: try to hunt down some numbers. So I'll give you
Speaker 1: guys an example some stats that I use, So like
Speaker 1: per possession stats. This is specifically in play types, right,
Speaker 1: So like, for instance, like how well does a player
Speaker 1: convert spot up situations? That means it's a combination of
Speaker 1: your ability to hit catch and shoes threes and your
Speaker 1: ability to drive it close out and score in those situations. Right.
Speaker 1: By the way, none of these are perfect either. Even
Speaker 1: a per possession spot up a piece of data doesn't
Speaker 1: quantify for playmaking. It doesn't quantify for what if you
Speaker 1: catch pump, fake, beat your man off the dribble, and
Speaker 1: drop it off to a guy for dunk at the basket.
Speaker 1: That doesn't quantify in spot up points per possession, right,
Speaker 1: So that's even a flawed piece of data. But again
Speaker 1: we're looking for data with less flaws by getting more concise.
Speaker 1: So like spot up possessions, I really like it in
Speaker 1: a shot creation situation, So like pick and roll post
Speaker 1: up ISO synergy has a version of that that includes passes.
Speaker 1: So it's a little bit more detailed than some of
Speaker 1: the stuff I see with spot ups, but those are
Speaker 1: important pieces of play type data. I even like looking
Speaker 1: at play type data by location. So for instance, like
Speaker 1: certain players are much better posting up on the left
Speaker 1: block than they are posting up on the right block.
Speaker 1: Some players, you know, have more success running pick role
Speaker 1: in the middle of the floor than they do on
Speaker 1: the side of the floor. Like there's a bunch of
Speaker 1: like different aspects there, and that's valuable data because if
Speaker 1: you find out, like, hey, let's say that Palo Banca
Speaker 1: is far more efficient as a post player on the
Speaker 1: left block because he can get to his left shoulder
Speaker 1: hook in the lane. Well, okay, then we need to
Speaker 1: make sure that we're running our offense so that we
Speaker 1: get palot touches on the left block as much as possible.
Speaker 1: We don't want to just be running left right, left, right,
Speaker 1: left right. If he's three tenths of a point more
Speaker 1: efficient per possession if we put him on the left block, So,
Speaker 1: like you want to pay attention to those sorts of
Speaker 1: things score percentage. I talked about this yesterday. Basically, the
Speaker 1: idea of like taking distilling efficiency down to like how
Speaker 1: likely are we to score on this possession? This throws
Speaker 1: an extra level of value on players that get high
Speaker 1: percentage field goal percentage shots or get to the foul
Speaker 1: line a lot, because again, that is more valuable on
Speaker 1: a per possession or excuse me, on a single possession basis,
Speaker 1: rather than the large sample. In the large sample, I
Speaker 1: want per possession stats, like how efficient is this guy
Speaker 1: if I let him run five hundred pick and rolls
Speaker 1: over the course of the of the season, is like
Speaker 1: a secondary shot creator. Okay, well, I've got these five
Speaker 1: hundred pick and rolls that I need to give to somebody.
Speaker 1: Do I want to give them to Gabe Vincent or
Speaker 1: do I want to give them to you know, a
Speaker 1: guy like a guy like you know, Jalen hou Chafino
Speaker 1: or or something like that. Right, Well, as I look
Speaker 1: at this, each guy's run one hundred pick and roll
Speaker 1: so far this year, Gabe's been more efficient. Maybe we
Speaker 1: lean into him a little bit more for those like
Speaker 1: secondary shot creation opportunities, right, Like, that's the large sample
Speaker 1: points per possession stet. At the end of games, though,
Speaker 1: when you're trying to win five or six possessions, that's
Speaker 1: where something like score percentage is more valuable because in
Speaker 1: five or six possessions. If I have a score percentage
Speaker 1: over fifty percent, I can count on myself scoring two
Speaker 1: or three buckets over that span. Whereas if I'm a
Speaker 1: high per possession guy but I rely on a lot
Speaker 1: of tougher three point shots, then my score percentage is
Speaker 1: going to be closer to the mid thirties. And now
Speaker 1: I might only get a bucket on one or two
Speaker 1: of those possessions, and it kind of affects the value
Speaker 1: there right. Defensive rating, I look at it more as
Speaker 1: an indicator of overall effort and commitment to attention to
Speaker 1: detail over the course of the regular season. There are
Speaker 1: a lot of really good defenses that they excuse me,
Speaker 1: there are a lot of really bad defenses that put
Speaker 1: up good defensive ratings over the course of the regular season.
