WEBVTT - What's Wright - Aaron Rodgers HUGE MISTAKE for Steelers + is Pacers-Thunder already over?

0:00:07.280 --> 0:00:10.360
<v Speaker 1>Welcome in episode three thirty eight, What's Right with Nick Right,

0:00:10.440 --> 0:00:14.640
<v Speaker 1>and check this out fresh from a trip to Vegas.

0:00:15.000 --> 0:00:18.200
<v Speaker 1>This couldn't have come any The timing couldn't have been better,

0:00:18.760 --> 0:00:23.160
<v Speaker 1>because while the show is more than solvent, I don't

0:00:23.160 --> 0:00:25.200
<v Speaker 1>know that I am anymore. So, you know what, we

0:00:25.239 --> 0:00:28.280
<v Speaker 1>need sponsors, and we got a brand new one. This

0:00:28.360 --> 0:00:32.080
<v Speaker 1>episode of What's Right is resented to you by boost

0:00:32.720 --> 0:00:37.680
<v Speaker 1>Mobile and Demonte. We have been for three years doing

0:00:37.720 --> 0:00:40.400
<v Speaker 1>What Missed the Cut off the top of the show

0:00:40.840 --> 0:00:43.440
<v Speaker 1>as a way to kind of get in some quick

0:00:43.520 --> 0:00:46.479
<v Speaker 1>hit or stuff that doesn't really deserve a full segment.

0:00:46.520 --> 0:00:50.640
<v Speaker 1>But also, I'll be honest, it's always it's been kind

0:00:50.680 --> 0:00:55.080
<v Speaker 1>of sponsorship bait, like that's a great segment right off

0:00:55.120 --> 0:00:59.480
<v Speaker 1>the top that someone should gobble up. How about this

0:01:00.120 --> 0:01:03.360
<v Speaker 1>no longer What Missed the Cut now known as straight

0:01:03.480 --> 0:01:09.720
<v Speaker 1>the voicemail. Guess that these people Boost Mobile, Trevor Lawrence,

0:01:10.040 --> 0:01:12.679
<v Speaker 1>the producers are such jerks. They want me to say this.

0:01:12.760 --> 0:01:16.000
<v Speaker 1>Trevor Lawrence stuns in new photo. I mean, listen, the

0:01:16.040 --> 0:01:19.520
<v Speaker 1>guy does look quite regal. I mean, let's be honest here,

0:01:19.560 --> 0:01:24.080
<v Speaker 1>that guy looks outstanding. Wimby embraces monk culture at the

0:01:24.120 --> 0:01:28.560
<v Speaker 1>Shaolin Temple that's actually really cool, and shaved head Wimby

0:01:28.680 --> 0:01:33.280
<v Speaker 1>is a little more intimidating. And Adam Sandler offers Derrick

0:01:33.360 --> 0:01:38.640
<v Speaker 1>Henry a movie role if he hits two thousand yards. Now.

0:01:38.680 --> 0:01:44.160
<v Speaker 1>This was broker by my friend Dan Patrick, which means

0:01:44.800 --> 0:01:48.000
<v Speaker 1>I am going to try to play a similar card.

0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:52.080
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna see if there is some threshold, some something

0:01:52.520 --> 0:01:57.080
<v Speaker 1>that I can that Dan doesn't think I can do that.

0:01:57.240 --> 0:02:00.360
<v Speaker 1>Dan will then leverage into Okay, if you do that,

0:02:00.720 --> 0:02:03.360
<v Speaker 1>I'll get you in one of the Sandler's movies. I

0:02:03.440 --> 0:02:10.080
<v Speaker 1>think that's possible, so uh, it'd be great. Years ago,

0:02:10.760 --> 0:02:14.799
<v Speaker 1>we tried to get demands on the HBO show Showtime

0:02:14.960 --> 0:02:18.639
<v Speaker 1>as Young Byron Scott. We were not yet able to leverage.

0:02:18.639 --> 0:02:20.960
<v Speaker 1>We weren't able to leverage the show for that. Maybe

0:02:20.960 --> 0:02:23.920
<v Speaker 1>I can leverage my relationship with Dan Patrick for something else.

0:02:23.960 --> 0:02:28.120
<v Speaker 1>But I am back in New York. I am in

0:02:28.600 --> 0:02:33.200
<v Speaker 1>a I go through this once every few years when

0:02:33.480 --> 0:02:37.600
<v Speaker 1>I prepare and I plot and I study, and I

0:02:37.680 --> 0:02:41.080
<v Speaker 1>get all ready for a big poker trip and then

0:02:41.120 --> 0:02:45.080
<v Speaker 1>I have my absolute guts ripped out by I can't

0:02:45.080 --> 0:02:49.760
<v Speaker 1>even say bad luck, just poor play, over zealousness, being

0:02:49.800 --> 0:02:52.640
<v Speaker 1>too excited. Where I am now in something of a

0:02:52.760 --> 0:02:56.640
<v Speaker 1>poker detox, where I just like the I'm not gonna

0:02:56.960 --> 0:02:59.120
<v Speaker 1>I gotta take a few days away from even watching

0:02:59.160 --> 0:03:02.200
<v Speaker 1>the World series. My buddies are out there still final

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:05.400
<v Speaker 1>tabling stuff. I can't even like really sweat them and

0:03:05.480 --> 0:03:09.680
<v Speaker 1>root them on. It's like the feeling one gets right

0:03:09.800 --> 0:03:14.520
<v Speaker 1>after in college drinking way too much of a certain liquor,

0:03:14.880 --> 0:03:17.200
<v Speaker 1>where like the next time you go out and you

0:03:17.240 --> 0:03:20.640
<v Speaker 1>get just a whiff of it, you feel that hungover feeling. Again.

0:03:21.200 --> 0:03:25.200
<v Speaker 1>Imagine that, except imagine if instead of having a terrible headache,

0:03:25.639 --> 0:03:28.840
<v Speaker 1>you know, you lost the equivalent of a I don't know,

0:03:29.120 --> 0:03:32.160
<v Speaker 1>a mid size semi luxury sedan. All right, deman s

0:03:33.000 --> 0:03:36.720
<v Speaker 1>like rate, subscribe, review, everybody check out the show on

0:03:36.840 --> 0:03:41.800
<v Speaker 1>all available platforms, and again, if for no other reason,

0:03:41.880 --> 0:03:47.480
<v Speaker 1>then you know, in some ways subscriptions funnel down eventually

0:03:47.560 --> 0:03:49.640
<v Speaker 1>into money in my pocket, and right now I need it.

0:03:50.240 --> 0:03:51.160
<v Speaker 1>Where are we starting, pal?

0:03:52.240 --> 0:03:54.880
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, So, after the crazy comeback by the Pacers in

0:03:54.920 --> 0:03:58.240
<v Speaker 2>game one, Haliburton hit that crazy shot you know, okase

0:03:58.320 --> 0:04:00.120
<v Speaker 2>he came back in game two and was shown in

0:04:00.160 --> 0:04:03.440
<v Speaker 2>their showing their stripes. They look dominant. Ye, based on

0:04:03.520 --> 0:04:06.200
<v Speaker 2>what you've seen so far. How comfortable were you with

0:04:06.240 --> 0:04:08.520
<v Speaker 2>your bet that you placed at the beginning? Okay see

0:04:08.560 --> 0:04:09.560
<v Speaker 2>minus one and a half?

0:04:10.560 --> 0:04:15.200
<v Speaker 1>Well, I mean here what I will say about that

0:04:15.240 --> 0:04:17.440
<v Speaker 1>bet to put a little pin in Vegas for now?

0:04:19.600 --> 0:04:23.119
<v Speaker 1>That bet was a luxury bet when I placed it.

0:04:23.120 --> 0:04:28.840
<v Speaker 1>It's a necessity bet now I just can't you can't

0:04:28.960 --> 0:04:32.560
<v Speaker 1>have you can't have bet of the year go awry

0:04:33.560 --> 0:04:39.800
<v Speaker 1>right after a five day poker bludgeting. Obviously, the bet

0:04:39.920 --> 0:04:45.080
<v Speaker 1>didn't look great after Indiana steels game one because then

0:04:45.760 --> 0:04:49.200
<v Speaker 1>for the thunder Haft to win in four, five or six,

0:04:49.279 --> 0:04:52.080
<v Speaker 1>for that bet to win and after you lose game one,

0:04:52.320 --> 0:04:58.440
<v Speaker 1>four is literally eliminated and five is potentially eliminated. However,

0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:02.159
<v Speaker 1>we now have had ninety six minutes of this series.

0:05:03.000 --> 0:05:06.360
<v Speaker 1>The Indiana Pacers have led for two of those minutes.

0:05:07.880 --> 0:05:12.080
<v Speaker 1>I do not think there is a single player on

0:05:12.279 --> 0:05:17.200
<v Speaker 1>the Pacers demonte who can say I like how I'm playing.

0:05:18.200 --> 0:05:21.600
<v Speaker 1>I don't think there is a single matchup in this

0:05:21.720 --> 0:05:25.200
<v Speaker 1>series right now that Rick Carlisle can look at and

0:05:25.240 --> 0:05:30.240
<v Speaker 1>be like bang, that's where we take advantage. So even

0:05:30.400 --> 0:05:37.360
<v Speaker 1>though it's one one I feel just as confident as

0:05:37.400 --> 0:05:42.640
<v Speaker 1>I did before the series that this is a real mismatch.

0:05:43.480 --> 0:05:47.880
<v Speaker 1>And again, it is no shame in it for the Pacers.

0:05:47.920 --> 0:05:50.120
<v Speaker 1>And if you disagree, we can discuss it in a second.

0:05:50.120 --> 0:05:55.520
<v Speaker 1>But it it's no shame in the Pacers that they

0:05:55.560 --> 0:05:59.200
<v Speaker 1>have finally found an opponent that is truly out of

0:05:59.240 --> 0:06:04.440
<v Speaker 1>their weight classes. This Oklahoma City team is eighty one

0:06:04.720 --> 0:06:09.200
<v Speaker 1>and nineteen on the year. No one has been able

0:06:09.240 --> 0:06:13.480
<v Speaker 1>to deal with Shay all year long, and Nie Smith

0:06:13.520 --> 0:06:16.480
<v Speaker 1>and Nimhard are not gonna be any different in that regard.

0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:22.080
<v Speaker 1>And you don't look at anything Oklahoma City has done

0:06:22.120 --> 0:06:27.719
<v Speaker 1>thus far and say, oh, well that's not sustainable. Oh well,

0:06:27.800 --> 0:06:30.919
<v Speaker 1>that guy's not gonna keep playing like that. If anything,

0:06:30.960 --> 0:06:33.800
<v Speaker 1>you look at how Jalen Williams is playing. I think

0:06:33.839 --> 0:06:37.440
<v Speaker 1>he's eleven of thirty three for the series. Uh, fact

0:06:37.480 --> 0:06:39.880
<v Speaker 1>check me on that, guys, if you would. Jalen Williams

0:06:39.880 --> 0:06:41.920
<v Speaker 1>total shooting splits in the series. But I think he's

0:06:41.920 --> 0:06:44.640
<v Speaker 1>eleven of thirty three and I think Chet has only

0:06:44.680 --> 0:06:48.000
<v Speaker 1>made one to three the entire series. If anything, you

0:06:48.040 --> 0:06:51.839
<v Speaker 1>look at that and you say, well, those guys should

0:06:51.880 --> 0:06:56.160
<v Speaker 1>get a little bit better, and will Shay average thirty

0:06:56.279 --> 0:06:59.360
<v Speaker 1>four a game in this series. Maybe not thirty four,

0:07:00.080 --> 0:07:03.479
<v Speaker 1>but will he average thirty Well, he has all year,

0:07:05.120 --> 0:07:13.440
<v Speaker 1>and so I just think that there is there's not

0:07:13.600 --> 0:07:20.080
<v Speaker 1>a lot of adjustments Indiana can make aside from try

0:07:20.120 --> 0:07:24.040
<v Speaker 1>to get hot from three and that might be worth

0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:28.360
<v Speaker 1>a game, but that I do not think is going

0:07:28.440 --> 0:07:31.600
<v Speaker 1>to be worth multiple games, and they need it to

0:07:31.640 --> 0:07:36.400
<v Speaker 1>be worth three games. And so we didn't end up

0:07:36.440 --> 0:07:42.080
<v Speaker 1>making the series exacta bets, which is, you know, game

0:07:42.120 --> 0:07:44.480
<v Speaker 1>one this way, Game two that way, so on and

0:07:44.560 --> 0:07:47.760
<v Speaker 1>so forth. And I'm glad we didn't because I obviously

0:07:47.840 --> 0:07:52.840
<v Speaker 1>would have gotten game one wrong. But in that I

0:07:52.960 --> 0:07:56.320
<v Speaker 1>thought we would head to Game three with the Thunder

0:07:56.600 --> 0:08:01.040
<v Speaker 1>up to nothing, and then they let their foot off

0:08:01.040 --> 0:08:03.360
<v Speaker 1>the gas a bit and the Pacers steal Game three,

0:08:03.560 --> 0:08:07.320
<v Speaker 1>and then the Thunder retake control in game four because

0:08:07.400 --> 0:08:11.480
<v Speaker 1>the Thunder already lost a game. I now feel like

0:08:11.640 --> 0:08:14.880
<v Speaker 1>there will be no foot off the gas in game three,

0:08:15.240 --> 0:08:19.200
<v Speaker 1>and the Thunder will be in position to retake home

0:08:19.240 --> 0:08:23.920
<v Speaker 1>court advantage in game three, which is what I fully

0:08:24.040 --> 0:08:27.800
<v Speaker 1>expect them to do. So before we get to Morche

0:08:27.880 --> 0:08:32.240
<v Speaker 1>and Haliburton stuff, Demonse, you I saw your kind of

0:08:32.360 --> 0:08:35.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, yeah reaction. When I was saying that, I

0:08:35.679 --> 0:08:38.960
<v Speaker 1>thought there was just there was no spot where the

0:08:39.000 --> 0:08:42.320
<v Speaker 1>Pacers had an edge or you know, nobody's playing that well,

0:08:42.360 --> 0:08:43.000
<v Speaker 1>so go ahead.

