Episode 31: Player Evaluations And Analytics With Tommy Gunn @TGunn21

it is, out of a punishment to this podcast. If we can't think of something better, we might have to to go go with that one. Um Anyway, I'm super stoked. We have just about an hour today before we gotta lose Tommy. We're going to start with just a little bit of a breakdown of last night's Warriors game and just a little a thing that's been on my mind having to do with the way we evaluate players. Then Tommy and I are gonna give our takes on the

kind of state of analytics and basketball. I know we're a couple of days behind on that one, but I've had a lot of thoughts on that that I wanted to share and then we're gonna end by talking about what I think has been an interesting topic as of late, which is just like the idea of the way that the league uh portrays certain stars and the way that the league uh portrays itself in general and in the media,

and just kind of some ideas about that. And we're gonna bounce around to a bunch of teams in the process, But I wanted to start with something interesting from last night's game because we kind of get on this merrygo round where every single time Steph loses or every single time Lebron loses, you get the same kind of loud criticism from one side of the equation. And I'm not talking about what you were saying, Tommy, because I know you had a very specific, pointed criticism about something having

to do with what's happening on the court. But it's more I'm more just talking about the real toxic stuff on either side. And I think this season is super are fascinating. It's like a case study, in my opinion, of the way that of the way that we evaluate players, because you know, we like to think that basketball is this sport that is very you know, uh that the individual has a great impact on which it does compared to other team sports, but at its core, it is

still profoundly a team sport. And I think the Steph Lebron thing is the best example of that, because if you took a random poll of people in two thousand and eighteen and said who's like, who's better stuff for Lebron, you have a group of them say Steph, And you have a group of them say Lebron, And and Steph was on a contender at that point, and Lebron was on a middling playoff team, you know, and then this

year I would vote. I would wager if you asked those same people, they would still say step and they would still say Lebron, despite the fact that the roles have been reversed and Lebron's on the Contender and Steph

is on the middling playoff team. And I think that has to do with the fact that it's very subjective the way that we evaluate these guys, and quite frankly, like, I'm over the idea of saying, like so and so is better than this guy because they wont head to head matchup or they won this specific series, Like I don't care, Like there's a better case for Steff over Dame than having beat Dame in the playoffs a few times.

To me, the cases he's better off the ball, which makes him more versatile, he's a better playmaker, he's got better control of the game, you know, those sorts of things. He's better defensively, or if you're making the case for Dame, it's he gets uh, he gets he's better isolations for he's better at the end of games as a as a shock creator. Like, those sorts of things are more interesting than me to me than the team results because

the team results are just so convoluted. So my question for you is does what I'm saying make any sense to you? And then also I'm I think this is a good segue into what your legitimate basketball criticism of Steff was last night. It does make sense, But I mean, the way that we operate is all just kind of an echo chamber of Twitter, and a lot of the stuff that you're saying, it's just two nuance of a conversation for Twitter, and you can't do it in two

characters or two and eighty whatever the limit is. Now. Um, I think that's what a lot of it boils down to, right, you you simplify, you get reductive um. Just by nature of the platform, you can't expound on things unless you go on these long threads. And if you're going on a long thread, nobody's gonna read it right like you, you really have to get lucky to have people read each and every thought that you put out in the thread. It's all gonna get kind of lost in the mix.

People are gonna respond to the first tweet and they're not going to see the context of what you're saying. So yeah, that's a better way to evaluate players, absolutely, but you're never gonna get that if you're just basing

your entire conversation off Twitter. And to go on top of that, I do think winning matters, Like I don't think Steph is better than Dames solely because he's beat him in the playoffs, But I don't think it's insignificant that he is ten and oh in games played against Damian Lillard in the playoffs, Like if Dame was if the conversation was a little bit closer, I don't think it would be ten zero. I really don't, because every time it comes down to it and playoff game, step

has been better than Dame. It's just a wat evidence. It's you know, or I should say it's convoluted evidence, it's convolution. It's convoluted evidence and doesn't tell the whole story. And I'm not trying to argue that it does, but I think it's it's a it's a mirror into what the conversation should be like. He is he tennan no better than Dame? No, he's not tenan no better? But

is he a good amount better? I still think so. Um. But to go on top of that, I mean, last night, one guy was better for forty five minutes and then he wasn't better in the last three minutes. And I don't know exactly what that point to. Yesterday he was four for fifteen in the second half, something along those lines. Four for fifteen and the second half, a horrendous third quarter. I don't think you made a shot in the third quarter.

Might have made one late, um, but just a really really bad second three at the end when they were up three with one minute left that would ice the game. That was get out to me. Just a shot that he never misses, never misses, never ever says, and then a couple of floaters. I don't know how the last floater stayed out. That was really like he put that basically right where it should have been. Maybe it should have been a little bit softer off the back. Um,

so we got a couple of unlucky rolls. Ramon missed put back? Is it that one if I remember correctly? Um? No, the Draymond missed put back was on the three, and then he took a floater with like he took a floater with like thirty seconds left right before dame at the step back to go up to he took a floater off the board and um, it like rolled around the rim and then sat on top of the side

of the rim for a second and rolled out. So he got he got on lucky on a couple of them, and then he got fouled on a drive where he actually made a lay up. Can't like h him right

across the face and they didn't call it. Um, But point being, he just there were too many times later where he like looked to get off ball or look for more screening action where it's like, dude, you just gotta go get a bucket man like you have you're being guarded by Rodney Hood or Robert Covington's or Carmelo Anthony, like guys who can take one on one and you just didn't go get a bucket, And sometimes Portland doubled him and forced the ball out of his hands, and

that matters, Like that's not insignificant in but at the end of the day, you've got to find a way to win that game. Your team had the lead, and if you're the player that everybody says you are, still you need to go win that game. And it's not an isolated incident. This has happened multiple times as you're happen against the Facers, against the Knicks, against the Magic, Like it isn't a small thing. And look, he's carrying

a huge burden. Nobody's saying he isn't um It's it's different than Portland's situation in that Golden State has put this really good defense around Steph and they've kind of forfeited offense, and Portland has kind of forfeited defense and put this really good offense around Dame. Even with c J and Nerk being out, like they still have very capable offensive players. So it comes back to team building in a lot of ways to like it's tougher for step,

because he really is manufacturing everything for them. But it's not an excuse for not making shots at the end of the game. It isn't I'm sorry, Like the game was close, You've got to find a way to win that one, and they could have three or four more wins this year. You're if he had done Like it's very similar situations the last night. So everybody got mad at me once again, and I understand it because I've become the the kind of blinchmen for this argument or