Speaker 1: To me, that as an indicator of their overall level
Speaker 1: of focus and attention to detail. So I do think
Speaker 1: that's important. By the way, That's why the vast majority
Speaker 1: of teams in NBA history that win the title, the vast, fast,
Speaker 1: vast majority, have top ten defensive ratings. Denver was an exception.
Speaker 1: The vast fast majority of top ten defensive ratings, and
Speaker 1: the reason why is because that is an overall indicator
Speaker 1: of how well they attack the regular season from start
Speaker 1: to finish. Half court offensive and defensive rating, I look
Speaker 1: at this as a cleaning the glass stat. I look
Speaker 1: at this one a lot simply because it is an
Speaker 1: example of what happens when the game gets strangled into
Speaker 1: the half court, which is something that happens more frequently
Speaker 1: in the postseason. Even bad transition defenses do a better
Speaker 1: job of running back in the playoffs, they can still
Speaker 1: get burned in transition. I've seen teams lose series in transition.
Speaker 1: I've seen teams win the title running in transition, like
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty one Milli Walkee Bucks of the twenty
Speaker 1: twenty Los Angeles Lakers. Right, Like, there are lots of
Speaker 1: teams that thrive in transition offensively, but half court offensive
Speaker 1: and defensive rating is like, we're in this strangled, slow
Speaker 1: down situation. Who's going to have an easier time generating shot?
Speaker 1: So that would be a piece that I look at
Speaker 1: points per shot on various shot types, So like I
Speaker 1: look at like, how good is this player making a
Speaker 1: float or a hook? In terms of like big guys
Speaker 1: on the role, especially centers, like a center that's got
Speaker 1: a hook shot that he can make fifty five percent
Speaker 1: of the time. I think that's high value. Right. Layups
Speaker 1: is a big one because there's a lot of guys
Speaker 1: that when they get dunks, they can make it, but
Speaker 1: when they get anything that's a touch shot around the rim,
Speaker 1: they struggle to finish. That's a problem. The difference between
Speaker 1: unguarded catch and shoot jump shots versus guarded catch and
Speaker 1: shoot jump shots, the difference between off the dribble and
Speaker 1: face up jump shots versus catch and shoot jump shots.
Speaker 1: Looking at all that data, I can see where specific
Speaker 1: players thrive as shot makers and where they have gaping
Speaker 1: holes in shot making where they need to improve. That's
Speaker 1: a piece of data that I like. Lineup data. This
Speaker 1: is again like trying to capture that science as best
Speaker 1: as you can, so like it's a every single basketball
Speaker 1: lineup is like this intricately connected group of strengths and weaknesses, right,
Speaker 1: and it kind of pieces together to make a certain
Speaker 1: type of success or failure on the basketball court that
Speaker 1: can be captured by lineup data. Again, never something you
Speaker 1: want to take a take as like a as the
Speaker 1: end all be all, but it's a piece of information
Speaker 1: you should look at oh, these guys. These three guys
Speaker 1: always seem to play well together. We should lean into
Speaker 1: that more. For the last month, we've been playing these
Speaker 1: three guys and they've been sucking. Okay, maybe we need
Speaker 1: to mix it up a little bit. That's where lineup
Speaker 1: data can have advantage. But again, those are just some
Speaker 1: examples of data that I look at a lot. Last season,
Speaker 1: Luca had the best season of his career stat wise,
Speaker 1: thirty four points per game, nine rebounds almost tennisis top
Speaker 1: ten steals is a league top score, but did not
Speaker 1: get enough votes because the MAVs only finished fifth despite
Speaker 1: having fifty wins in a loaded West. Just like Westbrook
Speaker 1: when he won his MVP, with Okce finishing only sixth
Speaker 1: in the West and Yokich went he only won his
Speaker 1: second MVP with the Nuggets finishing likewise at sixth. Jokics
Speaker 1: could probably win another one even if the Nuggets are
Speaker 1: currently struggling at seventh. So does winning a lot matter
Speaker 1: or not? As Nick Wright just pointed out a few
Speaker 1: days ago, the MVP narrative criteria keeps changing. I agree
Speaker 1: with Nick right on that. First of all, you guys
Speaker 1: have notice I periodically will mention MVP or talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about MVP, but I'm not a big MVP guy.
