The volume. We're this close to crowning a new NBA champ, and with the action heating up on the court, it's even hotter. At Draftking Sportsbook, an official sports betting partner of the NBA. There's only so many games left, and DraftKings Sportsbook has you covered with same game parlays, live betting odds, boosts, and so much more. Don't miss out or you'll have to wait until next NBA season to place your bets. It's super easy for first timers to
get started. Try betting on something simple like picking a team to win. Go to the Draftking Sportsbook app, select your squad and place your first bet. It's that simple. The odds for the NBA Finals are up on DraftKings right now. You can get Boston at minus two twenty to win the title. Dallas is at plus one seventy five. New to DraftKings listen up. New customers can get a
no sweat bet up to fifteen hundred bucks. Just deposit at least five bucks and you'll get a bonus bet back equal to your first bet if it doesn't hit. Download Draft Kings Sportsbook app now and use code hoops. That's code hoops Hoops for new cust to get a no sweat bet up to fifteen hundred bucks if your first bet doesn't hit only on DraftKings, the crown is yours. Gambling problem called one eight hundred gambler or in West Virginia visit www dot one eight hundred gambler dot net.
In New York, call eight seven seven eight hope and why, or text hope and why to four six seven three six nine. In Connecticut, help is available for problem gambling. Call eight eight eight seven eight nine seven seven seven seven or visit CCPG dot org. Please play responsibly on behalf of Boothill Casino and resort. In Kansas twenty one plus age varies by jurisdiction. Void in Ontario. One no sweat bet per new customer issued as one bonus bet
based on amount of initial losing bet. Bonus bets expire one hundred and sixty eight hours after issuance. See dkang dot co slash bball for eligibility, wagering and deposit restrictions, terms and responsible gaming resources. All right, welcome to hoops to night here at the volume Havy Sunday. Everybody, hope all of you guys are having a great weekend as
promised our third mail bag today. On Friday, we hit the Western Conference Finals and all the fallout, some stuff big picture with Luca and the MAVs, and then also just looking forward for the Timberwolves. You can find that on the feeds. Earlier Saturday, we did an NBA Finals mail bag, just some kind of preliminary stuff before we
get into our real prep starting next week on Monday. Today, all the mail bag questions that surrounded anything else, stuff about the non basketball stuff, stuff about the rest of the league. We're fitting that into today's mail bag. You guys are the job. Before we get started, subscribe to the Hoops to Night YouTube channels. You don't miss any
more of our videos. Follow me on Twitter at underscore Jason lt so you guys don't miss youw announcement sont forget about our podcast feed wherever you get your podcast under Hoops Tonight, and then keep dropping mail bag questions in those YouTube comments. We can keep hitting them throughout the rest of the postseason. All right, let's talk some basketball. So, first question, there has been a lot of talk about who the best player in the world is. After this series.
It seems like most people would consider that to be Luka or Jokic. What is your criteria for judging what makes one player greater in a vacuum than another? Do you compare basic stats like points per game, rebounds per game, assist per game, etc. Do you look at any advanced stats, team success a combination of them all. I'd love to hear about what your measuring stick is for comparing one
player to another. Thanks for all the fantastic content and for making the playoff watching experience greater for me this year. Thank you for supporting the show and for the kind words. It means a lot to me. Again, all throughout the mail diag, so many of you guys drop so many kind words, and I really truly appreciate it and all the support, and obviously the performance of the show has helped me realize just how much you guys support me,
and it's something that I greatly appreciate. Best player in the world stuff. Everybody has different criteria, and so don't confuse me to talking about who I think the best player in the world is. As like the end all be all, you might have different criteria than me. I keep two separate lists. I keep two separate lists for
my all time players as well. I separate permitter players in BIGS because I don't really feel comfortable saying Tim Duncan's better than Kobe or vice versa, when the two of them played such profoundly different positions in the NBA, their jobs just were not the same, right, And that's kind of how I feel about this particular type of discussion.
To me, there's the in a vacuum, who's the best player? If, like I had a franchise with a number one pick and every single player in the league was a free agent, who would be the first guy I'd pick to build a team around for that season from the start of training camp hopefully through the end of June. Who am I picking? Right? That's one debate. Then there's like the bragging rights debate that to me, has nothing to do with any sort of specific traits of a basketball player.