0:08:43.360 --> 0:08:44.920
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, No, they are out match.

0:08:45.000 --> 0:08:46.880
<v Speaker 2>I was just saying, like, with the first game, I

0:08:46.880 --> 0:08:49.120
<v Speaker 2>feel like they played a pretty poor game. They obviously

0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:51.360
<v Speaker 2>I think they had over twenty turnovers and they still

0:08:51.400 --> 0:08:53.280
<v Speaker 2>may have to get the win. So I was just saying,

0:08:53.280 --> 0:08:55.000
<v Speaker 2>with those stats, I feel like they should be able

0:08:55.040 --> 0:08:57.400
<v Speaker 2>to do something. But you say that there's just no

0:08:57.559 --> 0:09:01.000
<v Speaker 2>mismatches that Indiana can exploit. I understand that there is

0:09:01.040 --> 0:09:03.480
<v Speaker 2>not a single guy on there that you can just say,

0:09:03.520 --> 0:09:08.240
<v Speaker 2>go get a bucket or no. Yeah, they are outmatched,

0:09:08.280 --> 0:09:10.480
<v Speaker 2>but got And here's the.

0:09:10.440 --> 0:09:19.280
<v Speaker 1>Other piece of it. They win the turnovers. Thing isn't fluky.

0:09:19.320 --> 0:09:23.160
<v Speaker 1>This is what OKAC does to people. Yeah, and they

0:09:23.200 --> 0:09:26.000
<v Speaker 1>particularly this is one of the reasons. And I thought

0:09:26.080 --> 0:09:29.160
<v Speaker 1>this was a mistake. It was mistake, might be too strong,

0:09:29.200 --> 0:09:33.679
<v Speaker 1>but I was shocked that OKC changed their starting lineup

0:09:33.720 --> 0:09:37.640
<v Speaker 1>before Game one, that when they had been this dominant

0:09:37.640 --> 0:09:40.920
<v Speaker 1>team all year, that they took Hartenstein out of the

0:09:40.920 --> 0:09:44.680
<v Speaker 1>starting lineup. But they did that to add another perimeter defender,

0:09:46.160 --> 0:09:49.040
<v Speaker 1>so they could just harass the pacers out on the

0:09:50.040 --> 0:09:54.960
<v Speaker 1>you know, on the perimeter, and they they caused nineteen

0:09:55.240 --> 0:09:59.120
<v Speaker 1>first half turnovers in Game one. Now what was fluky

0:09:59.160 --> 0:10:03.800
<v Speaker 1>about that was despite causing all those turnovers, they weren't

0:10:03.840 --> 0:10:06.600
<v Speaker 1>getting fast break points. They weren't getting as many points

0:10:06.600 --> 0:10:12.240
<v Speaker 1>off turnovers. But it's still dead possessions and there Listen.

0:10:13.000 --> 0:10:21.120
<v Speaker 1>It is incredibly difficult too. I know this is going

0:10:21.160 --> 0:10:27.760
<v Speaker 1>to sound almost sacrilegious to how basketball is supposed to

0:10:27.840 --> 0:10:34.160
<v Speaker 1>be played, but it is incredibly difficult. And history will

0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:39.640
<v Speaker 1>back me up on this. To win a championship, if

0:10:39.679 --> 0:10:45.280
<v Speaker 1>your best player is a true pass first point guard

0:10:46.000 --> 0:10:50.800
<v Speaker 1>that is not a natural scorer, if you don't either

0:10:51.040 --> 0:10:55.199
<v Speaker 1>have to go along with that person the best defense

0:10:55.240 --> 0:11:02.600
<v Speaker 1>in the league or a go to dominant big that

0:11:02.640 --> 0:11:05.400
<v Speaker 1>he can get a lot of his you know, assists to.

0:11:05.880 --> 0:11:09.000
<v Speaker 1>So when you look at the most traditional kind of

0:11:09.480 --> 0:11:14.439
<v Speaker 1>pass first elite point guards in NBA history and you

0:11:14.480 --> 0:11:17.040
<v Speaker 1>go and that Listen, I'm not putting Halliburton on the

0:11:17.160 --> 0:11:20.880
<v Speaker 1>historical list, but he obviously is a pass first point guard.

0:11:21.360 --> 0:11:26.839
<v Speaker 1>Chris Paul ran into this where it's like, Okay, I

0:11:27.679 --> 0:11:30.880
<v Speaker 1>I am I'm the best player on the team. Yes,

0:11:31.120 --> 0:11:35.000
<v Speaker 1>I can score, but this is not really where my

0:11:36.000 --> 0:11:40.560
<v Speaker 1>bread is buttered, so to speak. And then as competition

0:11:40.640 --> 0:11:43.960
<v Speaker 1>gets harder and harder, and the other teams more and

0:11:44.080 --> 0:11:48.640
<v Speaker 1>more talented, eventually I'm going to play a team that

0:11:49.520 --> 0:11:53.720
<v Speaker 1>is going to have enough talent of their own on

0:11:53.800 --> 0:11:59.800
<v Speaker 1>the perimeter, particularly defensively or inside defensively to slow down

0:11:59.840 --> 0:12:03.080
<v Speaker 1>the guys. I'm trying to spoon feed these buckets too.

0:12:04.000 --> 0:12:09.120
<v Speaker 1>And he never made He didn't make a finals until

0:12:09.440 --> 0:12:13.280
<v Speaker 1>he was alongside a dominant scorer and booker, and they

0:12:13.320 --> 0:12:15.199
<v Speaker 1>didn't even they you know, when they made the finals,

0:12:15.280 --> 0:12:20.960
<v Speaker 1>didn't win. Steve Nash he could score like Haliburton can score,

0:12:21.360 --> 0:12:24.360
<v Speaker 1>but he's a career like eighteen point a game guy.

0:12:24.720 --> 0:12:28.319
<v Speaker 1>He's a pass first wizard who never had those dominant

0:12:28.360 --> 0:12:33.040
<v Speaker 1>defenses and had a hard ceiling. Some bad luck, some injuries,

0:12:33.080 --> 0:12:36.679
<v Speaker 1>some bad suspensions. I get it, though. Of the NBA Finals,

0:12:36.920 --> 0:12:40.199
<v Speaker 1>Chauncey did it, and Chauncey's not the caliber of those

0:12:40.240 --> 0:12:43.560
<v Speaker 1>two previous players, but that was the best defense in basketball.

0:12:43.880 --> 0:12:46.880
<v Speaker 1>Isaiah Thomas did it. But that was the best defense

0:12:46.960 --> 0:12:52.720
<v Speaker 1>in basketball, and Isaiah had real, real high end scoring

0:12:52.800 --> 0:12:58.360
<v Speaker 1>ability that he kind of tempered on his own. I mean,

0:12:58.720 --> 0:13:03.720
<v Speaker 1>John Stockton had Carl Malone as the go to score.

0:13:04.120 --> 0:13:08.040
<v Speaker 1>He's a pass first guy, and those teams were championship caliber.

0:13:08.080 --> 0:13:10.720
<v Speaker 1>They just ran into the bulls. But you had stockedon,

0:13:10.840 --> 0:13:14.439
<v Speaker 1>you had Malone to go alongside alongside him, and people

0:13:14.480 --> 0:13:17.520
<v Speaker 1>will be like, well, Magic did it, and you can't

0:13:17.559 --> 0:13:20.480
<v Speaker 1>even be like, well he had Kareem because older man

0:13:20.760 --> 0:13:24.000
<v Speaker 1>like it the for the last couple championships that was

0:13:24.080 --> 0:13:27.320
<v Speaker 1>not the same cream. But Magic's one of the five

0:13:27.360 --> 0:13:32.160
<v Speaker 1>greatest players in the history of the league, and as

0:13:32.200 --> 0:13:37.040
<v Speaker 1>great as great as Coozy was, Like they didn't win.

0:13:37.520 --> 0:13:40.160
<v Speaker 1>It's a little unfair to Cooozy, but they didn't win

0:13:41.400 --> 0:13:44.280
<v Speaker 1>until they got Russell and they had the best defensive

0:13:44.320 --> 0:13:47.920
<v Speaker 1>player in the history of the sport. It's just so

0:13:48.559 --> 0:13:55.760
<v Speaker 1>hard to win four rounds if your best player can't

0:13:55.800 --> 0:13:59.920
<v Speaker 1>reliably just go get you a bucket. And it's one

0:14:00.080 --> 0:14:04.439
<v Speaker 1>of the reasons why I have always been a defender

0:14:04.480 --> 0:14:08.559
<v Speaker 1>of Luca, even though people don't like the heliocentric style,

0:14:10.320 --> 0:14:15.560
<v Speaker 1>because guys like like Luca and Lebron, they are at

0:14:15.640 --> 0:14:22.119
<v Speaker 1>their core past first players, but they are also dominant scorers.

0:14:23.680 --> 0:14:27.720
<v Speaker 1>And so I know I'm kind of stepping a bit

0:14:27.800 --> 0:14:32.280
<v Speaker 1>on the Haliburton conversation, but we'll still get to it

0:14:33.240 --> 0:14:37.240
<v Speaker 1>because there's something specific about how he's playing. But it's

0:14:37.360 --> 0:14:47.240
<v Speaker 1>just it is. If you don't have if you are,

0:14:47.360 --> 0:14:49.680
<v Speaker 1>let me rephrase it, let me kind of turn it

0:14:49.720 --> 0:14:56.160
<v Speaker 1>a bit. The Pacers are an offensive minded team. There

0:14:56.280 --> 0:15:01.920
<v Speaker 1>is no precedent for a team that is their identity

0:15:02.040 --> 0:15:06.720
<v Speaker 1>is their offense to be able to win four straight rounds.

0:15:07.920 --> 0:15:13.000
<v Speaker 1>If they don't have anyone on that offense that you

0:15:13.120 --> 0:15:16.160
<v Speaker 1>are not at all surprised. In fact, you kind of

0:15:16.240 --> 0:15:20.840
<v Speaker 1>expect them to go for thirty. And so it's a

0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:26.200
<v Speaker 1>very thin needle that's trying to be threaded here, which

0:15:26.280 --> 0:15:29.600
<v Speaker 1>is the thunder of the better defense, we have the

0:15:29.600 --> 0:15:32.480
<v Speaker 1>better offense. The thunder, by the way, also have far

0:15:32.520 --> 0:15:35.920
<v Speaker 1>and away the best offensive player in the series. It's

0:15:35.960 --> 0:15:44.920
<v Speaker 1>a tough spot and that's where I think the that's

0:15:45.040 --> 0:15:49.280
<v Speaker 1>the hard ceiling the Pacers have run into. I know,

0:15:49.320 --> 0:15:51.240
<v Speaker 1>you want to talk a little Lesga before we get

0:15:51.280 --> 0:15:52.000
<v Speaker 1>to the other stuff.

0:15:53.000 --> 0:15:56.080
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, Bruce said, SGA is a little too mature

0:15:56.360 --> 0:15:57.920
<v Speaker 2>to be the face of the league.

0:15:59.520 --> 0:16:01.320
<v Speaker 3>Can we play That's what's going on.

0:16:01.480 --> 0:16:06.080
<v Speaker 1>So he was SGA just had such like a measured,

0:16:06.920 --> 0:16:11.800
<v Speaker 1>mature response to how every game is a reset. He's like, listen,

0:16:11.880 --> 0:16:15.240
<v Speaker 1>we've won by fifty, and then we've lost big, we

0:16:15.320 --> 0:16:17.680
<v Speaker 1>lost at home, and then we won by forty. And

0:16:17.720 --> 0:16:22.760
<v Speaker 1>he was just very calm, cool and collected. I don't think.

0:16:24.480 --> 0:16:27.800
<v Speaker 1>Here's what I think, because there there's going We already

0:16:27.880 --> 0:16:32.560
<v Speaker 1>knew this was coming that in Oklahoma City, Indiana Pacers

0:16:32.680 --> 0:16:39.560
<v Speaker 1>NBA Finals was not going to capture the imagination of America.

0:16:40.120 --> 0:16:43.680
<v Speaker 1>So we knew the ratings would not be great and

0:16:43.720 --> 0:16:47.120
<v Speaker 1>people and I listen, Adam Silver went on Breakfast Ball

0:16:47.680 --> 0:16:50.640
<v Speaker 1>and he was like, if it was Steelers Packers, people

0:16:50.680 --> 0:16:54.920
<v Speaker 1>would be celebrating it. Steelers Packers are one hundred year

0:16:54.960 --> 0:16:58.160
<v Speaker 1>old brands. Yeah, it was you know what, I like

0:16:58.600 --> 0:17:04.320
<v Speaker 1>the league exactly right, And so that is not the

0:17:04.440 --> 0:17:10.159
<v Speaker 1>right comp The right comp is if it were the Colts. No,

0:17:10.320 --> 0:17:14.720
<v Speaker 1>just say it again, the Colts no, because the cults

0:17:14.760 --> 0:17:18.479
<v Speaker 1>even have a sure if I mean, I'll take that,

0:17:18.640 --> 0:17:29.399
<v Speaker 1>But Colts Panthers, or if it were Jags Saints, you know,

0:17:29.600 --> 0:17:33.760
<v Speaker 1>like it wouldn't it would feel Now it's the NFL

0:17:33.920 --> 0:17:38.320
<v Speaker 1>and the NFL doesn't rely on individual star power as

0:17:38.400 --> 0:17:41.479
<v Speaker 1>much as the NBA does obviously, so there would be

0:17:41.560 --> 0:17:44.919
<v Speaker 1>some of it, but it wouldn't feel as exciting. Now.

0:17:45.520 --> 0:17:48.880
<v Speaker 1>What some folks might say is, yeah, Kansas City might

0:17:48.920 --> 0:17:53.800
<v Speaker 1>as well be Oklahoma City in one hundred. That is true,

0:17:54.240 --> 0:18:01.240
<v Speaker 1>That is correct, which is why Oklahoma City can become

0:18:01.960 --> 0:18:09.000
<v Speaker 1>a huge draw, but it needs sustained long term success.