Speaker 1: One of the main reasons why is because the criteria
Speaker 1: has shifted so many times over the years. It's so
Speaker 1: much a narrative contest. There are like substantial chunks of
Speaker 1: the MVP voter base who legitimately just look at advanced
Speaker 1: metrics or that allow advanced metrics like catch alls to
Speaker 1: be the determining factor in their vote. I think that's
Speaker 1: fucking insane. So, like, I distance myself from that debate
Speaker 1: as much as possible because it just frustrates me. I
Speaker 1: tend to agree though that, like, especially when you look
Speaker 1: at the Western Conference and actually, let's just get to
Speaker 1: the next question for this, what is the lowest seed
Speaker 1: the Nuggets can be for Jokics to still earn his
Speaker 1: fourth MVP if Yokic keeps averaging a massive triple double.
Speaker 1: So the way I look at it personally, for me,
Speaker 1: with MVP, it's a combination of a bunch of factors.
Speaker 1: It's a combination of like who's playing the best basketball,
Speaker 1: who's the most valuable to their team, and who's playing
Speaker 1: on the best team. So it's a combination of all
Speaker 1: those factors. So if you look at it, who's playing
Speaker 1: the best basketball? I'm looking specifically at like just overall,
Speaker 1: in a vacuum basketball impact, Yo Kich is dominating that
Speaker 1: for me right now? Okay, who's the most valuable to
Speaker 1: their team? Well, jokicch Just just watch the Nuggets. It's
Speaker 1: very clear that jo Kich is the most valuable to
Speaker 1: his specific team. Like, I'm a big Luka Doncic fan.
Speaker 1: The MAVs have been pretty good without him this year, right,
Speaker 1: so that's something that works against him to a certain extent.
Speaker 1: They have a very good roster. I think Dallas is
Speaker 1: a better team than Denver. I think Dallas is a
Speaker 1: better roster than Denver. I would pick Dallas over Denver
Speaker 1: in a playoff series as of right now, So like
Speaker 1: that's a big part of that, right, And then the
Speaker 1: best team part. I think Dallas will have an edge there.
Speaker 1: I think they'll finish higher in the standings. Right. If
Speaker 1: Luca wanted to win an MVP based on my voting,
Speaker 1: he would need to get closer to matching Jokic's overall
Speaker 1: level of impact, which right now is a thirty five
Speaker 1: point triple double or whatever the hell it is, and
Speaker 1: then he's going to need to demonstrate such a high
Speaker 1: level of play with the MAVs that there is a
Speaker 1: little bit of a drop off compared to when he's
Speaker 1: off the floor. He's capable of doing that. Right As
Speaker 1: far as the Western Conference goes, though, stop looking at seeding.
Speaker 1: I don't care about seeding. The West is two stacked.
Speaker 1: You could be a five or six seed out West
Speaker 1: and win fifty games, okay, So like to me, that's
Speaker 1: to me, it doesn't make sense to split hairs there.
Speaker 1: If there's a two seed that is fifty three wins
Speaker 1: and a six seed that has fifty wins, and the
Speaker 1: guy who's leading the sixth seed is a better basketball player,
Speaker 1: who's having a better season, who is more valuable to
Speaker 1: that fifty wins than the other guy is to his
Speaker 1: two seed fifty three wins, I think that that guy
Speaker 1: who won fifty games should be the guy who gets
Speaker 1: the awards. So again, it's a complicated combination of a
Speaker 1: bunch of factors. I do agree with you, though, that
Speaker 1: over indexing on the standings is silly when we're only
Speaker 1: talking about a couple of games in a really jam
Speaker 1: packed conference. I'd like your opinion on what the Nuggets
Speaker 1: should do. Is there a missing piece they could grab
Speaker 1: at the deadline? Do they need better coaching or scheme
Speaker 1: on defense? I've not seen anything on the coaching slash
Speaker 1: scheme front. This happens with a lot of teams after
Speaker 1: they start to have success, where it's like there's this
Speaker 1: huge chunk of Warriors fans that think Steve Kerr is
Speaker 1: bad coach. Like I just could not disagree more. I
Speaker 1: think he's the second or third best coach in the
Speaker 1: entire NBA. I think Mike Malone is a top five coach.