It has everything to do with the the importance of winning. For instance, we play these games for a reason. We play to win. We don't play for Instagram highlights. We play to see who's going to get the Larry O'Brien Trophy.
And to me, that Larry O'Brien trophy is sacred. When I grew up as a kid and I'd turn on the NBA Finals and they'd have that long, you know, minute long kind of intro that they'd air with all the footage of like Magic Johnson yelling back to back and like Bill Russell in the locker room and Red Hour back smoking a cigar, and you know, Lebron hunched over crying in the later years, Lebron hunched over crying after winning in twenty sixteen, like all of the example,
Anything's possible, Kevin Garnett screaming to the rooftops like that real to me is a representation of why we do this. We do this for Thearry O'Brien Trophy. It's all that matters. There's other stuff that matters, but this is the ultimate thing that matters. And so for me, like I believe in referencing the best player in the league in these two different lists so that we can properly account for
those two things. For instance, in a vacuum, I think Lebron James was the best player in the world from about twenty twelve to twenty twenty. If I was picking a franch I was picking a player to start a franchise with He's the guy I'm picking every single time. From twenty twelve to twenty twenty, I thought he was the best. I didn't think I thought a couple players
got close, but I never thought a player actually surpassed him. Right, But in terms of bragging rights, it's different, Right, Like, I totally understand why some Warriors fans would be like, Hey, what about Steph or KD or even Kawhi Leonard in twenty nineteen, Right like that, I understand why some fan bases feel like their dude had the bragging rights for that season, And that makes sense to me. So that's
what the purpose of the two lists are. How do we account for Lebron obviously being the best player in the world in twenty nineteen, because like what happened in twenty eighteen and what happened in twenty twenty twenty eighteen, Lebron was by far the best player in the world, kicked ass through the entire playoff run, had like eight forty point playoff games, had a fifty point playoff game, and then ran into the KD Steph Warriors when he didn't have another top fifteen player on his team, and
he lost right, but he was clearly the best player in the world twenty nineteen, sprains is growing, the strains is growing and misses the playoffs, right because he got hurt. Twenty twenty, he comes back best player in the league
start to finish. Should have one MVP team started twenty four and three dominated the playoff Run had a crazy efficient, high volume scoring, and a playmaking and rebounding Playoff Run was also an elite defender that year one finals MVP was clearly the best player in the world, right, Like,
he was the best player for that entire stretch. He just got hurt in the middle and was on a different team that didn't have enough talent after he went to Los Angeles before the Anthony Davis trade, Right, But, like I understand why Kawhi would have the bragging rights that year. But if you were an NBAGM and you didn't know that Lebron was gonna get hurt and he had just had that twenty eighteen playoff run, you bet your ass you're drafting Lebron James over Kawhi Leonard to
start the twenty nineteen season. That's kind of why I keep those two lists separate. Now, the question is if the bragging rights one is more focused on team results and just and again, just because you win doesn't mean
you get that in my opinion. In my opinion, it's like who played the best basketball that specific year, combination of all those things you just mentioned, production in statistics, team success, degree of difficulty, all of that, to me gets factored in on the bragging right side of things. When it comes to the inn of vacuum side, I'm
actually less concerned about some of the statistical stuff. It's more like actually analyzing what that player is good and bad at, because so much the statistical output has a lot to do with what the team construct is. It's no different than Jokic being a better scorer in the twenty twenty one to twenty twenty two seasons when he didn't have Jamal Murray, but then when Jamal Murray came back, his scoring took a little dip as he offloaded some
of those responsibilities. Like, that doesn't mean Yokic became a worst scorer. It's just a difference in the way the team was constructed, Right, So like that's kind of the way I look at the in a vacuum piece. I'm more looking at traits. Now, I wanted to rank the traits for the purpose of this question. I wanted to rank what I think are the most important traits in a vacuum for a basketball player. Number one, no question for me, half court shot creation. And the reason behind