this talking point. But it Yeah, I was just very disappointed and how he performed on the stretch, and I don't think I should be I don't know, castigated for that. So I think, uh, this is an interesting like I we're gonna kind of uh do a little ven diagram here over some other topics that we're gonna touch on today. But to me, this is like a problem that I have, one of many problems that I have with a purely analytical approach to basketball, because I tend to have a

very middle ground approach to this kind of stuff. Like I was listening to a great podcast what you guys have to check Out if you haven't checked out yet, which is the one that Jason Maples did the other day. Um, he brought on I'm blanking on the gentleman's name right now, Joseph gil Joseph Gillyah. He brought on a guy who works in analytics, and they had a really smart conversation surrounding a lot of this stuff. Um, and you've got to check that out if you haven't done yet. That's

on on Jason Maple's podcast. But that said, uh, there's the name of that podcast, by the way, it's Temple

of Hoo Yes, Temple of Hoop Podcasts. So the there's this idea of what we quantify to be an open shot, and we and we use that as kind of like the the only measure of the shots quality or its probability of going in, which is an issue that I have because like so, for instance, like the example that I've used with you several times has to do with the two thousand nineteen finals and the shots that Steph was getting at the end of the game against the Raptors.

And you know, uh, if it just by strictly looking at clips, you see separation and you see Steph getting a quality look. But what I see personally just and you you can relate to this too because you've played basketball as well. Is like, there's this unwritten there's this untold part of the story, which is how much energy

it took to get you open. And and this is something that I think is lost in a lot of defensive metrics that it bothers me when you see like, uh, you know, one of these heavily analytics orient and to guys be like, oh, well, this defense is actually not as good as it looks because teams are missing threes against them, which automatically is being quantified as luck and not the fact that that defense wears you down so much that even when you do get open, you're exhausted

and you can't make the shot. And that's really no go I would I'll let you finish. But that's a really good point. Tom Thibode's defenses always have that happen. The teams always shoot terribly from three against them, even on open threes. And it's exactly what you're pointing to. Their teams are always tired against them. And it's one thing if we're looking at a four game sample size and we're like, okay, teams are shooting fifteen percent from three.

They're getting lucky. That's one thing. But when I've got a season's worth, you know, a half a season's worth of data, that tells me that even when they get a defenses or offenses get open shots against them, they're

just not converting them at a high rate. That tells me that you're getting your ass kicked everywhere else on the floor, and then all of a sudden you find yourself open and you're almost like stunned to be open, and you're exhausted, and you're not getting the right lift and you're leaving stuff short and you're just missing shots.

And so my point is is, like, you know, Steph Curry going forward for fifteen, this kind of reminds me a lot of what would happen in UH in two thousand eighteen with lebron Is and even before that, or would be like people would be like, oh, well, you know, in the in the in the fourth quarter he was two for six, and it's like, yeah, but you know, when you are carrying the load that you're carrying, and when you are you know, under the that intense physical

stress for forty eight minutes, it's normal to get less lift and to be less effective at the end of games. And and all I'm saying is like, as far as Steph goes, you know, if you put him in a situation where his workload is less, I believe this version of Steph two thousand twenty one, Steph would appear to be more in control of games, kind of to to

what you were talking about earlier. And the last example I'll give, And then all your respond again is, you know, uh, wide open shot is quantified as a shot that has at least six ft is space between the closest defender and the shot, according to what you see on NBA

dot com. So in my opinion, though, a contested shot for me, when I'm in a smaller role or not even necessarily smaller role, but going against an inferior defense or whatever, it takes, a pull up three that's technically with the defender in front of me, when I have good legs and good rhythm, is actually a better shot for me than if I'm wide open but exhausted for

whatever the reason. Maybe, And so from that standpoint, like, I don't think it's ever a true, you know, assertion of a player's shooting ability to look at open versus wide open and things along those lines. I would look at it more, and you know, in relation to what his workload is, I think I don't think it's a coincidence that Lebron's three point shot has fallen apart as he's been in an operating and less spacing and in

the bigger workload, if that makes sense. No, you're not wrong on any of it, And a lot of it just poils down to we have all these numbers of available to us, but a lot of people don't know how to contextualize them, right, Like, no context has applied to any of these numbers. And you're right, sometimes a pull up three with kind of a semi contested hand in your face is actually easier than the wide open one. But specifically pointing to Steph, he's always shot incredible sentage

percentages on wide open threes. He's just for whatever reason, this year, he's just missing those ones at a higher rate than he ever has. And maybe it does point to the workloade because the contested ones are going in at basically the same rate, which is the weird part, right, because if he's making the contested ones at the same rate and he's missing the wide open ones, I don't

know what to attribute that to. Maybe it is defenses being more physical and when he gets the wide open ones, there's such like a sigh of relief and oh my god, I can't believe I'm open that he's more likely to miss it because he feels more pressure in a way, right, Like, it's all human stuff that we can't we can't put into numbers, and we probably never will be able to.

That's why as good as analytics are, and as good as they will get in the future, like we're probably kind of just that, you know, the tip of the iceberg here, they're gonna get a lot better and we're gonna be able to to quantify even more um parts of basketball, but there's always gonna be a human element that we cannot quantify, and the rush to do that, to just paint everything by numbers will ruin basketball to a certain extent if we don't get control over it.

It's just it's just the reality of the situation. If we continue to go down this path where numbers are God, they can't be they never will be. Well, there's a basic there's a basic like, uh, you know, conundrum that takes place when we start to paint any section of the public with the wide brush. And this is more

of like a worldview kind of thing. And when you factor in the reality that no two situations are like um and you know, that's why you know, any sort of of sweeping directive that just the responds to a specific you know, whether it's an income like income brackets. And we talked about this a while back, having to

do with like stimulus. It's like an income bracket in Arizona, where I live doesn't remotely resemble you know, something in CALIFORNI on you, and so everything is relative to your circumstance. And the same goes for for basketball analytics. And this is something that I think, UH is tough, and that's why I have. What I really enjoy with analytics is

you know, more scoreboard related UH measures. So for instance, like you know, UH points per possession that is waited to throw out garbage time or to throw out you know, UH end of quarter heaves and stuff like that. Like I like that sort of thing because it's the scoreboard uh and and and it's one of those things where you can actually uh draw a direct line between that and winning. And I thought Joseph Gila on that podcast.