Speaker 1: I've seen a lot of Nuggets fans complaining about Mike Malone.
Speaker 1: So like, this is a typical thing that happens. It's
Speaker 1: like the burden of success, right, you've become really good,
Speaker 1: you have high expectations, and then you start looking for
Speaker 1: people to blame when you don't reach those expectations. So
Speaker 1: I don't really go down that route as it pertains
Speaker 1: to the list of guys at the top of the league. Again,
Speaker 1: for me, that's like kylu Eric Spolstra, Steve Kerr, Mike Malone,
Speaker 1: Like there's a bunch of guys in that Mark Daginal
Speaker 1: there's a bunch of guys in that tier in that
Speaker 1: like top ten guy, a group of coaches where like,
Speaker 1: like I think that there's gonna be a lot of
Speaker 1: criticism of them that's misplaced, just because their teams have
Speaker 1: such high expectations. Also, even the best coaches in the
Speaker 1: world are gonna make decisions that are fifty to fifty
Speaker 1: calls that if they go wrong, could be criticized. But like,
Speaker 1: if you're in that position, you can't say that you
Speaker 1: wouldn't make the same decision. And it's a difficult decision
Speaker 1: on its face to begin with. And now you're just
Speaker 1: playing the results. As far as the Nuggets go, the
Speaker 1: problem is is that in order to go about getting
Speaker 1: real offensive reinforcements, like similar to what we talked about
Speaker 1: with the Warriors, just like another reliable twenty plus point
Speaker 1: per game score, which the Nuggets have not been getting
Speaker 1: because of you know, Michael Porter junior being Michael Porter
Speaker 1: junior and Jamal Murray just not having a very good season, right,
Speaker 1: But in order to go about getting one of those
Speaker 1: higher level players, if I'm another team, I'm asking for
Speaker 1: a Christian Brown or Peyton Watson in that deal, and
Speaker 1: those two guys have become vitally important to making this
Speaker 1: whole situation work, and so with the Nuggets, their best
Speaker 1: bet is continued improvement in the roster. You got to
Speaker 1: cross your fingers and pray that you mul Murray gets
Speaker 1: it back together. As not to say you don't keep
Speaker 1: your eyes open on the market and if a good
Speaker 1: opportunity jumps you, it comes up, you jump on it.
Speaker 1: Of course, I'm just saying it's gonna be a It's
Speaker 1: gonna be a There's gonna be a lot of people
Speaker 1: looking to buy at the trademarket this year, and Denver's
Speaker 1: gonna have to give up a lot to get what
Speaker 1: they want, and at this point, I think their better
Speaker 1: option is to just hope for internal improvement. You said
Speaker 1: you're not concerned with the amount of three point shooting
Speaker 1: because you think defenses will evolve and guard the three
Speaker 1: point line better. How do you expect defenses to mold
Speaker 1: over the next five years to guard the three point
Speaker 1: line better? Thanks for the content, Love the show. I
Speaker 1: think it's gonna mostly come down to what teams do
Speaker 1: in rotation as speed becomes more at the forefront of
Speaker 1: what makes modern NBA defense successful. I think we're gonna
Speaker 1: see a lot more aggression with really sharp backside rotations.