this is very simple. Defensively, you can scheme an elite defense. Just look at Luca this year or Jokic last year. Both of those guys are doing a good job defensively, but they're not elite defensive players. But both of those defenses were elite. Why Because they were able to construct through coaching and a few pieces of good defensive personnel and effort, execution, intention to detail for an entire season, those two teams built elite defenses. It's a lot easier
to do that than the opposite. If you've got it is really, really difficult to replicate what Luka doncicch does in half court. You can't just scheme like Eric Spolser can't turn Tyler Harrow into Lukadancic. Sorry, right. So like for me, the ability in the slow down half court environment to consistently generate quality shots for yourself and your teammates. That to me is the number one trade, I look at one of the valuating basketball players in a vacuum,
specifically versatility. What that means is different types of matchups require different forms of offensive attack. So Anthony Edwards, for instance, through the first two rounds, looked like one of the best offensive players in the world. The Dallas Denver started doubling him. Towards the end of that series, he kind of crumbled a bit. Then Dallas presents some rim protection and perimeter athleticism issues, he completely crumbles, right, So I
shouldn't say completely crumbles. He was pretty good in the last couple of games, but like he was pretty bad overall in the series, right. So to me, the versatility element says, regardless of which type of opponent I play against, can I consistently generate quality shots for myself and my teammates? And that to me comes down to like, can you attack in different ways? Can you function both as a playmaker and as a score if you need to? Can
you deal with hyper aggressive defensive schemes? Can you attack as an individual in different ways, like out of the post, out of ISO, out of pick and roll. Can you beat small guys and big guys? Can you beat strong guys and long guys. Right, those are all the different types of versatility elements offensively that I factor in there. But half court shot creation is unquestionably the number one thing the list. Number two I put size, strength, and athleticism.
At the end of the day, you get into these playoff environments, it gets super damn physical and being bigger, stronger and faster than people matters last year or this year. Looks, Look at Luca He's bigger and stronger than the vast majority of the perimeter players in the league. Right, Nicole Jokicic bigger and stronger than the vast majority of big
guys in the league. Steph Curry Again, every time you look at Steph Curry, he is the exception that proves the rule, both in NBA history and in a recent context. Anything Steph does, it just doesn't make sense in the big picture. So you just kind of have to pick Steph up and put him off to the side and discuss him separately. Right, We've been consistent about that on this show. Giannis bigger, stronger and faster than every forward
in the league. Right, Lebron James in twenty twenty, bigger, faster, stronger than most forwards in the league except for Giannis right twenty nineteen, Kawhi Leonard bigger and stronger than most forwards in the league. Right eighteen and twenty seventeen, Kevin Durant seven foot shooter, He's just taller than everybody. Right. And then obviously the Steph piece, which is weird. Twenty sixteen Lebron twenty fifteen, Steph again, twenty fourteen Finals MVP
was Kawhi. That's also a weird team. They're like the team version of Steph. You just pulled them out and remove them from the equation, right, Lebron. The years before that, Dirk was seven feet tall. Kobe Bryant was one of the freaky athletic two guards in the league. Right. So like, again, you have to have real physical tools unless you're Steph Curry to win an NBA history. That's the second piece.
Third piece I put defensive versatility. There are a lot of problems that get presented in playoff series that only superstar defensive talents can handle, right, Like, we've seen this a lot over the years. But like when you have a superstar like Giannis that could show on a Devin Booker floater bait him into a pass and then recover an erace eight and at the rim. That is a play that Giannis and maybe two other guys in the world can make, and it won them the finals game.
Like that is the type of defensive versatility that can shine through in a big way. Lebron James is a guy like this. Kawhi Leonard is a guy like this. Kevin Durant is a guy like this. Right. To me, defensive versatility the ability to impact the game defensively in multiple ways. Lebron James in twenty twenty switched on to Jamal Murray in the tail end of the series and shut him down, Like he can't do that anymore. But when he was thirty five he could do that, right.