It's such a good job of explaining how that's the number one thing that gets players paid, and it's the it's one of the number one things that he focuses on when he's coming up with strategy for players and their scouting reports and things like that, because like you know, for instance, yeah, if you you used to talk to UH analytics guy about the mid range shot, and they would tell you at first it was like no mid range shot, and then there was a bunch of push

back and they responded with like okay, end of games and the shot clock. And what I was always pushed back on is like, you can never quantify how comfortable an offensive player is when he's going into a shot. So,

for instance, like a slightly uncomfortable three. You know, if you may, you may attach a points possession points per possession to that based on it being a three point shot with a defender at a certain distance, but in reality, it's an uncomfortable three, and there's no way of quantifying that versus a comfortable, wonderable pull up, you know, in a point by per a point per possession stance. If factors in all these other fifteen footers and twenty footers

that kind of get convoluted in there. But if you're really comfortable and in rhythm in that shot, it's not a you know, one point per possession shot for you, it's like an eight percent shot. Like when you're comfortable and you're in rhythm. It's hard to quantify how like you that shots just gonna go in and you almost

get a feel for that. And I'm sure you feel this way too, and you watch games like you almost can tell when a guy's going up into a shot with his form and how confident he raises up if it's going to go in or not, and not to effects, but too close to that, And I think, I don't I don't think you can ever quantify that if that makes sense. No, I mean, I'll keep going back to step. His game last night was the perfect example of this. He looks super in rhythm and super comfortable in that

first half and the third quarter. It was like he was getting open looks and he was like messing up his footwork. Um, he was kind of stutter stepping and pump taking into shots instead of just shooting the ball. And those shots would be you know, higher value shots, They have a higher points per possession. You know, if you were just measuring it by how wide open they were, they were higher quality shots the ones that he was getting in the in the first half and even the

ones he made in the fourth quarter. He made his two toughest looks in the fourth quarter, but it was all because he felt more in rhythm stepping into those shots. So yeah, it's it's this weird thing well where the numbers will never be able to quantify it, no matter how granular would get and how good the tracking data gets and how good, um, you know, the formula has become. It's something where we can never actually nail it down to a science because at the end of the day,

these are humans. These aren't robots, and it's gonna be humans playing basketball unless there's a robot basketball league. Like, it's just it is what it is. So yeah, it's such a weird conversation because people in the Twitter sphere you get painned as either like an analytics guy or an eye test guy. And I don't think it's so cut and dry, Like if I say one thing bad about analytics, all of my analytics friendly followers will be like, hey, but like, what are you talking about? Look, dude, then

they'll throw a bunch of analytics in my face. And then if I quote something that's analytics, really a lot of the eye test people a question where I'm coming from, It's like, no, I'm just I'm operating on this occasion by one of the two things, because sometimes the eye test is more important to me, and sometimes the numbers actually are more important. And that's why it has to be on a case by case basis. You can't measure

any two things alike. Yeah, So that was something that I thought was really interesting in that podcast as well as he was talking about they were talking about how like, uh, measuring Rudy Gobert's individual defense versus in a switch on a particular player, and he was talking about how, like, you know, if Rudy Gobert gets involved in a pick and roll with Kyrie Irving, they just won't switch it, but if he gets involved in a pick and roll

with Alex Caruso, he will switch it. So a bunch of their individual defensive metrics are measured based on him switching only onto these weaker offensive players. It's selection bias, it's total selection bias. And the same goes for like like one of the things that and that's why, like for me, it's I lean slightly more eye test and I and I and I evaluate metrics that makes sense to what I'm seeing. So I'll give you an example. When Anthony Davis to me, has been having a bad

year as a post score. Uh, he seems indecisive. He's not. Uh. He's doing a better job attacking double teams than he did last year, but he's feelm like great at it. He's not making anything from the mid range, and he's not making anything from three. He's just it's just a really like a inconsistent season on that end. But according to metrics on a point by a point per possession basis, he's actually having a career year as a post up player.

And what I think is convoluting that. And I you know, I can't prove this unless I literally rewatch every Anthony Davis post up from the season, And maybe if I lose my job or something, I'll go do that one of these days. But the point is is, like you know, from my test eye test watching, which I've watched every

game and I've watched most of them twice. Uh, and Anthony Davis post up against an inferior UH defender where they UH like a really small guy where he has like an easy little, you know, drop step and put in those are he's converting at an extremely high rate, but then he's being almost completely unaggressive in other matchups. If you have a reasonable post up defender and you throw it into him and there's bad facing, he'll just

kick it back out. And so that's not even measured as a possession in there, especially if it if they end up running another action. They'll only count it as a possession if it's like swing swing three or swing

three or whatever it is. And so from that standpoint, like I just think, you know, I if I had, you know, whereas like if I'm watching, as another specific eye test thing like oh, Lebron is leading the league and points per possession and pull up threes off the dribble, it's like, oh wait, well, literally for two months before he got cold here in the last few weeks, he was making that shot almost every time he took it.

So it's like, those are the kinds of things where you know, if it makes sense to what you're seeing, you know, if you're you don't. You never want to lie in the face of overwhelming evidence. A great example that is the Rondo stuff last year, Like if if there's just overwhelming evidence that when Rondo's on the court, you're losing, and when Caruso's on the floor, you're winning, Like that's a different story because there's just so much

data pointing in one direction. But I think I think it's always important to either throw out I stuff if the data overwhelmingly disproves it, or throw out the data if the what you're seeing overwhelmingly disproves it. If that makes sense, Yeah, And that's where I hate when people use points per possession and isolation or anything like that

to your actual isolation scoring. A lot of that is just a player being smart enough to ISO against the right guys exactly, right, And like Montrese, Montrese isn' getting

buckets against other big power forwards. He's doing it against miss patches exactly And not to like come down too hard on step today, but a lot of times he's selecting the ISO, it's against bad defenders, right, So he always grades out well in isometrics, whereas some nights he really does struggle against really good defenders in those situations. And like we saw him panic a little bit last

night at the end of the game. I thought Ker ran a bad set honestly, like they try to do like a bunch of screening in trible handoffs instead of just like giving him the ball and letting him go. But yeah, yeah, this is the charge play um. But but like instead of just he got one on one with Rodney Hood, who he's like he killed off the in the twenty nineteen Western Conference Finals. He got him a couple of times last night, and he like panicked.

He was out top by himself, and he tried to turn the quarter too quickly instead of just backing out and like truly ice isoing him, and he panicked a little bit. In an isolation situation, He's like, he's a great is a player, not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is measuring him by the pure numbers is kind of dumb because he's really smart about who he ISOs and who he doesn't. M m hm h m hm, m hm mhm. Now yep, all right, we're back on.