Speaker 1: So in theory, even when you double team as soon
Speaker 1: as a guy, as soon as the guy who has
Speaker 1: the ball gives it up, there is a sequence where
Speaker 1: if you nail it in rotation, you can get out
Speaker 1: of it. So for instance, if you let's say it's
Speaker 1: a post up double team and there's a passer on
Speaker 1: the left wing, he drops the ball to the post
Speaker 1: and maybe they run a little split cut clear out
Speaker 1: whatever it is. Now the guy's posting on the left block,
Speaker 1: if he draws a second defender, you can set it
Speaker 1: up so that the only opening is the skip pass
Speaker 1: on the weak side. And you can have it set
Speaker 1: up as well because there's usually a guy in a
Speaker 1: dunker spot in that situation, or a guy setting a
Speaker 1: pin and flare somebody around the opposite kind of short
Speaker 1: corner area. If you have a good defender in that
Speaker 1: spot who's being active with his hands, it'll have to
Speaker 1: be a lob. If it has to be a lobb,
Speaker 1: then there's a chance to rotate. And if you're really
Speaker 1: sharpening your rotations and everyone quickly spread out to where
Speaker 1: they're supposed to go, the advantage can be gone, and
Speaker 1: so like whether it's a four on three and a
Speaker 1: ball screen or a four on three in a post
Speaker 1: up or whatever it is, I do eventually think teams
Speaker 1: will get better and better and better at rotating out
Speaker 1: of those situations, and that will be something that takes
Speaker 1: away shots at the three point line. And then what
Speaker 1: will happen is the teams offensively that thrive are the
Speaker 1: teams that stay with their ball in player movement, that
Speaker 1: stay difficult to guard in rotation by not just standing
Speaker 1: in single spots and waiting for guys to close out
Speaker 1: at him. But again, I think most of the defensive
Speaker 1: approach to guarding the three point line will center around
Speaker 1: just really really sharp rotations and closeouts or right will
Speaker 1: do a couple more. Hey, Jason love the pod. It's
Speaker 1: my daily watch. I have a mailbag question that I
Speaker 1: for sure needs your take on more than any other
Speaker 1: analyst out there. I want your take on another POD's
Speaker 1: take on Gobart's value to sum it up. The take was,
Speaker 1: defensive versatility is undervalued and rim protection is overvalued. What
Speaker 1: do you think about that? I agree defensive value defensive
Speaker 1: versatility is undervalued in rim protection is overvalued. What that
Speaker 1: means to me is like if you have a guy
Speaker 1: like Jolanbie. To me is the case study for this.
Speaker 1: If Joelanbe can sit in a deep drop coverage and
Speaker 1: play in the half court all night long, then he's
Speaker 1: one of the best defenders in the league. But as
Speaker 1: soon as the game enters into a phase where there's
Speaker 1: a lot of transition play or where he has to
Speaker 1: cover ground on the perimeter, he becomes a bad defender.
Speaker 1: And that's an example of like rim protection that is
Speaker 1: not defensively versatile and thus a weakness. That's it. I
Speaker 1: think Gobert is defensively versatile and is a rim protector.
Speaker 1: All of my concerns with Rudy Gobert stem on the
Speaker 1: offensive end of the four in his ability to ever
Speaker 1: catch a damn thing around the basket and finish it
Speaker 1: unless it's an easy dunk. He struggles on offense. It
Speaker 1: limits the Minnesota Timberwolves. That's the criticism of Gobert that
Speaker 1: makes sense to me. On the defensive end, Rudy Gobert
Speaker 1: is one of the best rim protectors in the league
Speaker 1: while also being one of the best guy bigs that
Speaker 1: can defend out on the perimeter and defend in a
Speaker 1: bunch of different circumstances. I don't understand the criticism of
Speaker 1: Rudy as a defensive player. Hi, Jason love the show.
Speaker 1: By the way, what do you think the Grizzlies need
Speaker 1: to become a true championship contender? Time and repetition At
Speaker 1: this point, talent is not an issue. Depth is not
Speaker 1: an issue. It's just a simple case of like John Morant,
Speaker 1: Jaron Jackson, Desmond Bain, these guys need continuity, lots of repetition,
Speaker 1: lots of experience, lots of big games under their belt
Speaker 1: so that they can get to where they need to
Speaker 1: get as individual basketball players to carry a team to
Speaker 1: a title. Memphis all the ingredients as long as there's
Speaker 1: internal improvement, so that is like John ran becoming more
Speaker 1: consistent as a pull up jump shooter so that teams
Speaker 1: can't just pack the pain on him in ball screens.