0:18:10.080 --> 0:18:17.040
<v Speaker 1>You know, people are just now recognizing who these guys

0:18:17.080 --> 0:18:20.199
<v Speaker 1>are and how good they are. The point Brew was

0:18:20.320 --> 0:18:26.880
<v Speaker 1>either intentionally or unintentionally making is the short The shortcut

0:18:26.920 --> 0:18:32.800
<v Speaker 1>to that is to be controversial or polarizing, and Shay

0:18:32.960 --> 0:18:35.960
<v Speaker 1>is not going to be that. Like the shortcut to

0:18:36.760 --> 0:18:42.879
<v Speaker 1>notoriety is to have, you know, have people on both

0:18:43.000 --> 0:18:45.800
<v Speaker 1>sides of the argument in a way. I'll give you

0:18:45.880 --> 0:18:52.600
<v Speaker 1>a different example. So Shae this year, by any objective measure,

0:18:52.640 --> 0:19:01.680
<v Speaker 1>Demonte had a better season than the last Oklahoma City

0:19:01.720 --> 0:19:06.440
<v Speaker 1>Thunder player to win League MVP, Russell Westbrook in twenty seventeen.

0:19:07.760 --> 0:19:16.600
<v Speaker 1>But that Thunder team and Russ individually was a wildly

0:19:17.520 --> 0:19:23.560
<v Speaker 1>interesting captivating figure for a lot of reasons. One was

0:19:23.920 --> 0:19:28.200
<v Speaker 1>just stylistically, and that's something that is going to somewhat

0:19:28.280 --> 0:19:31.560
<v Speaker 1>work against Shay. There is an element and a level

0:19:31.640 --> 0:19:37.560
<v Speaker 1>of are you dunking on people's heads that will grab

0:19:37.600 --> 0:19:41.160
<v Speaker 1>an audience in a way great footwork and mid range

0:19:41.240 --> 0:19:45.320
<v Speaker 1>jump shots and playing underneath the rim typically will not. Right.

0:19:45.760 --> 0:19:49.280
<v Speaker 1>So there's that piece of it. There was the morality

0:19:49.400 --> 0:19:55.639
<v Speaker 1>play piece of Durant left, he's there, now he's you know,

0:19:57.040 --> 0:20:00.240
<v Speaker 1>basically it felt like a one man show and it

0:20:00.320 --> 0:20:02.880
<v Speaker 1>kind of was, you know, there is that piece of it.

0:20:03.400 --> 0:20:06.320
<v Speaker 1>There was also this piece of it. A lot of

0:20:06.359 --> 0:20:09.080
<v Speaker 1>people who cover the league was like, he's not that good.

0:20:09.880 --> 0:20:15.160
<v Speaker 1>Triple double, shmippele double, don't care stat batter, empty calories,

0:20:15.560 --> 0:20:17.880
<v Speaker 1>and there are other people that were saying, no, he

0:20:17.960 --> 0:20:20.679
<v Speaker 1>does more for his team than any player in the league.

0:20:20.920 --> 0:20:26.800
<v Speaker 1>So it didn't matter that it was Oklahoma City. His

0:20:27.040 --> 0:20:32.920
<v Speaker 1>style was exciting. There was real emotion to his story

0:20:32.960 --> 0:20:38.640
<v Speaker 1>at that time, and there was a real argument about

0:20:39.119 --> 0:20:45.040
<v Speaker 1>how good he is or isn't. So it is in

0:20:45.119 --> 0:20:53.160
<v Speaker 1>a way it this is a weird one because lucas

0:20:53.280 --> 0:20:58.359
<v Speaker 1>with the Lakers now. But if Luca, let's just say

0:20:58.520 --> 0:21:01.640
<v Speaker 1>everything about Luca were the same, but he had been

0:21:01.720 --> 0:21:06.639
<v Speaker 1>traded instead of to the Lakers, he was he was

0:21:06.720 --> 0:21:11.360
<v Speaker 1>traded to Indiana. Let's just say that was the trade.

0:21:11.480 --> 0:21:14.199
<v Speaker 1>Instead of Luca for a d it was Luca for Halliburton,

0:21:14.480 --> 0:21:22.040
<v Speaker 1>all right. While Luca wouldn't have the high the aesthetically

0:21:22.080 --> 0:21:26.000
<v Speaker 1>pleasing style of play the way Russ did, people would

0:21:26.080 --> 0:21:32.480
<v Speaker 1>be invested because there is real debate about is he

0:21:32.600 --> 0:21:38.520
<v Speaker 1>a great player, a ballhog, or a legend? Like you

0:21:38.600 --> 0:21:43.080
<v Speaker 1>have opinions all across the spectrum, and man, this team,

0:21:43.160 --> 0:21:46.440
<v Speaker 1>his team gave up on him all like. There's all

0:21:46.560 --> 0:21:51.960
<v Speaker 1>those pieces to it, and so I don't I think

0:21:52.359 --> 0:21:57.560
<v Speaker 1>market size has something to do with it, but there's

0:21:57.800 --> 0:22:04.240
<v Speaker 1>just it's not just that it's Oklahoma City and Indiana.

0:22:04.800 --> 0:22:10.240
<v Speaker 1>The Indiana pieces, they were not taken seriously by anyone

0:22:10.280 --> 0:22:13.280
<v Speaker 1>as a contender all year, so they weren't like really

0:22:13.320 --> 0:22:17.040
<v Speaker 1>in the discussion. And the Oklahoma City piece of it

0:22:17.160 --> 0:22:26.240
<v Speaker 1>is they are not really a debatable team, which is

0:22:26.720 --> 0:22:29.360
<v Speaker 1>the only thing anybody could say about them all year

0:22:29.440 --> 0:22:32.679
<v Speaker 1>is like, Ah might be too young. Nobody was like

0:22:33.119 --> 0:22:37.200
<v Speaker 1>they're not that good, nobody was like Shay's overrated, nobody's

0:22:37.240 --> 0:22:41.280
<v Speaker 1>had any and we've never like hadn't seen them fail

0:22:41.359 --> 0:22:43.120
<v Speaker 1>and come back. So there's just a lot of pieces

0:22:43.160 --> 0:22:51.040
<v Speaker 1>to it and if folks can say that, well, if

0:22:51.080 --> 0:22:55.480
<v Speaker 1>you need something to debate in order to be interested,

0:22:56.040 --> 0:22:58.680
<v Speaker 1>then you don't love basketball, like you're not a die

0:22:58.760 --> 0:23:03.160
<v Speaker 1>hard basketball fan. But those people miss the point because

0:23:03.200 --> 0:23:07.880
<v Speaker 1>here's thing, demanse, whether or not the ratings are good

0:23:08.880 --> 0:23:14.320
<v Speaker 1>has absolutely nothing to do with the die hards. That

0:23:14.560 --> 0:23:18.840
<v Speaker 1>die hards are there for the finals, no matter what

0:23:19.720 --> 0:23:24.879
<v Speaker 1>a rating is generated by our people who typically are

0:23:24.920 --> 0:23:32.440
<v Speaker 1>not watching, watching, and like and for those people, you can't.

0:23:33.080 --> 0:23:36.800
<v Speaker 1>You can't sell a casual and by the way, sports

0:23:36.840 --> 0:23:40.359
<v Speaker 1>League shouldn't try to and there shouldn't be any like

0:23:41.600 --> 0:23:48.520
<v Speaker 1>shame about this. You the people that truly appreciate the

0:23:48.560 --> 0:23:53.560
<v Speaker 1>real artistry of the game, and you know how the

0:23:53.600 --> 0:23:59.719
<v Speaker 1>thunder were built and Haliburton's story, those people are all

0:23:59.760 --> 0:24:07.119
<v Speaker 1>ready the d if when you are trying to for

0:24:07.240 --> 0:24:16.080
<v Speaker 1>your premiere event, trying to draw in the everyone else,

0:24:16.720 --> 0:24:21.160
<v Speaker 1>those people, it's the same way any of us ever

0:24:21.800 --> 0:24:26.520
<v Speaker 1>have been drawn into something that we previously weren't interested in.

0:24:27.640 --> 0:24:32.280
<v Speaker 1>So like the people weren't go ahead, de mindset.

0:24:32.480 --> 0:24:34.480
<v Speaker 2>I was never a big boxing guy, but the Jake

0:24:34.640 --> 0:24:36.880
<v Speaker 2>I never like would watch pay per view, But Jake

0:24:36.920 --> 0:24:39.439
<v Speaker 2>Paul Mke's eyes something came out and I was watching boxing.

0:24:39.840 --> 0:24:44.040
<v Speaker 1>You gotta right, it's a spectacle. But no, there's the

0:24:44.080 --> 0:24:49.000
<v Speaker 1>people that knew nothing about Formula one racing and don't

0:24:49.400 --> 0:24:55.159
<v Speaker 1>and can't understand why this overtake was impressive, or why

0:24:55.200 --> 0:24:57.760
<v Speaker 1>this car is better than that car, or why that

0:24:57.840 --> 0:25:01.040
<v Speaker 1>pit crew is the best. Saw the one show got

0:25:01.040 --> 0:25:05.560
<v Speaker 1>to know the personalities. They're like, oh, I'm interested. And

0:25:05.600 --> 0:25:09.399
<v Speaker 1>by the way, that show on Netflix that Lebron and

0:25:09.480 --> 0:25:11.639
<v Speaker 1>Anthony Davis were in, I forget the name of it,

0:25:13.280 --> 0:25:18.240
<v Speaker 1>Starting five, the one that they're recording this year. Two

0:25:18.320 --> 0:25:23.040
<v Speaker 1>of the five are Shay and Haliburton. So maybe that's

0:25:23.080 --> 0:25:27.160
<v Speaker 1>good to bring in people for you know, future future

0:25:27.240 --> 0:25:29.760
<v Speaker 1>years or whatever it is. But that's just what it is.

0:25:29.840 --> 0:25:32.320
<v Speaker 1>And I don't think there's anything wrong with it, and

0:25:32.359 --> 0:25:38.800
<v Speaker 1>I don't think we have to. I don't love the

0:25:38.960 --> 0:25:43.360
<v Speaker 1>folks who are like patriotizing on NBA Twitter, like, well,

0:25:43.400 --> 0:25:48.560
<v Speaker 1>if you can't appreciate this basketball, then you don't love basketball.

0:25:48.560 --> 0:25:52.520
<v Speaker 1>It's like, no shit, the people who love basketball are

0:25:52.520 --> 0:25:57.800
<v Speaker 1>already watching. It's the people who, you know, they're debating

0:25:57.920 --> 0:26:02.760
<v Speaker 1>between you know, restarting the last season of Love is

0:26:02.840 --> 0:26:07.879
<v Speaker 1>Blind or flipping on the finals and though you're like,

0:26:08.520 --> 0:26:13.199
<v Speaker 1>those people know the storylines, you know, uh, and the

0:26:14.080 --> 0:26:18.159
<v Speaker 1>of Stafford Lebron or whomever, and they're not familiar with

0:26:18.200 --> 0:26:21.480
<v Speaker 1>these folks. Now you and again, now I'm kind of

0:26:21.480 --> 0:26:25.200
<v Speaker 1>like shadowboxing potential other arguments. People be like, well, it's

0:26:25.240 --> 0:26:29.440
<v Speaker 1>the media's job to inform people of these stories, sure,

0:26:30.440 --> 0:26:33.560
<v Speaker 1>but not all stories are as interesting from a story

0:26:33.640 --> 0:26:40.919
<v Speaker 1>perspective as others. And so like, there is there is

0:26:41.080 --> 0:26:48.200
<v Speaker 1>not a lot that is very interesting about the Thunder

0:26:48.440 --> 0:26:54.600
<v Speaker 1>the Pacers outside of the basketball, which is totally fine.

0:26:55.040 --> 0:26:58.479
<v Speaker 1>You're not always going to have that, but that is

0:26:58.600 --> 0:27:02.480
<v Speaker 1>going to make it difficult to bring in people who

0:27:02.520 --> 0:27:07.920
<v Speaker 1>are only passively interested in the basketball. And like, that's

0:27:08.040 --> 0:27:14.000
<v Speaker 1>just a reality of you know, I don't know if

0:27:14.000 --> 0:27:17.600
<v Speaker 1>it's marketing or how this stuff works. And so I

0:27:17.600 --> 0:27:18.680
<v Speaker 1>don't think that is.

0:27:19.600 --> 0:27:23.320
<v Speaker 2>Just saying don't coming, don't come with the casuals because

0:27:23.320 --> 0:27:23.720
<v Speaker 2>it's okay.

0:27:23.720 --> 0:27:28.280
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, I mean that's why they're casual fans, and

0:27:28.480 --> 0:27:31.560
<v Speaker 1>I think that's totally fine. And I think that you know,

0:27:32.520 --> 0:27:39.719
<v Speaker 1>interest ebbs and flows, and sometimes you need you know,

0:27:39.840 --> 0:27:46.439
<v Speaker 1>sometimes you don't know that this is going to be

0:27:46.520 --> 0:27:52.040
<v Speaker 1>an all time classic book. After the first chapter and

0:27:53.280 --> 0:27:56.640
<v Speaker 1>if the Thunder go on the type of run some

0:27:56.720 --> 0:27:59.240
<v Speaker 1>people not me as much, but some people think they

0:27:59.280 --> 0:28:05.280
<v Speaker 1>really could, then this will build and this will be

0:28:05.359 --> 0:28:08.320
<v Speaker 1>like Chapter one, and the people who were locked in

0:28:08.400 --> 0:28:13.040
<v Speaker 1>and dialed to these NBA Finals in four years, when

0:28:13.680 --> 0:28:19.160
<v Speaker 1>Shay and Chet and j Dubb are all household names,

0:28:20.520 --> 0:28:25.720
<v Speaker 1>people will be like I, you know, I remember watching

0:28:25.760 --> 0:28:31.879
<v Speaker 1>them nervously host to Game seven against Nikolai Jokic. That

0:28:31.960 --> 0:28:34.520
<v Speaker 1>could have derailed this whole thing for it even started.

0:28:35.080 --> 0:28:37.920
<v Speaker 1>You can be the hipster for the Thunder if they

0:28:37.960 --> 0:28:40.880
<v Speaker 1>ever go from playing coffee shops to play in arenas.