I apologize to everyone. I've been recently moving and dealing with a boatload of WiFi issues, and I will eventually get them figured out. You have my word anyway. So one other thing I wanted to say on the analytics front having to do with overarching metrics, and this is another thing that Joseph talked about in in the pod

the other day that I thought was interesting. This idea that like, you know, uh, if you're looking at baseball, every single player has the same goal, which is to get on base in some way, shape or form, whether it's through getting hit, getting a walk, getting home run, whether you're a big hitter or a contact hitter, your

your goal is essentially the same. And with basketball, it's not, you know, like you would never uh measure it doesn't make sense to measure Kareem abdul Jabbar's contribution in the same way you would measure Alan Iverson's contribution. Baseball. There's like a three true they call it three true outcomes, right, and that's what That's what it is in baseball. And you can boil it down to that because everything is

a one on one matchup. It's ess actually like if every basketball game was just one on one and you're just playing isolation all game. That's basically what baseball is. M m uh uh yeah, I can hear you a little bit, but it's still kind of like breaking up. Oh goodness, all right, Uh, give it a second, I'm good now, okay. Um. Anyway, my point is is like a lot of these when you when I see some of these metrics like Raptor and Lebron and and things

along those lines, he's like overarching metrics. The problem I have with that is it makes no accounting for that sort of thing. No players job is the same. So in for instance, I'll give you Lebron and Steph. Lebron and Steph are in our opinion, the number one and number two players in the entire world. And uh in this case, even though they both are primary offensive players, but both of their roles don't even remotely resemble each other. You know, Steph brings this whole extra element with his

off ball play that Lebron really doesn't. And then Lebron brings this whole extra element with his defense that that's definitely doesn't even even within the top echelons of the league. In two of the two very very unique archetypes of stars, their roles are still incredibly different. And so the idea that you would attach one single metric to try to paint a picture of the totality of a book. Basketball players impact to me doesn't really make a ton of sense.

And you can even look at players who are to me at least somewhat similar, like a Yo Kichen his staff right, like incredible offensive players, like maybe the two best offensive players in the league, but not great on defense. Even they play offense so differently that it's really really tough to measure them against each other. Because step is obviously the best shooter we've ever seen, and that's how he operates. Yokich is a big man who plays out

of the post. He can shoot the three a little bit, but he plays out of the post primarily out of dribble handoffs, and he's maybe the best passing big men we've ever seen. But measuring them by one metric are thinking that they played the game even remotely the same as ridiculous, right, Like, I was actually having a conversation

about this the other day with somebody. They I said, you know, Yoki might be the best offensive player in the league, and but of course a bunch of Warriors pan jumps and my mentions, you're crazy, it's STEP's Step, It's Steph. And they pointed out all these things that Yokich can't do that Steph can. I'm like, guys, you have to realize there's things that Yokich a bunch of things that Yokich can do that Steph can't do. It's not this one side of conversation, Well, this guy doesn't

bring these things at the table and this guy does. Okay, that might be true, but the inverse is also true. And now it comes down to what is more valuable? And I think that's the type of stuff that these metrics should try to quantify. Is okay, what is the most optimal way way to play? What is the most valuable thing? Is? Are Yoki post ups more valuable than steps shooting? Is his passing more valuable than steps off

ball movement? I don't know how you quantify that. I'm not smart enough to figure that out, but I think when analytics get really good, that's the type of stuff

they'll be able to quantify. And there is like a certain amount of that you have points per possession, But like we talked about, there there's a lot of selection bias where it depends what the matchup is, who's on the floor, who isn't on the floor, who they're playing with and it's just all stuff that we aren't going to be able to quanify for probably a long time in my opinion, Yeah, exactly. And and and this kind of goes back to what we originally started this conversation with,

which is the way we evaluate players. And you know, I I have said this many times and I I really really truly believe it is on a subjective process, because you know, this isn't This isn't like you know, racing where you get a bunch of guys that have the identical vehicle and one of them ends up coming in first and there's this very clear cut hierarchy in

the way that they perform. Instead, it's it's it's almost entirely different, like everybody's got a different race car, you know, Like there's and and it's been interesting to me to see, you know, uh know, and this is where the dishonesty on both ends i'd like to call out because there were so you know, there there were people last night, including Draymond himself. You know, there was this quote that

went crazy last night. Who was It's like, oh, well, our offense is kind of designed around getting shots for staff, and we all just kind of have to find our our space there. And it's like that, that's exactly what a bunch of crazy people and the Warriors side of things used to say about Lebron. And you know, Jordan Clarkson and Rodney Hood are struggling because they're trying to find out where they can be successful next to Lebron. It's like, no, actually, they're both just way better at

basketball now than they were back in two thousand eighteen. Okay, Jordan Clarkson is a better basketball player now. That's why he's doing better, and and and and the players that are alongside Staff right now are not the same caliber of players that we were seeing, you know, alongside him

in the past. And at the end of the day, like you know, with exception of like really crazy extremes like the James Harden situation in two thousand nineteen, where it's like they're really lean into one player, most of these guys are existing within a system that is more or less distributed the way every other star is dealing with it, where it's like they're they're mainly responsible for

generating offense. But if you're good, if you can play, you're getting your minutes, you're getting your shots, you're getting your attempts, like look at Dennis Shrewder. You know, no one.

I I even was a little skeptical coming into the season, like how's Dennis gonna fit in, you know with Lebron and a d having this give and take, And then you find out really quickly it's like, wait, Dennis is really good, and if you get him switched on to a big he's just go and buy him to the basket and and he can defend and you can do all these other m hm h m. Jason you there, yeah, m hmm a little bit. You come back now sostrating never Uh, well, I think there's something going on with

my upload speed, but I'll get that. I'll get that figured out. It seems like the upload just cuts out every few minutes, but the download stay steady the whole time. Anyway, I'll get that. I'll get that figured out. Anyway. Point being the if if Steph's offensive talent around him was better, they would have success around Steff. There's no systemic change that needs to take place in my opinion. Uh, As you know, Steph likes to play a certain style. Lebron

likes to play certain style. Good players, good offensive players will find a way to succeed, and more often than not, just in the interest of being dishonest, we may blame the stars, but to me, that's not necessarily fair, and any sort of systemic change would end up hurting the stars more than it would help the role players in my opinion, No, totally. I mean, look, man, everybody thought Lebron was washed two years ago, and then Anthony Davis came along, and all of a sudden, he's the Finals

MVP again twelve months later. So I mean a lot of it is just based on that. Like if the tough part is as a Warriors fan, it's like, we're all expecting Quai to be healthy this year, and then he goes down on Draft night, like literally on Draft night, we're supposed to get this number to pick, and Quaig tears his achilles, and now you're expecting a lot more out of this number to pick. Everything looks a lot different, and people are like, oh, you can't shift the future.