That was a huge piece of his defensive versatility in his way to impact the game. He could be a backline guy, he could be an on ball guy, right, you know like that? That, to me is an important piece of that in a vacuum evaluation of players, But it ranks lower than the other two pieces because it's easier as a front office to get a Yokich and get an Aaron Gordon than it is, in my opinion to get a Yannis and then to get a high
level offensive player to compliment him. And so for me, that's why I I ranked that half court shot creation piece number one. I think it's just the hardest thing to replicate on a team wide basis. Whereas defensive versatility can be a roster strength and it can be like elite, half court shock creation has only been a roster strength with the twenty fourteen Spurs. Like generally speaking, you need a superstar offensive player that can do that to address
that problem. So again, hopefully that answers that question for you guys. Those are the rankings of the three things I look at in a vacuum in a in bragging rights and primary looking at production and team success and who just gets to brag for that particular season. Why does everyone just cut Giannis out of the best player in the world chat? Now, he's still on part with these guys. To me, I think he's in that tier, but I think he's firmly below Luca and Nicole Jokic
for the exact same reasons I just explained. I don't think he's I think he's a good half court shot creator, but he's not in the same stratosphere as a half court shock creator as Jokic and Luca some solid analysis as usual, but the man which you jumped off Jokich as the best player in the world is a bit prisoner of the moment. Joker's shooting performance the decline, as you put it, against the Wolves was because they were built to defeat him and have the favorable matchups to
wear him down. Conversely, the MAVs have matchup advantages over the Wolves, and the truth of that out. You don't lose the title a best player in the league because your team loses in the playoffs in seven games, while you still perform very well. A larger sample size is needed otherwise the moniker becomes whoever plays best and wins in their title run. If next year Luca dominates and is better than Nicola, then I think it's fair to then hand him the belt, as Bill Simmons would put it,
as the best player in the world. But right now it's a bit premature. One of your great strengths as a basketball analysts is that you generally are not reactionary. Don't get caught up in this one. Let's see if Luca can win the title and MVP how can the best player in the league not have at least one MVP and dominate once more in the playoffs before we declare him the best player over Nicole Jokic, who has
had years of sustained excellence. A couple of things. What I said right off the top, your criteria for best player in the world is probably different. It's clearly different than mine. That's okay. It's okay that I have different criteria. So, like, I don't care that Luca doesn't have an MVP. Regular season MVP to me is like, for me personally, is
an achievement that I almost just don't care about. Like, it's just the problem with regular season MVP is it's so much based on media narratives, and like I believe Jokic deserves the MVPs he has, I'm not trying to undercut the accomplishment. Just regular season MVP. It just doesn't matter to me. There's too many examples like Russell Westbrook winning it, like James Harden winning it. There's just too
many Joel Embiid winning it. There's just so many examples of a guy that's clearly not the best player in the world winning MVP, and that to me, just makes it really difficult to tot to tie much success to that accomplishment. Even when Yannis won MVP in twenty twenty, I didn't think he was better than Lebron. So like to me, regular season MVP doesn't factor in. If you factor in regular season MVP, more power to you. I
don't care about that. Joker's shooting performance. The decline, as you put it against the Wolves, was because they were built to defeat him. That's not true. He shot poorly all season. Last year. In the regular season, he was one point one to seven points per jump shot. This year he was one point zero one. That's a what sixteen percent decline, So a substantial decline in Yokic's jump
shooting from last season to this year. In the regular season, last year, in the postseason, for the entire postseason, he averaged one point two to one points per jump shot. In this postseason he was below zero point nine, so massive sample from start of training camp through to what he got eliminated in the second round. He wasn't as good as a jump shooter. That's just a fact. He did decline on that front. He also was not as good defensively as he was last year. That is a fact.
All you have to do is look at the fact that they couldn't get stops against Minnesota, a mediocre offense when it mattered in big games, had a one sixteen defensive rating against Minnesota in those four losses. So like he just won as good and I think that has to be factored in there as far as like the he needs to have sustained success for multiple years in the postseason. By that logic, Jokic doesn't deserve it because he only did it for one year in the postseason.