0:28:40.920 --> 0:28:46.080
<v Speaker 1>But that's that's just how this works. NBA Finals are

0:28:46.160 --> 0:28:47.920
<v Speaker 1>here and this is your last chance to bet on

0:28:47.960 --> 0:28:52.400
<v Speaker 1>the NBA until next season. Drafting sportsbook and official sports

0:28:52.440 --> 0:28:54.880
<v Speaker 1>betting partner the NBA is pulling out all the stops

0:28:55.080 --> 0:28:57.920
<v Speaker 1>to make this a finals. To remember, one team will

0:28:57.920 --> 0:29:00.800
<v Speaker 1>be crowning the champ and the other will be lost

0:29:00.880 --> 0:29:02.680
<v Speaker 1>to history. See this is what I was talking about.

0:29:02.760 --> 0:29:05.920
<v Speaker 1>Who you got winning at all? Put your hoops expertise

0:29:05.960 --> 0:29:08.960
<v Speaker 1>to the test. All season long. DraftKings has been the

0:29:09.600 --> 0:29:12.200
<v Speaker 1>go to spot for NBA player props, and that doesn't

0:29:12.200 --> 0:29:14.760
<v Speaker 1>stop now who's going to carry their team to the chip.

0:29:14.800 --> 0:29:18.560
<v Speaker 1>Try placing a bet on your personal MVP to drop thirty,

0:29:18.880 --> 0:29:22.320
<v Speaker 1>forty or over fifty. Ready to place your first bet,

0:29:22.720 --> 0:29:25.360
<v Speaker 1>download the Draftings sports Book app. Now lock in your

0:29:25.360 --> 0:29:28.920
<v Speaker 1>bets and finish the season as a winner. Here's something

0:29:28.960 --> 0:29:33.960
<v Speaker 1>special first timers. New DraftKings customers. Bet five dollars to

0:29:34.040 --> 0:29:38.160
<v Speaker 1>get three hundred dollars in bonus bets if your bet wins.

0:29:38.200 --> 0:29:40.320
<v Speaker 1>Don't miss your last chance to bet on the NBA

0:29:40.480 --> 0:29:45.200
<v Speaker 1>this season. Download the DraftKings Sportsbook app and use code

0:29:45.400 --> 0:29:49.600
<v Speaker 1>right code right wriaght for new customers to get three

0:29:49.640 --> 0:29:54.600
<v Speaker 1>hundred dollars in bonus bets when you bet only five

0:29:55.040 --> 0:29:59.280
<v Speaker 1>bucks only on DraftKings. The Crown is yours.

0:30:00.200 --> 0:30:02.640
<v Speaker 4>Problem called one eight hundred gambler in New York called

0:30:02.680 --> 0:30:05.040
<v Speaker 4>eight seven seven eight open wire text ope and wy

0:30:05.080 --> 0:30:07.600
<v Speaker 4>at four six seven three six nine In Connecticut. Help

0:30:07.640 --> 0:30:09.800
<v Speaker 4>is available for a problem gambling called eight eight eight

0:30:09.880 --> 0:30:12.640
<v Speaker 4>seven eight nine seven seven seven seven or visit CCPG

0:30:12.800 --> 0:30:15.440
<v Speaker 4>dot org. Please play responsibly on behalf of boothilk a

0:30:15.520 --> 0:30:18.840
<v Speaker 4>Cinnamin resorting Kansas twenty one on over agent eligibility varies

0:30:18.840 --> 0:30:21.560
<v Speaker 4>by jurisdiction VOYD and Ontario. Bet must win to receive

0:30:21.600 --> 0:30:25.080
<v Speaker 4>reward minimum minus five hundred odds required. Bonus bets expire

0:30:25.120 --> 0:30:27.160
<v Speaker 4>one hundred and sixty eight hours after issue. In four

0:30:27.160 --> 0:30:30.880
<v Speaker 4>additional terms and responsible gaming resources see DKNG dot Co.

0:30:31.040 --> 0:30:31.960
<v Speaker 4>Slash audio.

0:30:32.440 --> 0:30:35.920
<v Speaker 1>By the way, erisiss in the chat says is this

0:30:36.040 --> 0:30:39.040
<v Speaker 1>actually live? Yeah, and you can ask questions in the chat.

0:30:39.040 --> 0:30:41.360
<v Speaker 1>I should have been saying that earlier, but yes, we

0:30:41.400 --> 0:30:43.720
<v Speaker 1>are actually love. Check out the boost Mobile pillow in

0:30:43.760 --> 0:30:47.960
<v Speaker 1>the background. We actually had that funny the last show

0:30:48.000 --> 0:30:52.480
<v Speaker 1>we did from here, even though the partnership with boost

0:30:52.480 --> 0:30:55.920
<v Speaker 1>Mobile was not yet like pinned to paper, donn or

0:30:55.960 --> 0:30:58.000
<v Speaker 1>finalized or I don't know, they don't inform you this

0:30:58.000 --> 0:30:59.600
<v Speaker 1>type of stude. I think it was done. Gause already

0:30:59.600 --> 0:31:03.000
<v Speaker 1>had the bill, but we weren't. It hadn't started yet,

0:31:03.320 --> 0:31:05.680
<v Speaker 1>and I put it up there just as like a

0:31:05.680 --> 0:31:09.400
<v Speaker 1>little extra bonus for our friends at boost Mobile for

0:31:09.520 --> 0:31:13.120
<v Speaker 1>showing faith in the pod. But then Dexter, my dog,

0:31:13.240 --> 0:31:16.560
<v Speaker 1>walked in and sat right on the couch and blocked

0:31:16.560 --> 0:31:19.880
<v Speaker 1>the pillow the whole time, So now I have to

0:31:19.920 --> 0:31:22.720
<v Speaker 1>close the door. He's laying right there, right outside the door.

0:31:23.320 --> 0:31:24.800
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna have to figure that out because I do

0:31:24.960 --> 0:31:26.840
<v Speaker 1>like when he hangs out with me in here sometimes.

0:31:26.960 --> 0:31:28.440
<v Speaker 1>So maybe we need to get a second one in

0:31:28.480 --> 0:31:31.120
<v Speaker 1>case he knocks that one off. All right, Demanse, let's

0:31:31.120 --> 0:31:33.880
<v Speaker 1>talk a little more Halliburton and then get some other stuff.

0:31:34.240 --> 0:31:37.080
<v Speaker 2>So, yeah, you touched on a little bit of Halliburton's

0:31:37.160 --> 0:31:41.280
<v Speaker 2>lackluster scoring ability. Rick Carlisle came in the conference and

0:31:41.320 --> 0:31:43.160
<v Speaker 2>backed him and said, you can't judge him off his

0:31:43.240 --> 0:31:46.480
<v Speaker 2>box score. He had five points and three quarters in

0:31:46.560 --> 0:31:51.440
<v Speaker 2>Game two. Do you think that everybody overreacted by crowding Halliburton?

0:31:55.680 --> 0:32:00.600
<v Speaker 1>The yeah, he does. No, I don't think everyone overacted.

0:32:01.360 --> 0:32:06.520
<v Speaker 1>I here's what I think. It's undeniable that what he

0:32:06.600 --> 0:32:14.600
<v Speaker 1>has done in the clutch is unprecedented. He's thirteen of

0:32:14.720 --> 0:32:20.120
<v Speaker 1>fifteen on game go ahead or game time shots in

0:32:20.160 --> 0:32:24.280
<v Speaker 1>the final minute this year. He has hit four de

0:32:24.480 --> 0:32:29.440
<v Speaker 1>facto buzzer beaters this playoffs. And one of my favorite things,

0:32:29.520 --> 0:32:33.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm just gonna be honest with you guys, one of

0:32:33.480 --> 0:32:37.760
<v Speaker 1>my favorite things about and this is why is a

0:32:37.760 --> 0:32:41.680
<v Speaker 1>bit of a sidebar. I'll get back to Halliburton, but

0:32:41.880 --> 0:32:48.200
<v Speaker 1>for years I have said that the next generation is

0:32:48.240 --> 0:32:51.800
<v Speaker 1>going to look back on the goat debate and be like,

0:32:51.800 --> 0:32:55.400
<v Speaker 1>you gotta be kidding me. That was a debate, and

0:32:55.440 --> 0:33:00.560
<v Speaker 1>they're gonna look back on some of the arguments and say, no,

0:33:00.560 --> 0:33:06.400
<v Speaker 1>nobody actually said, you know, Lebron wasn't clutch. Nobody actually

0:33:06.600 --> 0:33:10.400
<v Speaker 1>did this stuff. And the reason that I have been

0:33:10.480 --> 0:33:16.760
<v Speaker 1>so confident in it was demonstrated, really, I think well

0:33:17.400 --> 0:33:24.800
<v Speaker 1>by what happened after Halliburton's last game winner, where all

0:33:24.880 --> 0:33:29.480
<v Speaker 1>over TV and all over social media are a bunch

0:33:29.520 --> 0:33:35.120
<v Speaker 1>of graphics and it's like, wow, Tyre's Halliburton now has

0:33:35.440 --> 0:33:42.320
<v Speaker 1>five five playoff game winners or game tires in the

0:33:42.360 --> 0:33:46.920
<v Speaker 1>final second in his career, and you know, here's his

0:33:47.040 --> 0:33:50.640
<v Speaker 1>percentage and this is unbelievable. And then you see it

0:33:51.360 --> 0:33:55.400
<v Speaker 1>and he's tied for second because Lebron has eight. And

0:33:55.440 --> 0:33:58.920
<v Speaker 1>then you see the other ones where it's like wow,

0:33:59.400 --> 0:34:05.240
<v Speaker 1>look at look at this guy's percentages and you see

0:34:05.240 --> 0:34:08.279
<v Speaker 1>it and then it's like, oh, wait, hold on, is

0:34:08.320 --> 0:34:12.799
<v Speaker 1>that Kobe at twenty two percent and Lebron at you

0:34:12.840 --> 0:34:16.400
<v Speaker 1>know whatever, it was fifty percent. I mean, Nate Tice

0:34:16.520 --> 0:34:22.480
<v Speaker 1>tweeted it, tweeted out, and I'm looking for it that

0:34:22.640 --> 0:34:25.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, all I can see. I'm looking at this

0:34:25.160 --> 0:34:28.040
<v Speaker 1>and all I can see is twenty two percent, which

0:34:28.160 --> 0:34:31.120
<v Speaker 1>was you know what, Kobe was four of twenty two

0:34:31.880 --> 0:34:34.200
<v Speaker 1>for his career. And I'm not trying to denegrate the

0:34:34.239 --> 0:34:38.200
<v Speaker 1>late great Kobe Bryant, but it was just about yeah,

0:34:38.239 --> 0:34:41.560
<v Speaker 1>here it is right here. So extra Stats had tweeted

0:34:41.960 --> 0:34:45.399
<v Speaker 1>most game tying or lead taking shots with under five

0:34:45.520 --> 0:34:48.520
<v Speaker 1>seconds left in the game in the playoffs since the

0:34:48.680 --> 0:34:55.160
<v Speaker 1>stat tracking era has started, and so since nineteen ninety seven.

0:34:55.760 --> 0:34:59.440
<v Speaker 1>And what you see is the you know guys with

0:34:59.640 --> 0:35:04.960
<v Speaker 1>four or more. It is Chris Middleton, Kobe Halliburton with five,

0:35:05.280 --> 0:35:08.920
<v Speaker 1>Reggie with five, and Lebron with eight. And then you

0:35:08.920 --> 0:35:11.359
<v Speaker 1>look through it and you're like, you know, Lebron eight

0:35:11.400 --> 0:35:16.040
<v Speaker 1>of twenty, Reggie five of nine, Halliburton and impossible five

0:35:16.080 --> 0:35:19.920
<v Speaker 1>of six, Middleton four for eight, and Kobe four for

0:35:19.960 --> 0:35:29.000
<v Speaker 1>eighteen twenty two. And so there is an element of

0:35:29.840 --> 0:35:34.440
<v Speaker 1>the numbers are the numbers, and the facts are the facts.

0:35:35.719 --> 0:35:44.239
<v Speaker 1>And we are going to because of Lebron's longevity and

0:35:44.280 --> 0:35:48.040
<v Speaker 1>the fact that in the playoffs he has every record

0:35:48.080 --> 0:35:53.880
<v Speaker 1>there is for the next at least twenty five years

0:35:53.920 --> 0:36:02.279
<v Speaker 1>of basketball. Every time every single time a guy hits

0:36:02.320 --> 0:36:07.800
<v Speaker 1>a milestone or a threshold, there is going to be

0:36:07.880 --> 0:36:12.120
<v Speaker 1>a reminder to the audience that this player just became

0:36:12.280 --> 0:36:16.359
<v Speaker 1>the second youngest or the second oldest, or has the

0:36:16.400 --> 0:36:20.120
<v Speaker 1>second most and first on all of those lists is

0:36:20.120 --> 0:36:21.000
<v Speaker 1>going to be Bron.

0:36:21.880 --> 0:36:24.040
<v Speaker 3>Hey, how Burden might be first on that? On the

0:36:24.080 --> 0:36:26.880
<v Speaker 3>go ahead book, is he already got five? Took Lebron

0:36:26.920 --> 0:36:28.160
<v Speaker 3>like two years to get that.

0:36:29.400 --> 0:36:31.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I'm gonna I'm gonna go ahead and say he's

0:36:31.680 --> 0:36:32.560
<v Speaker 1>not gonna get.

0:36:32.440 --> 0:36:35.680
<v Speaker 3>For in his whole career. He's already got five.

0:36:37.200 --> 0:36:41.200
<v Speaker 1>Kobe played twenty years, he got five. I'm the and

0:36:41.200 --> 0:36:44.560
<v Speaker 1>and so again like just man twenty four. Let me

0:36:44.600 --> 0:36:47.680
<v Speaker 1>go ahead and guess the twenty four is for Kobe

0:36:48.640 --> 0:36:51.320
<v Speaker 1>rights in the chat Bro, Come on, that's a longevity stat.

0:36:52.200 --> 0:36:56.200
<v Speaker 1>Game winners and percentage is a longevity stat. Okay, But

0:36:56.320 --> 0:37:03.800
<v Speaker 1>again there is there's no reconciling the percentages. They're just there.