You have to wait for quite to come back. Quays coming off in the A C and achilles. You might have to shift the future a little bit. You might have to go all in in a way that you didn't expect. I know you wanted to keep this number two pick. I know you did, but that might not be the reality anymore with a guy not playing basketball for thirty months and coming off to catastrophic lower extremity injuries. And that's where a lot of this just boils over.

We all get frustrated every night because we thought we were going to have a chance to be a contender again and our second best player went down and now they can't score if he was out there. This year, I think the roster actually looks okay for the most part. It's not perfect, but it all makes a lot more sense. And I mean that's the frustration that boils over every night,

and that's why I get piste basically. So that's actually a really interesting, uh segue into this this lamella ball thing, because I think it's been ridiculous that people, you know, this kind of goes to what I was just saying about this offensive talent, like there you know, I heard, you know, there's people everyone is just trying to defend this process. And the one thing I do agree with in terms of in defense of the Warriors and their decision to take Wiseman, is it wasn't as clear cut

a gap during the draft process. Um, it was a lot closer. There was a clear roster need in the front court for the Warriors. LaMelo had all these question marks, fair or not. He had all these question marks, you know, coming out of New Zealand or whatever the heck he was doing, or wherever the heck he was, but Australia, Australia. Yeah. But the point is is that, you know, the the

we overthink these things a lot of the time. I can't tell you how many times we've overthought that there's only one basketball thing, you know, for for multiple stars. We've been proven wrong. Every single time that's been the case, even the most horrific scenario like Chris Paul and James Harden, it worked. Brooklyn's giving it again right now. Brooklyn is

giving it again right now, exactly. And so the bottom line is this idea that like LaMelo wouldn't be able to fit with Steph or he wouldn't be able to do the same things. And and and then there's people being dishonest and saying that you know, he's just doing it because he's in Charlotte and they're giving him the ball every time it's like, well, they're winning, okay, so they're giving him the ball every time, but they're winning, so you're you're it's this is not garbage time. This

is legitimate basketball success that this kid is having. And I think it's okay to sit back and be like, man, it would have been nice to have that next to Steph, especially when you consider the fact that he does have such an amazing off ball game. And I saw this the other day. It this lasting. I'll say, I don't have to take over, but it's like, it's like, oh, Draymond, you know, why would they need LaMelo? They got Draymond

to have the ball with Steff's got them. I'm like you, you think it's good to have one dude who can dribble with his head up. All staff is running around like, how how about two of them? Okay? Or what if you know what if LaMelo and Draymond are running action and Steph is running around off the ball, like it's there's no scenario where that doesn't make that team infinitely better. Every night, the fan blase every game, every single game,

they complain about Brad Wannamaker every single game incessantly. It never stops and I get it. One maker has been terrible this year, like he deserves some type of flak because he was much better in Boston. A lot of that is the role that he's playing on this team. But that's besides the point he's complained about every night. The guy who solves that problem is LaMelo Ball. James

Wiseman isn't solving anything for this team right now. God love him, He's I think he's gonna be a good player, and else I'll keep saying that because people are gonna yell me if I don't he is going to be a good player. But right now, LaMelo Ball already is a good player. And it doesn't matter that he's playing with you know, some good teammates and Rosier and Hayward. Yeah great, he'd be playing with better teammates in Golden State and Stephan Draymond. It would only make him look better.

Maybe his numbers would be a little bit lower, but he would be He would be feeling a role for that is needed on this team. Every night we can play. Oh, Steve Curs said it last night. Need more scoring, need more playmaking. He would have provided it, right And everybody who does this for a job had him as best player available. Everybody. By the time the draft around, everybody

had him. They might have not had him one number one in their mock draft or number one on their board or whatever, but they all had him as VP a best player available. I remember the draft Express guys had him number one. I don't think Kevin O'Connor did. But O'Connor had kill a catastrophically wrong. Yeah, I think he had. I think he had ball number two though, I'm pretty sure, but he had Wiseman six. Walserman had

Wiseman six, um Schmid's had Wiseman at five. Like all of the weaknesses that Wiseman has right now weren't unknown, And so my frustration is not with James Wiseman, because these weaknesses were known. That the rebounding, the bad hands, that kind of average basketball feel, um, kind of bad latera mo ability, these things were all known. Like you could have watched a couple of college high school games

and you would see it. And I am I blame the Warriors front office for putting a kid who's nineteen years old in this situation where they're heaping the expectations of a dynasty on on him. A team that won three titles in five years. They're saying, hey, man, come in and take this over from one of the twenty greatest players of all time. How is that fair to him?

It isn't. It isn't. And the way it would have been more fair is if you bring in a guy like LaMelo or any other guard who functionally is steps back up so their role doesn't have to be that big.

If you bring in a guy like Wiseman who's a five man, and you're saying, you basically got to be our starter from day one and be really good from day one, the expectations only grow If you bring it a guy that plays the same position as stephor Quay, It's like you can be the backup for a little bit and then you know, come in and figure it out on the tail end. That's what the Spurs didn't did with Kawai and Away. He wasn't man who's like exact backup, but they didn't have a you. There wasn't

really a need at that position. It was anything that quite gave them was great. They knew he could defend, and they said, just go do that, don't worry about anything else. The Warriors are asking Wiseman to do like twelve different things that things that he's not ready to do. It's just not fair to him, and so they just I'll keep saying that they need to push all the chips in and then we can stop talking about the Warriors.

But it's just the guy was there to draft LaMelo Ball was the guy, and we can argue about it, but it's very clear now he should have been the guy. He's last sixteen games, he's like twenty six and six one eighties something from the field. He's incredible. He's better than anybody thought he would be. I'm not gonna sit here and say I thought he would be this. I thought he'd be, you know, like a better version of Ricky Rubio to start and then eventually maybe progress into

like a dont level guy. I was by the time the draft world around, I had him as that as an on ball creator. The off ball stuff has been super surprising offensively and the defense has been way better than anybody could have ever imagined. Even his most like optimistic supporters point being, they had the guy that could have draft it, and they didn't draft him, and now they're stuck with a guy who's not going to help them win and it's not his fault. It is not

his fault at all. Yeah, And hindsight is always on this stuff. I mean, for whatever that's worth. Like I think draft pre draft stuff like I was making fund of Kevin O'Connor is second to go. Like I love Kevin O'Connor. I think he knows the stuff, he does, his work. He just great. He got he was wrong about something and we've all been wrong. And but the point is is, like you know, you're you're betting on a teenager. Uh, and and God knows what a teenager

is gonna do. I know I was completely unpredictable as a teenager myself. And uh, but at the end of the day, like when uh, it's hindsight and now you look back at it and you're like, huh, Like young bigs are never good. You know, they had enough in the front court to be serviceable and have Draymond play the five for the most the mid level on a big man. You could use the mid level on a big man, Like there were things you could have done, you could have used there. They had a trade exception.