Luca's doing it for his first year in the postseason. To me, I'm giving it to Luca because in this particular postseason run, Luka Doncic played better basketball and achieved more, and so for this season he gets the bragging rights. In a vacuum, I still lean Jokic a little bit, and we'll see how I feel about that when we
get into the summer. But for me, in a vacuum, if I was GM of the Charlotte Hornets and I had the number one pick going into a full NBA wide four hundred and fifty player draft, I'm probably taking Nikola Jokic first. That to me is separate from the bragging rights title, which to me, Luca has at this point because he just took the team that beat didn't just beat Denver, but shut down their offense, which is
Jokic's strength. Luca eviscerated them. He averaged twelve additional points per one hundred possessions against that Minnesota defense than Jokic did. He deserves it for now in terms of bragging rights. That hopefully will kind of explain where I stand on those things. And you're right, like kicking me kicking a player off of the vacuum list, that's gonna take a lot more sample size for me. But the bragging rights list is very much a year to year thing. I
had Luka Dancic tenth in my bragging rights list last year. Tenth. Do I think lucas the tenth best player in the world. No, But he missed the playoffs last year, and Jimmy Butler took his team to the finals, Jason Tatum took his team in the Eastern Conference finals. Lebron James took his team to the Eastern Conference Final. Like, all those guys accomplished more last year, so they just were higher in their back in the bragging rights list. For me, I
don't have a question. I just want to say I'm a real hoophead. And when I found you a few years back, when you were just getting this thing going, I was super excited to hear someone talk about the game in a way that I had been waiting for and to see how far you've come. It's just great to see. I tell everyone about you, Bro. Thanks, thanks man, keep doing you, Bro. This comment meant a lot to me.
When I started this show, I had this, you know, I had this like belief system in place where, like I wanted to talk about the game the way I wanted to talk about it. But I was worried that it might not perform super well because it's a little more niche, right, It's a little bit more in the weeds. And I wasn't willing to do the stuff that so many other shows out there do in terms of like just countless lebron MJ debates and who's under more pressure
and like all those like classic first takey type of headlines. Right, I didn't want to do that, and I was really nervous that I had to have a hard time getting the show off the ground because of that and to see me start this show and to not compromise on any of that stuff, Like does my behind the scenes package and make thumbnails and titles that are a little clickbait? Yeah, but that's just smart business. I've never built a show like that. That's just smart business that they do that.
But like, to me, the actual show, I've never compromised on. I've only talked about the game that I want about the I've only talked about the game the way that I want to talk about it, and to get to see it have success and to see where we've gotten to is has just like literally been everything to me because that means that my vision for what the show should be like was actually capable of being a real show that actually had a little bit of a following.
And so what it means to me is that there's a lot of you guys out there that love basketball as much as I do, and that is that's that that to me is incredible because I love the game so much it's literally gone everything that I have came from basketball, Like I got my school paid for by basketball. A lot of my travel over my life has been
because of basketball and understanding of the game. Most of it comes from playing basketball, right, Like every my love of basketball has given me everything I have and so like to see that get returned in the form of the support of this show is just meant everything to me. And to hear comments like that and to know that you guys wanted to hear analysis like this, it makes me feel vindicated for believing that this is the way that the game should be talked about. So just thank
you all for supporting the show. And like again, I just I can't put into words how much I appreciate you guys for helping the show get to the point where it's at right now. Hey, Jason, love watching your analysis.
I wanted to ask, with all of these rumors the Warriors trading Wiggins, do you think it's the right move with all these elite guards looking in the west, to give up on the only point of attack defender who has been able to keep the force of Luca at bay Or should they put him in the Jada McDaniels lou Dort role, move him to two and add a big who can shoot to add size. So I've seen a lot of Warriors fans talk about potentially trading Andrew
Wiggins and I disagree in the sense that for two reasons. One, I think Andrew Wiggins' ability to defend on the perimeter is a profoundly valuable trade his athleticism in general is profoundly valuable trade. And lastly, for all of his struggles, his trade value is not very high. So it's not likely that you can actually get much back for Andrew Wiggins that would replace the things that he's pretty elite at.
So I would look for moves on the margins, and I would try to not include Andrew Wiggins as far as playing him at the two. I think that you need another shot creator, and so if you moved him at the two, it to me that would require you to have a three out there that can really run offense. What you can't do is go back into next season where Steph's the only guy on the team that can create his own shot. That to me would be a disaster. How often do you attend live games and are you
planning to attend the finals? Somel across your vance's postseason. Love the work you put into them, so not going to the finals, but we are planning on trying to do a ten more games next year. I think our plan is to at least go to the Ncason Tournament next year. My guess is in the long run we'll go to more games, like when we talk about like
five ten years in the future. But so much of it just has to do with like the volumes growing really fast, and we're still kind of working through all that. Like I'm still recording the show in my guest bedroom, so like we'll see how that turns out in the long run. Right, So, Like again I right now this is kind of the format that works. We will go to more events, not going to the finals this year, but in the long run, we'll see if we end up at more of that stuff. What did you think
of Sam Presci's comments on trading for Gordon Hayward. Do you believe more gms? Do you believe more gms should take accountability? Like this more great content, keep up the great work. So the comment from Sam Presci basically just said he missed on that Gordon Hayward trade. One of the things that I appreciated about it, there's this I didn't even really realize this until like started in this business.