0:37:03.920 --> 0:37:11.080
<v Speaker 1>There just isn't. And the the the playoff game winners,

0:37:13.520 --> 0:37:17.880
<v Speaker 1>Kobe's shooting eighteen of them and making four and Bron

0:37:17.920 --> 0:37:21.680
<v Speaker 1>shooting twenty and making eight, you can call that a

0:37:21.680 --> 0:37:24.719
<v Speaker 1>longevity staff. But you're just that's just what kids would

0:37:24.719 --> 0:37:28.239
<v Speaker 1>call cope. It's it's just I mean, it's just what

0:37:28.320 --> 0:37:28.600
<v Speaker 1>it is.

0:37:28.640 --> 0:37:31.080
<v Speaker 3>Go ahead, And Haliburn's percentage is higher right now.

0:37:31.440 --> 0:37:33.879
<v Speaker 1>And no, well, Halliburn's percentage is the highest of any

0:37:34.880 --> 0:37:40.160
<v Speaker 1>exactly five on these Yeah, no listen, So to get

0:37:40.160 --> 0:37:42.120
<v Speaker 1>back to the Halliburn thing, because we're actually gonna talk

0:37:42.239 --> 0:37:50.120
<v Speaker 1>Lebron in a second. Anyway, he has been this clutch

0:37:50.239 --> 0:37:54.400
<v Speaker 1>run is one of the greatest, if not the greatest

0:37:54.440 --> 0:38:06.240
<v Speaker 1>single season clutch performance in playoff history. That's undeniable. It's

0:38:06.400 --> 0:38:10.680
<v Speaker 1>also that can be true, while it's also true that,

0:38:11.080 --> 0:38:17.000
<v Speaker 1>as I said earlier, for any NBA player, if they

0:38:17.040 --> 0:38:24.440
<v Speaker 1>cannot reliably go get you a bucket, it's there is

0:38:24.480 --> 0:38:32.200
<v Speaker 1>a ceiling on their consistent effectiveness offensively, that's all. And

0:38:32.280 --> 0:38:43.920
<v Speaker 1>so there is both things can be true that there

0:38:43.960 --> 0:38:46.960
<v Speaker 1>are ways to slow down Halliburton that that don't exist

0:38:47.040 --> 0:38:50.240
<v Speaker 1>to slow down most of the other superstars in this league.

0:38:50.719 --> 0:38:54.160
<v Speaker 1>But while also true he can impact the game differently

0:38:54.200 --> 0:38:57.600
<v Speaker 1>because of his passing, while also true that his clutch

0:38:57.600 --> 0:39:02.880
<v Speaker 1>stuff this postseason we've never seen before, Like you know

0:39:02.920 --> 0:39:06.560
<v Speaker 1>what I mean, that's all. That's all part of the

0:39:06.640 --> 0:39:10.600
<v Speaker 1>story with him this year I'm going to add one

0:39:10.640 --> 0:39:14.080
<v Speaker 1>other thing though, demons for the Pacers before we move on,

0:39:16.080 --> 0:39:19.560
<v Speaker 1>And this is maybe the adjustment Carlisle needs to make,

0:39:19.760 --> 0:39:25.719
<v Speaker 1>And it's more about approach. The Pacers all year, if

0:39:25.719 --> 0:39:29.200
<v Speaker 1>they're not out running, have been a good shot, good shot,

0:39:29.280 --> 0:39:29.840
<v Speaker 1>great shot.

0:39:29.880 --> 0:39:30.120
<v Speaker 3>Team.

0:39:31.080 --> 0:39:35.000
<v Speaker 1>Oh that's a good look. Extra pass that's a good look.

0:39:35.280 --> 0:39:40.040
<v Speaker 1>One extra pass, that's a great look. Halliburton needs to

0:39:40.120 --> 0:39:45.240
<v Speaker 1>recognize that shit doesn't exist against the Thunder. What exists

0:39:45.239 --> 0:39:50.960
<v Speaker 1>against the Thunder is okay, look, decent look, bad look, turnover.

0:39:52.040 --> 0:39:55.840
<v Speaker 1>Like you have to be willing, especially if you're the

0:39:55.880 --> 0:40:02.120
<v Speaker 1>best player on the team and you know the the

0:40:02.160 --> 0:40:05.560
<v Speaker 1>engine of the offense, to take some shots you otherwise

0:40:05.600 --> 0:40:10.320
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't because a B minus look might be the best

0:40:10.320 --> 0:40:13.560
<v Speaker 1>look you're getting that that time up the court, and

0:40:13.600 --> 0:40:16.239
<v Speaker 1>that takes some adjustment, you know what I mean, Like

0:40:16.320 --> 0:40:20.360
<v Speaker 1>the you are not going to ball movement them into

0:40:20.480 --> 0:40:24.000
<v Speaker 1>a bunch of wide open threes. They're too good. Yeah,

0:40:24.000 --> 0:40:26.920
<v Speaker 1>And so like that's that's something that you almost have

0:40:27.000 --> 0:40:30.160
<v Speaker 1>to retrain your yourself.

0:40:30.360 --> 0:40:32.600
<v Speaker 2>There are just times in the game where it like

0:40:32.640 --> 0:40:35.520
<v Speaker 2>flips on the Pacers where Halliburton has to just be

0:40:35.560 --> 0:40:37.440
<v Speaker 2>like I'm getting a bucket right here, like the crowd's

0:40:37.480 --> 0:40:38.120
<v Speaker 2>going crazy.

0:40:38.160 --> 0:40:40.919
<v Speaker 3>They just went up nineteen twenty one points. You gotta

0:40:40.960 --> 0:40:43.440
<v Speaker 3>go down and do something correct.

0:40:43.520 --> 0:40:46.799
<v Speaker 1>All right, all right, let's speaking of Lebron. Let's talk

0:40:46.840 --> 0:40:47.720
<v Speaker 1>a little more Lebron.

0:40:47.760 --> 0:40:48.160
<v Speaker 3>Go ahead.

0:40:48.360 --> 0:40:52.839
<v Speaker 2>Uh yeah, Lebron might be the NBA's leading scorer, but uh,

0:40:52.880 --> 0:40:54.719
<v Speaker 2>what does that mean when you got no back?

0:40:55.640 --> 0:40:56.000
<v Speaker 3>Uh?

0:40:56.080 --> 0:40:59.160
<v Speaker 2>On mine the game? Lebron said, I see all the time,

0:40:59.480 --> 0:41:02.520
<v Speaker 2>I'll be on social media like Lebron has no bag.

0:41:02.800 --> 0:41:05.000
<v Speaker 2>Lebron has no bag, and I'm sitting here like I

0:41:05.040 --> 0:41:07.759
<v Speaker 2>got fifty billion points. I thought he should have said

0:41:07.760 --> 0:41:10.719
<v Speaker 2>I've got fifty billion chips, like wordplay on like a

0:41:10.760 --> 0:41:14.120
<v Speaker 2>bag of chips. But to Lebron be the undisputed goat

0:41:14.160 --> 0:41:15.400
<v Speaker 2>if he's got no bag.

0:41:16.200 --> 0:41:18.480
<v Speaker 1>Okay, so let me go. Let me ask you this,

0:41:19.440 --> 0:41:25.480
<v Speaker 1>what do you think having a bag means? Because it's

0:41:26.520 --> 0:41:29.719
<v Speaker 1>this is not an agreed upon definition, and I think

0:41:29.760 --> 0:41:31.920
<v Speaker 1>this is an important piece to it. So I'm curious

0:41:32.000 --> 0:41:33.680
<v Speaker 1>where you what you think?

0:41:34.040 --> 0:41:37.640
<v Speaker 2>Okay, I think having a bag is is James Harden

0:41:37.960 --> 0:41:41.359
<v Speaker 2>that's like like Steph Curry, just just a go to

0:41:41.520 --> 0:41:43.880
<v Speaker 2>move or or a bag of moves that you can

0:41:43.920 --> 0:41:46.239
<v Speaker 2>go to to break the defender down. I just think

0:41:46.280 --> 0:41:49.000
<v Speaker 2>it's offense. It's offensive game. I don't think it's like

0:41:49.800 --> 0:41:51.120
<v Speaker 2>anything outside of that.

0:41:51.960 --> 0:41:55.000
<v Speaker 1>No, So it's and it's a it's definitely offense and

0:41:55.000 --> 0:41:58.120
<v Speaker 1>definitely related to scoring. Yeah, right, Like I think everybody

0:41:58.160 --> 0:42:01.120
<v Speaker 1>agrees on that. So here is what I think is

0:42:02.640 --> 0:42:05.600
<v Speaker 1>fair and true, and here is what I think is

0:42:05.800 --> 0:42:11.160
<v Speaker 1>just nonsense. Right, So I think, what do you think

0:42:11.280 --> 0:42:16.160
<v Speaker 1>the weakest part of Lebron's offensive game is? Because I

0:42:16.200 --> 0:42:18.759
<v Speaker 1>think it's very clear. I think there is one thing

0:42:19.920 --> 0:42:26.160
<v Speaker 1>that offensively he is average at. I would say it's

0:42:26.280 --> 0:42:27.200
<v Speaker 1>just league.

0:42:26.880 --> 0:42:31.280
<v Speaker 3>Average stop go, stop start.

0:42:32.200 --> 0:42:35.640
<v Speaker 1>Well, maybe we're saying the same thing just general ball handling.

0:42:36.200 --> 0:42:38.640
<v Speaker 1>Oh okay, he's not an elite He's not an elite

0:42:38.680 --> 0:42:42.399
<v Speaker 1>ball handler. And so if people if by bag they

0:42:42.520 --> 0:42:49.920
<v Speaker 1>mean like a Kyrie's style, like fifteen dribble move, then sure,

0:42:50.440 --> 0:42:53.080
<v Speaker 1>then yeah, Lebron's not going to be one of your

0:42:53.600 --> 0:42:57.319
<v Speaker 1>top thirty picks of people when it comes to ball

0:42:57.360 --> 0:43:02.160
<v Speaker 1>handling like the he I think Duran at seven feet

0:43:02.200 --> 0:43:05.960
<v Speaker 1>tall might be a better ball handler like I do.

0:43:06.040 --> 0:43:10.680
<v Speaker 1>And so like that is to me, that's a if

0:43:10.719 --> 0:43:14.800
<v Speaker 1>that's what people are talking about, that's actually accurate. Now,

0:43:15.440 --> 0:43:21.880
<v Speaker 1>to Lebron's point, is it possible that not just kids

0:43:21.920 --> 0:43:28.560
<v Speaker 1>on Twitter, but also retired NBA players on horrific podcasts

0:43:29.600 --> 0:43:35.400
<v Speaker 1>wildly overrate the bag. If to Lebron's point, he's got

0:43:35.440 --> 0:43:40.040
<v Speaker 1>fifty thousand points and doesn't have one, then yeah, then

0:43:40.200 --> 0:43:43.759
<v Speaker 1>maybe it's not quite as important as you think. So

0:43:43.880 --> 0:43:48.919
<v Speaker 1>if we're just saying bag is ball handling, then it's

0:43:49.160 --> 0:43:54.560
<v Speaker 1>probably It's probably true. Here is where I think it

0:43:54.640 --> 0:44:03.000
<v Speaker 1>gets a little though misconstrued or misleading. If by bag

0:44:03.160 --> 0:44:08.799
<v Speaker 1>people are talking about ability to score from anywhere on

0:44:08.920 --> 0:44:14.480
<v Speaker 1>the court at any time, Lebron's as good as anyone

0:44:14.480 --> 0:44:17.799
<v Speaker 1>in the history of the league being are. And this

0:44:17.920 --> 0:44:21.920
<v Speaker 1>is where and this is again where we will simply

0:44:22.040 --> 0:44:26.319
<v Speaker 1>run into folks who some I'm sure are in the

0:44:26.440 --> 0:44:32.240
<v Speaker 1>chat right now, who are going to try to douce

0:44:32.480 --> 0:44:40.280
<v Speaker 1>a lot of mental gymnastics around the numbers in the facts,

0:44:40.719 --> 0:44:46.160
<v Speaker 1>which is now Lebron early in his career, didn't you know,

0:44:46.360 --> 0:44:49.319
<v Speaker 1>was not a good jump shooter. But the benefit of

0:44:49.360 --> 0:44:52.440
<v Speaker 1>playing twenty two years is even if you weren't good

0:44:52.480 --> 0:44:56.200
<v Speaker 1>at something for the first seven there were fifteen years

0:44:56.239 --> 0:44:58.960
<v Speaker 1>you were good at it. So like even be like ah,

0:44:59.080 --> 0:45:07.080
<v Speaker 1>Lebron couldn't shoot. But by year nine he was literally

0:45:07.640 --> 0:45:12.040
<v Speaker 1>forty one percent from three. His third year in Miami,

0:45:12.120 --> 0:45:14.359
<v Speaker 1>I guess that would have been year ten, and then

0:45:14.480 --> 0:45:17.399
<v Speaker 1>you know that was year ten for him was still

0:45:17.400 --> 0:45:23.360
<v Speaker 1>the first half of his career. In Miami, he developed

0:45:23.360 --> 0:45:27.440
<v Speaker 1>his three point shot. His second stint in Cleveland, he

0:45:27.560 --> 0:45:33.160
<v Speaker 1>developed his mid range shot, particularly the turnaround, And since

0:45:33.200 --> 0:45:36.080
<v Speaker 1>then has been the idea that he's gotten his fifty

0:45:36.120 --> 0:45:39.360
<v Speaker 1>thousand points by putting his head down and just going

0:45:39.360 --> 0:45:42.680
<v Speaker 1>to the rim one hundred times a game. Again, that's

0:45:42.800 --> 0:45:46.200
<v Speaker 1>just blied by the data and by the date, I

0:45:46.239 --> 0:45:48.120
<v Speaker 1>mean the games are on TV. You can see where

0:45:48.120 --> 0:45:50.879
<v Speaker 1>the shots are made, all of it. That he has

0:45:50.920 --> 0:45:53.960
<v Speaker 1>the same shot. People talk about him as if he

0:45:54.000 --> 0:45:57.600
<v Speaker 1>has the same shot chart as Shack did. That it

0:45:57.640 --> 0:46:01.520
<v Speaker 1>was layup some free throw, dunk some free throw. But

0:46:01.800 --> 0:46:05.720
<v Speaker 1>this is where now we are, and this is why