They could have used that on a big man if they really wanted to there were other avenues to to get big men. It's just exactly. And the most frustrating part is the front office says, well, we still want to contend for titles, then why are you drafting a guy that they have admitted when they drafted him. Bob Byers has said this, he's raw, he's untap potential. There's a long way to go. You can't say you want to win titles out of one side of your mouth and then try to develop a guy like that on

the other end. It doesn't work like that, especially if you're asking to play a major role in what you're doing. Mm hmm, yeah, and uh, and it is what it is. It's like at the end of the day, there's no point in complaining about it now. And Wiseman still has a great deal of of value UM. Even if it may not be the LaMelo's value, he still has a great He still brings value to the table. And I'm with you that the we've discussed that length that they

need to move him. So before we talk about our last topic, I wanted to this is something I meant to jut too when we got to the uh, the stuff about UM analytics and UH Um, I wanted to just quick kind of circle back. So when we were talking about you know, uh, you know analytics, is this a lot of the like the core spine of of analytics is based on this outside in a coach and finding a way to maximize your you know, points per possession by doing and the three point shot has an

increased value which increases your point per possession. Right. Well, again, we talked about this a lot earlier. No two shots are alike, and I think this is a great example to talk about the difference between a Utah Jazz team and l A Clippers team. It's just like a fundamental difference in basketball. So, for instance, the the l A Clippers are i want to say, twenty nine in the entire NBA and shot attempts within five ft of the rim?

Uh they are. They lean heavily on on created jump shots off the dribble and especially from their two stars. And I think it is manifested negatively in a bunch of ways, mainly stagnation because one of the easiest ways to get an offense out of a slump is to get easy shots, and they kind of just rely on difficult shots eventually going and sometimes they just don't, which I think is part of the reason why they struggled

so much in the clutch. So this kind of is a great time for me to just kind of, uh, you know again, kind of harp on one of my core basketball philosophies, which is you can have an outside in approach that is built on pressure on the rim. And this is what Utah does so well. Utah does not dribble up the floor and take a bunch of

contested threes or threes off the dribble. Their guards will shoot threes if you go under pick and roll, but the the entire premise of their offense is putting pressure on the rim with Donovan Mitchell and Mike Conley, which starts a cascading effect where there are other wings. Will then drive out of a close out and it's driving kick and driving kick, and then they find this wide open three and it doesn't feel like settling because of

the pressure that you put on the rim. And it's what allows a guy, a guy that's really like set in in and ready for a catch and shoot opportunity. You know, that kind of three point it's tempt carries so much more value than in off the drooble attempt because of the rhythm and because of the pressure that you put on the rim and the way you're fatiguing

the defense instead of the other way around. And I do think it's a it's an interesting difference that you see between the Clippers and the Jazz and the way they generate their jump shots because both teams are considered jump shooting teams, and the Jazz, for the record, I think are twenty in shot attempts within five ft of the room, so they also lean heavily on jump shooting.

But to me, and you can tell me if you disagree, I just feel like they're like fundamentally in the way that they've discover and search out those types of shots. It's an it's an inside out approach, if that makes sense. No, it definitely is. And they use Gobert's roll gravity to do that too, like they you know, they have them constantly rolling to the rim to suck ind week side defenders and then kick out the shooters on the weak side. And then they're, like you're saying, they're re driving it

with their wings. I don't fundamentally disagree where it's where it's interesting. I keep going back and forth on this Utah team. Some nights I think, man, maybe they can win the championship. Like for the first half last night when they were playing the the Sixers, I was like, God, they look so good, like they are getting any look they want. Donovan Mitchell is getting any look he wants. He's abusing Ben Simmons, just absolutely taking him to task.

And then that second half of that fourth quarter happens, and You're like, oh, there it is. They can't get any good looks late, like or Donovan Mitchell isn't willing to shoot the good looks, like he kept coming off picking rolls late in that game, and and he was playing like a pretty heavy drop coverage, and Mitchell just wouldn't. He wouldn't either just take an easy pull up or drive harder and beat and sucked the week side in

to get kind of that driving kick action going. So it's interesting because I think the Jazz are, like on equivocally a better regular season team and the Clippers, but in a playoff matchup, the Clippers kind of survive on those tough shots. And if I would trust them more to make those tough shots, because eventually Utah is gonna have to make those tough shots, and it's probably just gonna come down to Donovan Mitchell making them right. I don't really see another guy who can do that for them.

Maybe Bogdanovitch a little bit. He's got a nice little mid range game and post game and he can he can get kind of crafty with how he scores. But if he's going up against Kawai and Paul George, I think the Clippers are winning that battle. So it's just this really interesting conversation in how much should we value regular season success? And we talked about it all the time. But yeah, they definitely are different place styles though to your point, they totally are, even though they are, on

their face both shooting a lot of jump shots. Well, like even just something silly like James Harden putting pressure on the rim as a as an as a pick and roll an isolation guy, completely changes the complexion of Brooklyn's offense compared to the Clippers. Um, but it's just you know, but you're right, you need to be able to do both. And that's what makes the Clippers so scary is if they if they always stay in a

rhythm for a playoff series, good luck beating them. But like you know, That's why I'm always going to lean on teams like the Lakers in the sixth is as the most dangerous teams in the league because they do they cross all of the they check all the boxes.

You know, they defend at an extremely high level. They have individual defenders that can stifle your stars like Lebron, Anthony Davis and Ben Stimmons are all players that if you put them on Kawhi Leonard, like kawais in for a hell of a night, you know what I mean. And those those are those are advantages. And then they're versatile defensively too, because they don't, you know, rely on

one specific type of defense. For instance, the Jazz rely so much on Rudy Gobert and the paint If you put a stretch big on him, and it's a stretch big that Rudy has to respect and Pep won't just leave open, there's a there's it changes the complexion of their defense, whereas like the Lakers can defend and scramble and you know, the six are same thing, and you know, but then there's the offensive side of the ball, and it's like the Lakers and the Sixers both put immense

pressure on the rim to generate three point shots. Now, the Lakers for the record not shooting well lately, but in my opinion, a big part of that is Lebron kind of taking it easy and Anthony Davis being out so they're not pressuring the rim like they're just not pressuring the rim the way they do in a playoff series.