Speaker 1: Jared Jackson just becoming a more reliable version of what
Speaker 1: he's been the last few weeks, which is a guy
Speaker 1: that can really knock down threes and hit hook shots
Speaker 1: over both shoulders against size mismatches in the post. Right,
Speaker 1: Like tying all that together and then there's like a
Speaker 1: scar tissue element, right Like I talked about this a
Speaker 1: lot like failure breeds a fear of losing. A fear
Speaker 1: of losing breeds better attention to detail. Better attention to
Speaker 1: detail carries you in in any sort of like adversity
Speaker 1: that you have faced, the that you face in the postseason.
Speaker 1: So like, there's a lot of opportunity to to get
Speaker 1: better through loss in a lot of ways. And so
Speaker 1: it might take two three years for Memphis with this
Speaker 1: group to get to where they need to be. But
Speaker 1: right now, you just got to let them play, and
Speaker 1: guys got to stay healthy, they got to stay on
Speaker 1: the court, and they need lots of repetition and experience together.
Speaker 1: Last question, why is it you consider Luca better than
Speaker 1: Yannis Gianna says the championship edge, multiple MVPs, Defensive Player
Speaker 1: of the Year Trophy, all NBA defensive teams, and actually
Speaker 1: competes on defense while being the league's leading score. Not
Speaker 1: sure there's ever been a time in the NBA when
Speaker 1: a guy with those accolades at the peak of his
Speaker 1: powers isn't considered top two in the world. Luca's thirty
Speaker 1: slash forty point triple doubles are awesome, but that would
Speaker 1: be like putting prime James Harden over Lebron simply because
Speaker 1: of the offensive brilliant, brilliant, slash volumes, volume of stats.
Speaker 1: In a helio centric offense, usually their teams fall short
Speaker 1: in the postseason due to their awful defense. So Giannis
Speaker 1: is having a better season than Luca this year. It's
Speaker 1: the last year. Luca had a better season because he
Speaker 1: came on super strong at the end, and he had
Speaker 1: a much better playoff run because Gianni's got hurt again.
Speaker 1: So here's the thing, Like, Yeah, if Giannis finishes this
Speaker 1: season playing the way he's playing and then has a
Speaker 1: more impressive playoff run than Luca, then he will take
Speaker 1: that spot back to me. Last year, I thought Luca
Speaker 1: was better. Luca has been playing really well since he
Speaker 1: came back, been getting closer to that Giannis Jokic level,
Speaker 1: and I think he'll stay there and it'll be a
Speaker 1: more complicated debate as a basketball concept, though, simply put,
Speaker 1: as I've said many times, it is much easier to
Speaker 1: cover for defensive deficiencies in a star through scheme and
Speaker 1: through defensive role players and allowing your offensive superpower to
Speaker 1: carry over the top than it is to do the reverse,
Speaker 1: which is to have a star that is a defensive
Speaker 1: minded player, but then to try to have to cover
Speaker 1: for his offensive weaknesses. It's a lot harder to just
Speaker 1: find a Damian Lillard like lying around somewhere for you
Speaker 1: to bring in to run your offense in big late
Speaker 1: game situations. Now, for the record, Giannis has been pretty
Speaker 1: good this year, even as an over the top shot maker.
Speaker 1: He's a better half court player than he's ever been
Speaker 1: in his career. Giannis is having a great season. It's
Speaker 1: December tenth, though, I'm going to wait for a whole
Speaker 1: season before we start having big picture topics about who
Speaker 1: a player might be better. That's why we do player
Speaker 1: rankings in August and September and not in the middle
Speaker 1: of the season. So hopefully that explains that for you guys.
Speaker 1: All right, This all have for today is always to
Speaker 1: sincerely appreciate you guys for supporting me and supporting the show.
Speaker 1: We'll be back tomorrow with a breakdown of the nd
Speaker 1: season tournament games with some film. I'll see you guys
Speaker 1: then the volume what so, guys, As always, I appreciate
Speaker 1: you for listening to and supporting Hoops tonight. It would
Speaker 1: actually be really helpful for us if you guys would
Speaker 1: take a second and leave a rating and a review.
Speaker 1: As always, I appreciate you guys supporting us, but if
Speaker 1: you could take a minute to do that, I'd really
Speaker 1: appreciate it.