0:46:06.239 --> 0:46:11.399
<v Speaker 1>and I you always have to be sensitive here because

0:46:11.440 --> 0:46:19.280
<v Speaker 1>of obviously the tragedy surrounding is passing, but the juxtaposition

0:46:19.360 --> 0:46:24.920
<v Speaker 1>of Kobe versus Lebron, as far as what the actual

0:46:25.760 --> 0:46:32.160
<v Speaker 1>truth is and was versus how they are remembered, has

0:46:32.239 --> 0:46:38.320
<v Speaker 1>always been very interesting because if you ask one hundred

0:46:38.400 --> 0:46:46.560
<v Speaker 1>NBA fans who was the better three point shooter, Kobe

0:46:46.640 --> 0:46:52.720
<v Speaker 1>or Lebron, the vast majority are going to say Kobe Bryant,

0:46:54.080 --> 0:46:59.520
<v Speaker 1>despite the fact that any possible way you slice it,

0:46:59.520 --> 0:47:04.560
<v Speaker 1>it's not true. And I will and that's you know,

0:47:04.680 --> 0:47:07.279
<v Speaker 1>that's bag for some, it's like your ability, like I said,

0:47:07.320 --> 0:47:11.600
<v Speaker 1>to score from all three levels. So Kobe for his

0:47:11.760 --> 0:47:18.240
<v Speaker 1>career was thirty two point nine percent from three. Lebron

0:47:18.320 --> 0:47:23.279
<v Speaker 1>for his career thirty four point nine percent from three. Oh, well, Nick,

0:47:24.040 --> 0:47:29.520
<v Speaker 1>Kobe shot way more, No, he didn't. Kobe for his

0:47:29.640 --> 0:47:34.239
<v Speaker 1>career four point one attempts per game, Lebron for his

0:47:34.320 --> 0:47:40.239
<v Speaker 1>career four point seven attempts per game. Well, Kobe was

0:47:40.280 --> 0:47:45.920
<v Speaker 1>better in the playoffs. No, Kobe for his career from three,

0:47:46.560 --> 0:47:51.000
<v Speaker 1>his three point percentage is thirty three point one percent

0:47:51.480 --> 0:47:56.080
<v Speaker 1>on four attempts per game. Lebron for his career in

0:47:56.120 --> 0:47:59.919
<v Speaker 1>the playoffs is thirty three percent on four point one

0:48:00.360 --> 0:48:05.080
<v Speaker 1>attempts per game. Well, oh wait, hold on, I had

0:48:06.160 --> 0:48:08.879
<v Speaker 1>I got that last one exactly wrong. I apologize because

0:48:08.920 --> 0:48:14.440
<v Speaker 1>I read Kobe's I read Kobe STAPs twice. Kobe for

0:48:14.560 --> 0:48:18.160
<v Speaker 1>his career in the playoffs thirty three point one percent

0:48:18.440 --> 0:48:22.120
<v Speaker 1>on four attempts per game four point zero, exactly Lebron

0:48:22.200 --> 0:48:25.680
<v Speaker 1>for his career in the playoffs thirty three point three percent,

0:48:25.840 --> 0:48:28.479
<v Speaker 1>essentially the same Lebron to took better, but on four

0:48:28.520 --> 0:48:31.799
<v Speaker 1>point nine a tempts per game. Oh well, Nick, and

0:48:31.880 --> 0:48:34.919
<v Speaker 1>this is one you'll hear when people are really at

0:48:34.920 --> 0:48:41.319
<v Speaker 1>this point grasping, Nick, the game's changed so much, even

0:48:41.320 --> 0:48:43.520
<v Speaker 1>though Lebron and Kobe played in the league together for

0:48:43.560 --> 0:48:48.440
<v Speaker 1>a more than a decade. Okay, so if you just

0:48:48.719 --> 0:48:56.720
<v Speaker 1>take Lebron's career and stop it when Kobe retired, Kobe

0:48:56.760 --> 0:49:00.560
<v Speaker 1>again for his career thirty three point one one percent

0:49:01.200 --> 0:49:06.279
<v Speaker 1>on four point zero attempts per game. Look, that's for

0:49:06.360 --> 0:49:09.799
<v Speaker 1>the playoffs and for the regular season Kobe thirty two

0:49:09.920 --> 0:49:12.720
<v Speaker 1>point nine on four point one attempts per game, basically

0:49:12.719 --> 0:49:16.120
<v Speaker 1>identical for Kobe regular season of playoffs. He retired in

0:49:16.160 --> 0:49:22.799
<v Speaker 1>twenty sixteen. Lebron his rookie year through the date of

0:49:22.880 --> 0:49:27.400
<v Speaker 1>Kobe's retirement the exact same number of three point attempts

0:49:27.400 --> 0:49:30.879
<v Speaker 1>per game four point zero, and Kobe's thirty two point

0:49:30.960 --> 0:49:35.680
<v Speaker 1>nine Lebron thirty four point zero. And so this isn't

0:49:35.800 --> 0:49:39.279
<v Speaker 1>a I'm not trying to do like a Kobe versus

0:49:39.360 --> 0:49:45.400
<v Speaker 1>Lebron thing, because I think that's a silly, really untenable argument,

0:49:46.440 --> 0:49:48.880
<v Speaker 1>as much as people try to make it one. The

0:49:49.040 --> 0:49:53.839
<v Speaker 1>reason I am mentioning that is because that is as

0:49:54.000 --> 0:49:57.799
<v Speaker 1>clear and as clean and as matter of fact as

0:49:57.920 --> 0:50:03.200
<v Speaker 1>data can get, and people simply will say, I do

0:50:03.280 --> 0:50:09.680
<v Speaker 1>not believe that. That's not how I remember it, which

0:50:09.719 --> 0:50:15.799
<v Speaker 1>is that and the people in the chat can get

0:50:15.840 --> 0:50:18.080
<v Speaker 1>as angry as they want, and they say that's longevity,

0:50:18.120 --> 0:50:21.040
<v Speaker 1>even though it's per game, that that's a different era,

0:50:21.239 --> 0:50:24.480
<v Speaker 1>even if we just go year per year. In their

0:50:24.600 --> 0:50:32.279
<v Speaker 1>mind's eye, Kobe was a dominant three point assassin, and

0:50:32.320 --> 0:50:35.120
<v Speaker 1>in their mind's eye, Lebron was just putting his shoulder

0:50:35.160 --> 0:50:39.160
<v Speaker 1>down and get into the rim, despite the fact that

0:50:39.280 --> 0:50:44.080
<v Speaker 1>at the date of Kobe's retirement, he averaged the exact

0:50:44.200 --> 0:50:46.720
<v Speaker 1>same number of three point attempts per game as Lebron

0:50:46.760 --> 0:50:51.480
<v Speaker 1>did and shot him worse. It's just what the facts were.

0:50:52.040 --> 0:50:54.880
<v Speaker 1>So when Lebron is talking about I'm get on social

0:50:54.960 --> 0:50:57.040
<v Speaker 1>media and say Lebron doesn't have a bag or this

0:50:57.160 --> 0:51:02.200
<v Speaker 1>or that, it's because so much of that is it's

0:51:02.280 --> 0:51:11.360
<v Speaker 1>not revisionist history. It's just absolute fake news so to speak,

0:51:11.760 --> 0:51:18.319
<v Speaker 1>that people will believe to their dying breath. Like one

0:51:18.360 --> 0:51:24.440
<v Speaker 1>of the number one questions people will ask is, okay,

0:51:24.440 --> 0:51:27.480
<v Speaker 1>so whatever you're gonna say Lebron's better than Kobe because

0:51:27.520 --> 0:51:32.680
<v Speaker 1>of you know, he played longer or whatever it is. However,

0:51:33.360 --> 0:51:37.520
<v Speaker 1>but one shot life on the line, and then you

0:51:37.640 --> 0:51:40.439
<v Speaker 1>tell him, well, playoff game winners like we just talked

0:51:40.480 --> 0:51:45.359
<v Speaker 1>before Lebron took was eight of twenty, Kobe was four

0:51:45.400 --> 0:51:49.000
<v Speaker 1>of eighteen. People will simply say, I don't believe you,

0:51:49.960 --> 0:51:53.239
<v Speaker 1>even though it is what it is. And so now

0:51:53.280 --> 0:51:55.239
<v Speaker 1>doctor Frank says in the chat, but would you say

0:51:55.320 --> 0:51:57.759
<v Speaker 1>Kobe had a deeper bag than Lebron? I think there's

0:51:57.800 --> 0:52:02.759
<v Speaker 1>an argument there, yes, a hunt because I Kobe was

0:52:03.600 --> 0:52:09.440
<v Speaker 1>a better mid range shot maker than Lebron, and I

0:52:09.440 --> 0:52:12.680
<v Speaker 1>think Kobe was a better ball handler than Lebron.

0:52:13.000 --> 0:52:16.359
<v Speaker 2>That one I agree with there, Yeah, yeah, on the

0:52:16.400 --> 0:52:18.920
<v Speaker 2>back you Agreeeah.

0:52:18.360 --> 0:52:23.759
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, there is. But the that then circles back to

0:52:23.920 --> 0:52:29.040
<v Speaker 1>the more I think interesting question is, but then what

0:52:29.120 --> 0:52:32.960
<v Speaker 1>does it really matter except for again to be fair,

0:52:33.400 --> 0:52:38.040
<v Speaker 1>because I am I gotta tell you, among other things,

0:52:38.080 --> 0:52:43.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm the most I'm the fairest arguer in sports media

0:52:43.880 --> 0:52:47.719
<v Speaker 1>because I will often make an argument, and while I'm

0:52:47.719 --> 0:52:51.680
<v Speaker 1>making it, because it's how my brain works, think like, oh,

0:52:52.400 --> 0:52:55.960
<v Speaker 1>does this contradict something you were making? Argument you're making

0:52:55.960 --> 0:52:59.000
<v Speaker 1>about something else, and how do you reconcile those two? So,

0:53:01.200 --> 0:53:06.600
<v Speaker 1>while how Deep your Bag is might be overrated when

0:53:06.600 --> 0:53:11.480
<v Speaker 1>it comes to your effectiveness as a player, as evidenced

0:53:11.520 --> 0:53:17.200
<v Speaker 1>by our discussion about why people were more maybe attracted

0:53:17.200 --> 0:53:21.160
<v Speaker 1>to Russell Westbrook's style of play than Shay Gilgess, Alexander's

0:53:21.800 --> 0:53:27.000
<v Speaker 1>how Deep your Bag is certainly has to do has

0:53:27.040 --> 0:53:34.320
<v Speaker 1>an impact on popularity, grabbing the casual fan highlights things

0:53:34.400 --> 0:53:39.040
<v Speaker 1>like that. That part there is a real impact, all right,

0:53:39.120 --> 0:53:43.360
<v Speaker 1>Before we get to a few other things, my friends

0:53:43.760 --> 0:53:47.720
<v Speaker 1>at Boost Mobiles got a well there are newest friends,

0:53:47.960 --> 0:53:50.320
<v Speaker 1>there are a newest sponsor, and we got something we

0:53:50.360 --> 0:53:52.480
<v Speaker 1>want to tell you from them. Have you ever signed

0:53:52.520 --> 0:53:56.560
<v Speaker 1>up for a phone plan thinking wow, it's an unbelievable price,

0:53:56.960 --> 0:53:59.080
<v Speaker 1>and it probably is right in the beginning, and then

0:53:59.120 --> 0:54:02.320
<v Speaker 1>a few months later it's like, wait the bill, what's

0:54:02.400 --> 0:54:05.920
<v Speaker 1>this fee? That was introductory? What? I don't all of

0:54:05.960 --> 0:54:08.400
<v Speaker 1>a sudden I thought I was I thought I was

0:54:08.440 --> 0:54:11.840
<v Speaker 1>getting a great deal, paying thirty bucks a month or something,

0:54:12.200 --> 0:54:16.359
<v Speaker 1>and now my bill they it might say thirty dollars

0:54:16.440 --> 0:54:18.399
<v Speaker 1>a month, but then at the end of it, I'm

0:54:18.400 --> 0:54:22.240
<v Speaker 1>paying sixty or seventy five dollars a month. With Boost Mobile,

0:54:22.719 --> 0:54:27.319
<v Speaker 1>you pay twenty five dollars a month forever, unlimited talk,

0:54:27.800 --> 0:54:31.919
<v Speaker 1>text and data starting at just twenty five dollars a month.

0:54:32.200 --> 0:54:37.880
<v Speaker 1>No price hikes, no contract. That's forever. Plus. Boost Mobile

0:54:38.280 --> 0:54:43.160
<v Speaker 1>is now a legit nationwide five G network. No one

0:54:43.200 --> 0:54:48.120
<v Speaker 1>tell Aaron Rodgers. They've invested billions building five G towers

0:54:48.160 --> 0:54:52.600
<v Speaker 1>across the country. Visit boostmobile dot com or head to

0:54:52.640 --> 0:54:56.840
<v Speaker 1>your local Boost store today and get unlimited talk, text

0:54:56.920 --> 0:55:00.720
<v Speaker 1>and data for twenty five dollars a month four Ever,

0:55:00.880 --> 0:55:03.520
<v Speaker 1>a reminder, of course, five G speeds not available in

0:55:03.680 --> 0:55:08.200
<v Speaker 1>all areas. After thirty gigabytes, customers may experience slower speeds.

0:55:08.360 --> 0:55:11.319
<v Speaker 1>Customers will pay twenty five dollars a month as long

0:55:11.320 --> 0:55:16.279
<v Speaker 1>as they remain active on the Boost Unlimited plan. All right,

0:55:16.320 --> 0:55:19.319
<v Speaker 1>Deman's let's get to the New York Knicks before we

0:55:19.360 --> 0:55:20.560
<v Speaker 1>get to some NFL stuff.

0:55:21.080 --> 0:55:24.920
<v Speaker 2>Uh yeah, So, Whendhorses reported that there's mutual intrigue between

0:55:25.000 --> 0:55:28.240
<v Speaker 2>New York and Dallas head coach Jason Kidd. You mentioned

0:55:28.320 --> 0:55:30.040
<v Speaker 2>a few days ago, a couple of days ago, that

0:55:30.080 --> 0:55:31.200
<v Speaker 2>this might be an efforts to.