I believe the reason why the Lakers made shots when it counted in the playoffs last year was the quality of three point shots that they were getting when things mattered was extremely high because Lebron and A d were one engaged and pressuring the rim, and it was generating those types of shots. But then the Sixers with m B being as good as he is, and then the

Lebron Anthony Davis effect. Those teams can also to the teams that are shutting off the rim or packing things in and jumpers aren't following on the other with from the spot up shooters. They have these guys that can create extremely difficult shots in isolation as well, so they kind of check all three boxes. If you go to any of the other teams like Brooklyn, they don't bring it on the defensive end of the ball. The Clippers. They don't pressure the rim enough. You know, Utah they

lack that elite high end shot creation. Uh defense, They're gonna struggle to lock players down in the playoffs if we just used last night's game as an example first of all, and be dominated Gobert, Who's probably gonna win Defensive Player of the Year again, which is just ridiculous. But indeed, I mean it's within a week. I think embiad and Yo Kitcher some other big men have just absolutely just how dumb does that John hollingder really go bear m v P piece? Look? I thought about that

last night. I almost texted you about it, and I was like, I'll just talk. I tweeted it. I tweeted it. I said, we need to send John Hollinger to Mars for saying Uncle Bart's the top three m VP candidate. But told Bias Harris was dominating the Jazz Wings last night late in that game. So Bias is a really nice player. I don't want to take anything away from him. What's that gonna look like when it's Kauai or Paul

George or Lebron James. It's gonna get really ugly for Utah and that's where as much as I want to believe, I really do want to believe in that team because they're I think they're doing things in a very unique way. They've actually, as I've said, they've tried to do the three point thing the correct way. They've actually gotten good

shooters to do it. At the end of the day, it's probably not gonna matter because they one they don't have the perimeter defense to get it done, and too they don't have the high and shock creader to get it done. Um, where are you at on Philly right now? Because I thought that was a huge win for them last night, but it also took basically everything they had to get that win. So again I I put them there in my top three. I I have Lakers, Philly

and Brooklyn as my top three. I Philly has struggled a little bit, especially against really good teams this year, so they're far from perfect. Um, but the reason why I view them is dangerous is those three things. Like I said, I think what will eventually get them beat And the reason why I'm not sure if they can beat Brooklyn is at the end of the day, their offense is going to degenerate into Joe l Embiid, which

is what happens to all of the best teams. Like all the Brooklyn offense looks so free flowing and nice. Guess what it's gonna turn into elite high end shot creation from their best players. It's gonna get stagnant. Same thing goes for the Lakers. And I'm just referring to the late rounds against the best of the best on the defensive end of the ball. But who do you trust more in those moments? Like I know Brown is going to find a way to to kind of like

decipher that to some extent, you know. And the same goes for the Kevin Duran, Kyrie James Harden trio. Joel Embiid. I can't remember this off the top of my head, so I don't want to mess it up. But I believe he's averaging more turnovers than assists this year. I might need to double check that. But but he's not He's not great and in the at deciphering the defenses when they really load up on him. And in almost

every matchup that I've seen, he's incredible. For the record, like his little his little step back three that he made over I think it was but Bogdanovitch at the end of game last night. That literally reminded me of one of those memes that makes fun of the big

guy who runs the three point line. Have you ever seen that mean where they're talking about the different players and they like throw the guy to the ball, to the guy in the post, and then he just runs to the three point linetitudes like, that's what in B did on that play. It was funny like and beats incredible.

I'm not trying to undercut him in any way, shape or form, but when you're nitpicking amongst the very top of the league, you know, Brooklyn in l A, They're They're not a team you can double out of existence. I'm sorry, it's just not gonna happen. They're going to find a way to continue to counter and beat that. Whereas whereas I've really seen Philly struggle when embaid when the defense really loads up on embeat at the end

of games. Uh. And it's something that that I that has been a problem in the past, and it's just something to keep it on. Did you have been looking the up the m B. Yeah, it's he's one to one, it's three point three. Is since three point two turnovers. And that's basically it's not very good. No, it's terrible that and that spells trouble for because here's the thing.

In the playoff series, they're gonna make him pass. I'm sorry, And in every matchup I've seen this here against the best of the best defenses, they've made him pass, you know, yep, And especially when you're best passer. Simmons, who is a really really good passer, he can't really operate in the half court well when he doesn't dictate the double teams. Like that's the thing, Like he he can dictate it, like he can pass, but can't dictate the double teams.

Joan and b can dictate the double teams, but he can't pass. So it's kind of like this like kind of that's the worst of both worlds. Should it's it'd be tough to do because the beat has gotten so good as an isolation score. His his isolation game is like so much smoother this year. He's he's like really working at a triple threat. Well, he's basically dictating to

any one on one matchup exactly what he wants. He gets what he wants anytime unless they bring a double right so it'd be really tough to do this, but like you almost want to look at posting up Simmons a little bit late in those games situations and having him beat spot up because his three ball is real this year. I want to say he's still around from three on the year. He's had his shooting performance that looks like Anthony Davis last year where it's like you're like,

is he making a leap? You know, like a here like that exactly, so you could you know, they do have maybe enough shooting around like a Simmons post up to work. You could put and beat Curry and Tobias on the perimeter with one more guy, maybe thigh bol just because he's a good cutter and he's a good defensive player. Finished with those five post up Simmons a little bit more because he would be really good working out of those double teams. You get some cutters of

the rim, you have guys spotting up. Maybe the the late game offense looks a little bit better against the best teams. But then and Bead has been so good this year, how do you tell them that? And that's a human part of coaching, where how do you tell a guy who's averaging just observed number like twenty eight and twelve, and he's doing everything for you. How do you tell him, hey, man, we're gonna go to somebody else down the stretch, especially a guy who scores like

fifteen a game. Good luck, Like he's not gonna listen to that. So, yeah, they just Philly feels like a team to where if they're ever gonna get it done, Like if they're ever actually gonna win a title with this corp of guys, with them beating Simmons, they're probably still a year away, Like they're probably still one or two good roster moves away, and they're just they're getting to the point where, yeah, they can beat really good

teams right there there there. But typically when you see a true title team, they're blowing out most opponents and they're like putting the beat down on a lot of good teams. Like they're not just beating good teams, they're beating them soundly, and Philly is not really doing that yet. And you know, they're probably not at that point yet. And Beads only twenty six years old. Most guys don't

until eight when they're winning a title, right. I think Jordan same with Lebron, so by no means should be closing the book on Philly as a whole, but just just from watching them a little bit more closely, because I still have them tentatively as my pick out of the East. I still think they're probably about a year away, like in terms of actually winning an NBA championship, unless some injuries happened this year. I think they're a year

away this year. To me, anything can happened. It's weird, Like I mean, even with the Brooklyn thing, Like, uh, Brooklyn kind of reminds me a little bit about of the two thousand sixteen Warriors, where they're a little bit uh scheme proof in the regular season, but it's something a team that's a little easier to game plan for, Like I don't think the Warriors, like I don't think the Warriors were as good as like everyone appoints to the Oh Lebron beat the seventy three one team. Oh

Lebron w bet the seventy three one team. And don't get me wrong, that team was really really good. But I think that team's record was a little bit better than what they projected to be in the playoffs, and I think that showed and and I think that's why Oklahoma City gave them so many problems as well, Like just this basic idea that you had this guy that you had to guard in a way that was different

than anybody had ever guarded. And then suddenly Oklahoma City in Cleveland, when they had time to game plan for him, found out a way to make him a little more uncomfortable. That kind of reminds me of Brooklyn's defense, where it's like, in the regular season, no one can figure out how to attack the switching defense. No one can figure out.

But but at the in a playoff series, when there's extensive watching of tape and really really smart offensive players, whether it's a Kai or a Lebron or an Anthony Davis, Paul George or you know, a Joel Embiat or whoever it is, Jimmy Butler even might like Jimmy Butler, might find a way to like and dam might find a

way to relentlessly attack that that Brooklyn defense. I just don't think, you know, I don't think anybody on a random Tuesday night, in one forty eight minute sample cannot be thrown off by the Brooklyn defense, if that makes sense. And and so I don't find them as scary as they've looked. And then Utah, we've discussed that length. You know,

the Lakers have looked overly dominant this year. I looked like the two through I want to say, the two through six seeds are all a half game apart right now. Overall overall in the entire league, like there's just everyone is, you know, like everyone's not very good. It seems like that's the weird part to me. A lot of it is just injuries and COVID, Like said, teams have just

been really banged up this year. Like and just from an injury standpoint, even if COVID wasn't a thing, I think it would still be really jumbled because there have been just a lot of injuries, two key players for a lot of teams. So it's eight out of ten and it's I want to say, six out of eight, and it's because they've been missing all their guys. Like I don't know what to tell you. It is what it is. There's nothing you can do if all your best players are out. So it's just a weird year.

It's just a weird year. And I still tendively have the Lakers is the favorite but we'll see what happens. I mean, it's a default at this point. I think the picture will get I think the picture will get a lot clearer after the All Star break. Hopefully teams get healthy. Nobody comes back from All Are with COVID, which we'll see what happens. That could be really messy down there. Um And if that happens, hopefully teams are healthier.

Maybe COVID cases continue to go down, and we get like a more regular second half of the NBA season, But we'll see. I think it's all gonna be. It still has a chance to be all really jumbled heading into May real quickly before I let you go, like, I think that's been one of the interesting things to me is every team this year has had a stretch where they looked over like dominant, with exception of Utah in my opinion, and I'm not talking about in the record.

I'm talking about like really convincing wins. So for instance, like Philly, do you mean over good teams? Yeah, like really really good teams. So for example, Utah went through this stretch here where every time they played a contender they were down stars and then they finally play Philly, and they lose. You know, they finally play the Clippers

with Kawai and Paul George and they lose. So uh so, for instance, like Philly, they can look at themselves in the mirror and be like, we beat the Lakers and Jazz at full strength. You know, the Lakers can look themselves in the mirror. They have a bunch of convincing like they beat the living ship out of Denver, they went into uh went into Milwaukee and they were really dominant.

I'm missing off the top of my head. But or they can at least fall back on what they did last year, you know, like, okay, we had this success in the playoffs. The Clippers have a bunch of really convincing wins. They were the ones that beat Utah. For instance. If you go out East Brooklyn can look at them and be like, look, we lost Kadie and we ran through all these teams. We beat both l A teams in l A. You know, we we were dominant. We went to Phoenix and we won, and we did all

this stuff. You know. The Utah It's weird because the two times that they've played a contender at full strength in the last couple of months, they lost, you know, and that's where it gets a little tricky in the sense that you know, I compare them a lot with you to the to the Bucks last year, but there are much less impressive version of them in terms of what they've actually accomplished on the court. Yeah, it's it sucks for Utah because they also get the two thousan

fifteen Hawks comparison a lot. Yeah, and they're they're they're better than that. They're better than that Hawks team. That's what sucks. Like if they were in the East and two dollar fifteen, maybe they come out of the East, but with as good as the West is right now, they might be a second round exit. After winning, you know, fifty five to sixty games in a seventy two games season. They're gonna have an outstanding regular season, whether they keep

losing the good teams or not. Um, But yeah, it just sucks that they're probably gonna have this spectacular regular season then they're gonna flame out in the playoffs and we're gonna have to do the whole referendum on three point shooting thing again. Like it's just it's just one big cyclical conversation that we're never gonna stop having until the team like Utah wins one if they ever do, which they probably won't. Well and we we we everybody's a fraud when they lose, which is so unfair, Like

that's the thing. It's it's like the uh uh, the stupid simple fact that twenty nine of the thirty teams are gonna lose and every one of them is going to have this massive referendum on what they do, like get ready, Like the Lakers I think are the best team, but there's a good chance they lose this year and if they do, immediately, it's gonna be time to throw out last season as as like a team that is an extremely lucky team and what they've been and fitted

from in circumstance, And it's just unfortunate because that's the way we are. And we talked about this earlier, like Twitter is just you know, a place that lacks context and nuance and all that good stuff. But anyway, dude, hey, I really appreciate you taking the time to hop on today. I need to get you out of here for your meeting everybody. I'm really really sorry about the WiFi stuff. Promise I'll get it figured out. Going through a move right now. So it's a little complicated, but I will

get it figured out. I feel bad for Tommy because he's over there just looking like what am I supposed to do? We're good. We're good now. I think I think we can have some fun conversations around uh small star stuff next week if we want to do that. So just some some halfway awards stuff like that, some stuff that's pretty fun. Um, talk about how the league looks, all that good stuff, and maybe touch on some teams that we haven't yet, some of the uh the more

middling teams in the league. Yeah, we could do some like half season grades or something. There we go. Um. I also need a name for the podcast. Please send me some stuff. Okay, all right, everybody, enjoy the rest of your weekend. I am on with Raj tomorrow morning at eight am. Hopefully the WiFi supports me in that regard. Tommy, have a good night, man, I'll talculator. Thanks everybody. M