0:55:31.120 --> 0:55:32.040
<v Speaker 3>Push for Giannis.

0:55:32.640 --> 0:55:38.520
<v Speaker 1>Why would Dallas let this happen, Well, it's very interesting.

0:55:39.440 --> 0:55:45.360
<v Speaker 1>You could listen. Jason Kidd's history of forcing his way

0:55:45.440 --> 0:55:50.720
<v Speaker 1>out of situations or leaving tough situations in his wake

0:55:51.000 --> 0:55:56.080
<v Speaker 1>is somewhat legendary. Okay, so Tim bond Temps did a

0:55:56.120 --> 0:56:02.840
<v Speaker 1>good job describing describing this. But as a player, Jason

0:56:02.920 --> 0:56:06.640
<v Speaker 1>Kidd was with the MAVs that thing within a couple

0:56:06.719 --> 0:56:09.440
<v Speaker 1>within a couple of years for a lot of reasons

0:56:09.440 --> 0:56:11.680
<v Speaker 1>we don't really need to get into. On the show

0:56:12.000 --> 0:56:17.560
<v Speaker 1>got toxic and he goes to Phoenix. That then at

0:56:17.600 --> 0:56:20.279
<v Speaker 1>the end it ran its course. He goes to the

0:56:20.320 --> 0:56:23.880
<v Speaker 1>Nets and it's awesome. Early on, they make two straight finals.

0:56:24.160 --> 0:56:27.600
<v Speaker 1>He arguably should have won MVP early on in his

0:56:27.680 --> 0:56:30.839
<v Speaker 1>career with the Nets. That then goes sideways. He goes

0:56:30.920 --> 0:56:34.080
<v Speaker 1>back to Dallas, then finishes his career with the Knicks.

0:56:34.440 --> 0:56:36.880
<v Speaker 1>He then for one year as head coach of the

0:56:36.880 --> 0:56:40.640
<v Speaker 1>Brooklyn Nets. At the end of that year, he tries

0:56:40.680 --> 0:56:44.640
<v Speaker 1>to basically take over the team Uh, that doesn't work,

0:56:44.719 --> 0:56:48.040
<v Speaker 1>So he gets his way to Milwaukee. Then in Milwaukee

0:56:48.400 --> 0:56:50.960
<v Speaker 1>they end up souring on him, they fire him, and

0:56:51.000 --> 0:56:53.240
<v Speaker 1>now he's in Dallas. You know, he's with the Lakers briefly.

0:56:53.280 --> 0:56:57.960
<v Speaker 1>Now he's in Dallas, when even when he was with

0:56:58.000 --> 0:57:00.319
<v Speaker 1>the Lakers, there was like worry, like is he gonna

0:57:00.360 --> 0:57:03.320
<v Speaker 1>try to like unseat Vogel? But he goes to Dallas

0:57:03.560 --> 0:57:05.520
<v Speaker 1>and now he's in Dallas and it sure looks like

0:57:05.600 --> 0:57:07.480
<v Speaker 1>he would like to be the head coach of the Knicks.

0:57:08.160 --> 0:57:17.120
<v Speaker 1>And you can say, why would they let you, you know,

0:57:17.200 --> 0:57:24.400
<v Speaker 1>why would they allow it in Dallas? But the answer

0:57:24.680 --> 0:57:28.840
<v Speaker 1>to that is how messy does Jason Kidd want to

0:57:28.840 --> 0:57:34.520
<v Speaker 1>make this? Because you can't have a guy coach your

0:57:34.560 --> 0:57:38.840
<v Speaker 1>team that wants to coach another team. It's one of

0:57:38.880 --> 0:57:44.520
<v Speaker 1>those things like there are certain industries where a contract

0:57:44.880 --> 0:57:48.480
<v Speaker 1>really only as good as long as the person wants

0:57:48.520 --> 0:57:54.760
<v Speaker 1>to fulfill it. Like if if Demanse came in and

0:57:54.840 --> 0:57:59.960
<v Speaker 1>was like, hey, guys, I would like permission to interview

0:58:00.080 --> 0:58:07.320
<v Speaker 1>you to be on Rory and Mao and leave this show,

0:58:10.120 --> 0:58:12.000
<v Speaker 1>well then that kind of just means he doesn't want

0:58:12.040 --> 0:58:15.760
<v Speaker 1>to be on this show anymore. And even if I'm like, no,

0:58:16.000 --> 0:58:20.880
<v Speaker 1>you can't, it doesn't really mean like that. I think

0:58:20.880 --> 0:58:24.960
<v Speaker 1>it's going to be right exactly. And so this idea

0:58:25.000 --> 0:58:29.120
<v Speaker 1>that like the Knicks want permission to interview kid, that's

0:58:29.160 --> 0:58:33.240
<v Speaker 1>not an interview. If somebody has a job and they're

0:58:33.280 --> 0:58:35.800
<v Speaker 1>going to talk to someone about another job, it's not

0:58:35.840 --> 0:58:39.640
<v Speaker 1>like a real negotiation. It's like you have that job now.

0:58:40.880 --> 0:58:42.320
<v Speaker 1>So I think go ahead.

0:58:42.960 --> 0:58:46.480
<v Speaker 2>Oh, I mean you're saying the question was, how is

0:58:46.560 --> 0:58:48.440
<v Speaker 2>Dallas going to allow this to happen. I think that

0:58:49.360 --> 0:58:52.560
<v Speaker 2>Jason Kidd wasn't involved when it was Luka Doncon's being

0:58:52.560 --> 0:58:54.720
<v Speaker 2>traded from the team. If he doesn't want to be

0:58:54.800 --> 0:58:57.800
<v Speaker 2>there and stay on that team and stay with the mess.

0:58:57.520 --> 0:58:59.360
<v Speaker 3>That was left, then so be it.

0:58:59.760 --> 0:59:01.760
<v Speaker 2>I think they should let the guy go if he

0:59:01.800 --> 0:59:04.080
<v Speaker 2>wants to go, no questions asked.

0:59:04.320 --> 0:59:08.520
<v Speaker 1>I think that's probably how he would feel. And I

0:59:08.560 --> 0:59:11.480
<v Speaker 1>think that the fact that the Knicks the reporting is

0:59:12.520 --> 0:59:15.600
<v Speaker 1>the Knicks fired Thibodeau, and they seem to only want

0:59:15.640 --> 0:59:19.320
<v Speaker 1>coaches that are currently hired. It's like they're interested in

0:59:19.440 --> 0:59:23.080
<v Speaker 1>Email Odoka who has a job, Jason Kidd, who has

0:59:23.120 --> 0:59:25.760
<v Speaker 1>a job. And then the reporting this weekend was Chris

0:59:25.800 --> 0:59:30.919
<v Speaker 1>Finch who has a job, and so I I think

0:59:30.960 --> 0:59:37.680
<v Speaker 1>they're gonna get Kid. Now is that going to lead

0:59:37.720 --> 0:59:43.400
<v Speaker 1>to them getting the honest It certainly wouldn't hurt. Jiannis

0:59:43.440 --> 0:59:47.560
<v Speaker 1>really liked Kid and even if it's a longer term

0:59:47.680 --> 0:59:52.640
<v Speaker 1>play than just this this year, it seems like that's

0:59:52.720 --> 0:59:57.200
<v Speaker 1>the Knicks. That's the Knicks plan.

0:59:57.280 --> 0:59:59.880
<v Speaker 2>Do you think that he's the best options of the

1:00:00.080 --> 1:00:05.360
<v Speaker 2>than the other coaches if they don't get you honest.

1:00:04.240 --> 1:00:06.640
<v Speaker 1>Listen, I think he's done a really good job in Dallas.

1:00:07.760 --> 1:00:11.320
<v Speaker 1>I also think that you know, you have to be prepared.

1:00:11.400 --> 1:00:14.000
<v Speaker 1>You have to understand Jason Kidd is going to leave

1:00:14.040 --> 1:00:19.480
<v Speaker 1>you at some point. Like there is an element of like,

1:00:20.880 --> 1:00:23.680
<v Speaker 1>you know, if you get in a relationship with someone

1:00:24.280 --> 1:00:28.520
<v Speaker 1>who five of their previous six relationships have started with

1:00:28.600 --> 1:00:31.720
<v Speaker 1>someone new when they were already living with someone else,

1:00:32.440 --> 1:00:36.680
<v Speaker 1>you kind of know that eventually you're going to be

1:00:36.840 --> 1:00:39.680
<v Speaker 1>the someone else. But you're just like, you know what,

1:00:41.080 --> 1:00:43.920
<v Speaker 1>I'm up for the ride. Let's see how this goes.

1:00:45.200 --> 1:00:48.680
<v Speaker 1>So I think people you've got to go go into

1:00:48.680 --> 1:00:52.840
<v Speaker 1>that situation eyes wide open. But if it moves the

1:00:52.880 --> 1:00:55.880
<v Speaker 1>needle in your ability to get y honest, I think

1:00:55.920 --> 1:01:03.720
<v Speaker 1>that is uh. I think that is worth it. All right,

1:01:03.840 --> 1:01:07.200
<v Speaker 1>Let's do a little NFL and then tennis corner and

1:01:07.240 --> 1:01:09.520
<v Speaker 1>then some listener questions because we're gonna go a little

1:01:09.520 --> 1:01:10.280
<v Speaker 1>too long today.

1:01:10.320 --> 1:01:13.640
<v Speaker 2>Otherwise, Aaron Rodgers officially a stealer. I think we found

1:01:13.640 --> 1:01:17.120
<v Speaker 2>out a little bit after Thursday's show. Pittsburgh Super Bowl

1:01:17.160 --> 1:01:20.080
<v Speaker 2>odds didn't change and their plus money to make the playoffs.

1:01:20.480 --> 1:01:23.640
<v Speaker 2>Looks like TJ. Watt also wants a new contract. How

1:01:23.720 --> 1:01:27.000
<v Speaker 2>much does them acquiring Aaron Rodgers move the needle for you?

1:01:28.600 --> 1:01:34.080
<v Speaker 1>Not much at all. And listen, I think Pittsburgh made

1:01:34.080 --> 1:01:40.520
<v Speaker 1>a mistake in a lot of ways this offseason. And

1:01:40.760 --> 1:01:43.320
<v Speaker 1>I know Steeler fans probably are not going to want

1:01:43.360 --> 1:01:46.440
<v Speaker 1>to hear this, but I would have taken a totally

1:01:46.440 --> 1:01:51.120
<v Speaker 1>different tact. I would have actually gone the opposite to

1:01:51.120 --> 1:01:55.920
<v Speaker 1>de Mons, and I would have started fresh, so to speak.

1:01:56.880 --> 1:02:00.520
<v Speaker 1>I would not have traded for DK Metcalf, would have

1:02:00.520 --> 1:02:04.959
<v Speaker 1>traded away George Pickens. I would not give TJ. Watt

1:02:05.000 --> 1:02:07.600
<v Speaker 1>a new contract. I would I think you get a

1:02:07.600 --> 1:02:12.080
<v Speaker 1>first round pick and something for TJ. Watt. And I

1:02:12.280 --> 1:02:16.280
<v Speaker 1>probably would have said Mason Rudolph take the reins, buddy,

1:02:17.280 --> 1:02:20.880
<v Speaker 1>and I would have gone into next year with multiple

1:02:20.920 --> 1:02:26.200
<v Speaker 1>first round picks, multiple second round picks. My own bad

1:02:26.320 --> 1:02:29.000
<v Speaker 1>pick because I'm a team that doesn't have TJ. Watt

1:02:29.280 --> 1:02:32.920
<v Speaker 1>or George Pickens or DK Metcalf and Mason Rudolph is

1:02:32.960 --> 1:02:36.960
<v Speaker 1>my starting quarterback. And I would say, we're having a

1:02:37.120 --> 1:02:42.080
<v Speaker 1>one year reset and we're cleaning all our books up,

1:02:42.320 --> 1:02:46.480
<v Speaker 1>we're getting young, we're gonna crush the draft, and we're

1:02:46.520 --> 1:02:49.880
<v Speaker 1>gonna have a franchise quarterback. That's the tact I would

1:02:49.880 --> 1:02:55.280
<v Speaker 1>have taken. Instead, they traded for DK Metcalf. I think

1:02:55.320 --> 1:02:58.800
<v Speaker 1>they are going to give TJ. Watt a new contract,

1:02:59.120 --> 1:03:04.000
<v Speaker 1>and they signed Aaron Rodgers. You know, fingers crossed hope

1:03:04.000 --> 1:03:08.200
<v Speaker 1>against hope. We can go eleven and eight, and by

1:03:08.240 --> 1:03:11.560
<v Speaker 1>eleven and eight, I mean ten and seven, sneak into

1:03:11.600 --> 1:03:15.680
<v Speaker 1>the playoffs, win a playoff game, losing round two. That

1:03:16.080 --> 1:03:18.200
<v Speaker 1>is what the That's not what I think they're gonna do.

1:03:18.720 --> 1:03:22.160
<v Speaker 1>I think they're gonna go seven and ten. But but

1:03:23.760 --> 1:03:26.680
<v Speaker 1>the that's the goal. The goal is to break this

1:03:27.120 --> 1:03:30.520
<v Speaker 1>damn near decade long streak of not winning a playoff game.

1:03:31.000 --> 1:03:37.200
<v Speaker 1>And I just think this is a huge mistake and

1:03:37.520 --> 1:03:40.000
<v Speaker 1>and Aaron is gonna talk today, and I'm curious what

1:03:40.040 --> 1:03:42.760
<v Speaker 1>he says, but that that's what I that's where I

1:03:42.800 --> 1:03:47.479
<v Speaker 1>think this is going. All right, let's go to our

1:03:47.640 --> 1:03:48.840
<v Speaker 1>tennis corner, demons.

1:03:49.920 --> 1:03:50.120
<v Speaker 3>Uh.

1:03:50.200 --> 1:03:53.320
<v Speaker 2>Yes, the French Open wrapped up with Cocoa Golf winning

1:03:53.360 --> 1:03:59.720
<v Speaker 2>our first final at Ronald Garrow's gar.

1:04:00.160 --> 1:04:02.200
<v Speaker 1>French Open site.

1:04:02.240 --> 1:04:06.280
<v Speaker 2>The crazy comeback against Center. It's time for tennis corner.

1:04:06.680 --> 1:04:10.600
<v Speaker 3>Let's go. I'm ready for your knowledge, all.

1:04:10.560 --> 1:04:19.760
<v Speaker 1>Right, So listen Coco getting the French Open and beating Sablenka,

1:04:20.640 --> 1:04:24.439
<v Speaker 1>and listen. It was a little marred a bit by

1:04:24.480 --> 1:04:28.840
<v Speaker 1>I thought, you know, some less than gracious comments by Sabalanca,

1:04:28.840 --> 1:04:32.640
<v Speaker 1>But whatever that was, that was an awesome moment and

1:04:32.680 --> 1:04:37.760
<v Speaker 1>it was it in most tennis tournaments would have been

1:04:37.920 --> 1:04:44.200
<v Speaker 1>the moment of the tournament. But my guy, Carlos Alcarez

1:04:45.360 --> 1:04:56.320
<v Speaker 1>being down triple match points and fighting that off and

1:04:56.360 --> 1:05:01.960
<v Speaker 1>then going from there to winning the entire thing in

1:05:02.080 --> 1:05:06.800
<v Speaker 1>a five set, five and a half hour epic. It

1:05:06.920 --> 1:05:11.680
<v Speaker 1>is on the short list of five or six greatest

1:05:11.800 --> 1:05:17.439
<v Speaker 1>matches in modern tennis history. That is not an exaggeration.

1:05:18.960 --> 1:05:25.320
<v Speaker 1>And the fact that he now is sitting there at

1:05:25.480 --> 1:05:32.240
<v Speaker 1>twenty three years old and has five grand slams. The

1:05:32.280 --> 1:05:38.800
<v Speaker 1>only one he's missing is the Australian. He is a

1:05:38.880 --> 1:05:43.000
<v Speaker 1>back to back Wimbledon winner, a back to back French

1:05:43.040 --> 1:05:49.760
<v Speaker 1>Open winner, has won the US Open once and will

1:05:49.920 --> 1:05:57.640
<v Speaker 1>go into Wimbledon as the huge I would imagine huge

1:05:57.680 --> 1:06:02.440
<v Speaker 1>favor's probably wrong, but a significant and favorite. And that

1:06:02.560 --> 1:06:06.600
<v Speaker 1>in twenty twenty two, when he was twenty years old,

1:06:08.080 --> 1:06:13.440
<v Speaker 1>he beats Rude to win the US In twenty twenty three,

1:06:14.360 --> 1:06:19.320
<v Speaker 1>he beats Joker in the Wimbledon final. In twenty twenty four,

1:06:20.080 --> 1:06:25.560
<v Speaker 1>he beats Joker in the Wimbledon final. This last year

1:06:25.680 --> 1:06:31.040
<v Speaker 1>in the French Open final, he beats Zverev in another classic.

1:06:32.000 --> 1:06:35.480
<v Speaker 1>And then this year he beats Center in an all

1:06:35.840 --> 1:06:43.800
<v Speaker 1>all time match. Doing that where he is beaten everyone

1:06:43.880 --> 1:06:54.959
<v Speaker 1>that matters, four championships essentially, and he is at twenty three,

1:06:55.560 --> 1:07:00.800
<v Speaker 1>the not not just the face but then next guy

1:07:00.920 --> 1:07:05.320
<v Speaker 1>up as just an all time legend in the field

1:07:06.240 --> 1:07:14.800
<v Speaker 1>at that age is really remarkable. And I said, I've

1:07:14.840 --> 1:07:17.520
<v Speaker 1>been saying he's twenty three? Am I wrong? Is he

1:07:17.600 --> 1:07:20.960
<v Speaker 1>twenty two? And I and I just have that wrong.

1:07:21.080 --> 1:07:23.080
<v Speaker 1>I this whole week, I thought he was doing all

1:07:23.080 --> 1:07:28.440
<v Speaker 1>this at twenty three, But I but this is what

1:07:28.520 --> 1:07:31.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm currently looking at, says that he just turned it.

1:07:31.920 --> 1:07:34.600
<v Speaker 1>Could I thought he just turned twenty three? This is

1:07:34.600 --> 1:07:37.960
<v Speaker 1>saying he just turned twenty two. The Internet's not as

1:07:38.000 --> 1:07:43.680
<v Speaker 1>reliable as it once was. Regardless, is an all time match.

1:07:43.760 --> 1:07:47.560
<v Speaker 1>And I do have to say I am so thrilled

1:07:48.520 --> 1:07:55.320
<v Speaker 1>for my friend Adam Lefgo, who got that tabbed by

1:07:55.440 --> 1:07:59.880
<v Speaker 1>TNT to be the host of their French open cover

1:08:00.240 --> 1:08:04.720
<v Speaker 1>for these last two weeks and just absolutely crushed it.

1:08:05.640 --> 1:08:12.600
<v Speaker 1>And I just cannot help but think back to the

1:08:12.720 --> 1:08:17.080
<v Speaker 1>two thousand and six was it two thousand? What was

1:08:17.120 --> 1:08:22.479
<v Speaker 1>the Adrian Peterson Draft? I have to look was Adrian

1:08:22.520 --> 1:08:27.280
<v Speaker 1>Peterson two thousand? That was he two thousand and seven? Yeah? Okay.

1:08:29.520 --> 1:08:37.360
<v Speaker 1>April twenty eighth, two thousand and seven, on Z eighty

1:08:37.479 --> 1:08:43.799
<v Speaker 1>nine at Syracuse University, there was a six hour live

1:08:44.280 --> 1:08:50.479
<v Speaker 1>NFL draft show on the radio, and the hosts of

1:08:50.600 --> 1:08:59.320
<v Speaker 1>that show were me, Danny Parkins, Adam Lefgo. It was

1:08:59.360 --> 1:09:01.600
<v Speaker 1>the first time I'm the three of us. Danny and

1:09:01.680 --> 1:09:04.800
<v Speaker 1>left Goo were tight. Lefto and I didn't know each

1:09:04.840 --> 1:09:06.719
<v Speaker 1>other as well because he did a lot of TV

1:09:06.840 --> 1:09:09.720
<v Speaker 1>stuff and was a year younger than me, but we

1:09:09.800 --> 1:09:14.840
<v Speaker 1>did that radio show together and Danny now after being

1:09:14.880 --> 1:09:20.759
<v Speaker 1>a longtime radio star in Chicago host breakfast Ball, I'm

1:09:20.880 --> 1:09:28.080
<v Speaker 1>me and left go is just you know, outside of

1:09:28.120 --> 1:09:32.960
<v Speaker 1>the inside the NBA, you know main crew, the guy

1:09:33.760 --> 1:09:38.840
<v Speaker 1>at Turner Sports. It's just so cool. And I'm so

1:09:39.040 --> 1:09:46.080
<v Speaker 1>happy that he that everybody loved his coverage and everything

1:09:46.080 --> 1:09:49.640
<v Speaker 1>he did, so that that really thrilled me. All right.

1:09:49.720 --> 1:09:54.559
<v Speaker 1>Reminder everyone like rate subscribe review. That really does help

1:09:54.640 --> 1:09:59.120
<v Speaker 1>us out. The producers want a world series of poker recap. Guys,

1:09:59.160 --> 1:10:01.280
<v Speaker 1>the body's not even cold yet. I'm not ready to

1:10:01.320 --> 1:10:06.599
<v Speaker 1>talk about it. We can, however, do some listener questions.

1:10:06.640 --> 1:10:09.400
<v Speaker 3>Go ahead, uh, Mary says, let the dog in.

1:10:10.360 --> 1:10:12.280
<v Speaker 1>Let's see if you're sitting right out here, hold on,

1:10:13.080 --> 1:10:16.599
<v Speaker 1>Probably there is come on, decks, all right, he's just chilling.

1:10:16.720 --> 1:10:18.280
<v Speaker 1>He's like, I don't need to come in. Maybe he

1:10:18.360 --> 1:10:22.479
<v Speaker 1>will come here, decks getting up, He'll probably just hop

1:10:22.479 --> 1:10:24.240
<v Speaker 1>on that couch. All right, Go ahead.

1:10:24.560 --> 1:10:27.639
<v Speaker 2>Very playoffs starts next week. Demonsay, I think we play

1:10:27.680 --> 1:10:29.880
<v Speaker 2>your team in the first round. Very nice meeting, by

1:10:29.880 --> 1:10:32.559
<v Speaker 2>the way, nice meaning her Eric. I did see him

1:10:32.640 --> 1:10:36.000
<v Speaker 2>last last Tuesday. Last month Tuesday was.

1:10:36.439 --> 1:10:37.719
<v Speaker 1>How's the basketball going?

1:10:38.120 --> 1:10:40.800
<v Speaker 3>Basketball is going good. We lost that game.

1:10:41.040 --> 1:10:44.840
<v Speaker 2>I was there, Uh it was I think we lost

1:10:44.840 --> 1:10:48.240
<v Speaker 2>by like seven, but we honestly, we never have more

1:10:48.320 --> 1:10:51.200
<v Speaker 2>than a single sub is the problem.

1:10:51.640 --> 1:10:53.960
<v Speaker 1>Now we're sorry. This is why I couldn't let the

1:10:53.960 --> 1:10:58.840
<v Speaker 1>dog in. I gotta close the door. Now the hold

1:10:58.920 --> 1:11:03.840
<v Speaker 1>on that. Okay, but the playoffs haven't started yet, so

1:11:03.880 --> 1:11:04.840
<v Speaker 1>your team's still alive.

1:11:06.000 --> 1:11:09.599
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I honestly thought today was playoffs and the game's

1:11:09.680 --> 1:11:10.200
<v Speaker 2>kind of late.

1:11:10.280 --> 1:11:14.800
<v Speaker 1>Honestly, listen, Eric might be trying to sandbag you, so

1:11:15.000 --> 1:11:18.400
<v Speaker 1>like the the I mean, if I if I were you,

1:11:18.439 --> 1:11:19.720
<v Speaker 1>i'd make sure.

1:11:20.560 --> 1:11:22.160
<v Speaker 3>Says, does demons have a bag?

1:11:24.160 --> 1:11:28.640
<v Speaker 2>You know, my left hand was never the best.

1:11:29.080 --> 1:11:30.679
<v Speaker 3>I got a bigger bag than Lebron. Though.

1:11:32.080 --> 1:11:34.040
<v Speaker 2>If I dribbled like Lebron in high school, my cult

1:11:34.120 --> 1:11:35.760
<v Speaker 2>would have maybe just dribbled with my left hand the

1:11:35.880 --> 1:11:36.400
<v Speaker 2>entire time.

1:11:36.960 --> 1:11:38.519
<v Speaker 3>Do layups left hand?

1:11:39.080 --> 1:11:41.880
<v Speaker 2>Well, everybody else did the right hand, left hand, right side.

1:11:41.920 --> 1:11:46.040
<v Speaker 2>He made me do that, but uh, well, yeah.

1:11:45.760 --> 1:11:46.400
<v Speaker 3>I've got a bag.

1:11:48.920 --> 1:11:54.960
<v Speaker 2>Go ahead, matt Ford. Did you see mission impossible yet?

1:11:55.360 --> 1:11:56.920
<v Speaker 2>But then he's starting to be I did not?

1:11:57.360 --> 1:12:00.720
<v Speaker 1>Oh oh you yeah, he's asking me not yet. I'm

1:12:00.720 --> 1:12:03.000
<v Speaker 1>gonna see it. This week though I was busy.

1:12:03.200 --> 1:12:05.960
<v Speaker 3>Let's see it this week, Trace says Nick.

1:12:06.240 --> 1:12:08.760
<v Speaker 1>I'm not answering any World Series of Poker. Oh yeah,

1:12:08.960 --> 1:12:10.280
<v Speaker 1>I'm not ready to do that yet.

1:12:11.200 --> 1:12:14.400
<v Speaker 2>Dub says, since twenty twenty one, Trevor Lawrence leads the

1:12:14.439 --> 1:12:17.200
<v Speaker 2>NFL and turnovers, what more will it take for you

1:12:17.240 --> 1:12:19.519
<v Speaker 2>to finally concede that you were wrong about him?

1:12:20.080 --> 1:12:22.920
<v Speaker 1>Let's see how this year goes. W Let's just see

1:12:22.920 --> 1:12:26.160
<v Speaker 1>how this year goes. Let's see how this year goes.

1:12:26.280 --> 1:12:28.160
<v Speaker 1>This is a big year for trev So let's just

1:12:28.200 --> 1:12:28.920
<v Speaker 1>see how it goes.

1:12:29.200 --> 1:12:29.599
<v Speaker 3>This is.

1:12:31.280 --> 1:12:33.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, this is the year. And that's where listen, that's

1:12:33.200 --> 1:12:36.400
<v Speaker 1>where we'll leave it. I gotta run. Great job, Demond's

1:12:36.400 --> 1:12:42.120
<v Speaker 1>a great job, Blue Duck, DraftKings, Boost Mobile volume everybody.

1:12:42.960 --> 1:12:50.400
<v Speaker 1>By the way, the listener question segment that's still sponsorship available,

1:12:50.840 --> 1:12:54.639
<v Speaker 1>Our opening thirty minute, you know opening segment that's always

1:12:54.640 --> 1:12:57.080
<v Speaker 1>supposed to go eight minutes and goes thirty that's spot

1:12:57.160 --> 1:13:01.320
<v Speaker 1>we have some spots open. Boost Mobile has smartly claimed

1:13:02.040 --> 1:13:06.679
<v Speaker 1>the opening of every show now known as Straight to Voicemail.

1:13:06.840 --> 1:13:09.679
<v Speaker 1>But we still have some valuable real estate still available

1:13:09.720 --> 1:13:12.360
<v Speaker 1>out there. That's a reminder for anyone listening and for

1:13:12.439 --> 1:13:15.880
<v Speaker 1>the wonderful volume sales team like rate subscribeer to you,

1:13:16.040 --> 1:13:19.800
<v Speaker 1>check us out on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts,

1:13:19.840 --> 1:13:21.439
<v Speaker 1>and I'll see you guys soon. We'll trade