There's this belief. I've seen it from fans and it's like this, there's this expectation that basketball is just easy to figure out and that the solution is just obviously right in front of you, and that you should just you know, if you make a mistake, it's a sign that you're incompetent. I could not disagree more Like sports has such a variability element to it. Right as a
Lakers fan, I experience this personally all year long. Ruey hatch Murrow is better than Torrian Prince, and I advocated all year long to play Ruey more than Torrian Prince. And it was the right decision all year long until the Denver series when Rui was terrible and Torrian was good. Right, Like, is that just the weirdness of basketball? Or am I incompetent?
You know what I mean? Like, that's where it gets really tricky, right, Like, Sam pressI is regarded as one of the best gms in the league, and he can
make a mistake. I think he was just looking at a player that he could potentially slot in for Josh Giddy in those lineups as kind of like a connective piece that would just be a higher level offensive player, and it turned out that it was better for him to go with Isaiah Joe or Aaron Wiggins or even maybe even some big looks with Jay will Right, it just turned out it wasn't the right move, right, But you got to take You gotta take chances, you got
to take shots, you got to take risks. And I always will advocate for people doing that sort of thing, and inherently there are mistakes that can be made in those processes. Hey, Jason, what have we learned this playoffs? About which types of defensive players are the most valuable perimeter defenders, wings or rim protector centers. How does that influence team building? Thanks so much for all that you do. Again,
for me, it's the versatility element. It's the guys like Aaron Gordon that can guard on the back line, defensive rebound and guard on the perimeter. Jason Tatum can do that too, right. PJ. Washington has showed some of that. It is the versatile defensive players. Derek Lively is a great example. It is the versatile defensive players that can do both that bring the most value. A big, strong athlete that you can hang around inside and defend on the perimeter is by far the most valuable type of
defender that you can have. Do you think that the Bucks are still top tier contenders. I feel their entire defensive system revolved around what Brook Lopez could do and drop, which was only enabled by elite screen navigation by Drew. Without that, Lopez's defensive flaws are magnified, and I don't think they have the assets to fix the issue. I know the offense has been poor, but all the pieces are there. Giannis just needs to be more familiar without
a role with Dame. Agree with everything you said. I agree that the point of attack defense was an issue in terms of complimenting Lopez and drop coverage one hundred percent. Agree about Giannis and Dame just kind of needing more reps figuring out how to play together. I would use Dallas as an example of optimism if I was a Milwaukee fan. Dallas missed the playoffs last year. But they have two superstars or two superstar and a star that both compliment each other really well, and they made some
tweaks to the roster. Now they're in the finals. That's what you got to look at. Look at if you're Milwaukee, you have Giannis and Tenna Kombo, the third best player in the world in a vacuum. In my opinion, and you have Damian Lillard, a guy is in that like top twelve, top thirteen, right, so you are capable of making a similar pivot. And all it is is you got to hit on a veteran minimum signing or two.
You got to hit on some sort of other move in the summer, whether it's a sign and trade or it's a mid level exception deal, and you got to hit on a trade or two between the offseason and on the deadline. If you hit on those deals, you have the top tier talent to build an elite team around them. You just have to make the appropriate tweaks. To me, I would go in on athleticism. I think this is a team that needs to be very, very
fast and long and athletic. I think that, especially since brook Lopez like that was part of the issue last year.
We're just too slow everywhere. And I would pivot in the direction towards length and athleticism, especially considering to get out of the conference, You're gonna have to deal with the Knicks team, which is gonna come at you with overwhelming layers of physicality and size and length, and Boston's gonna come at you with a ton of speed and spread you out on the perimeter to survive that conference. I think they need to get faster on the perimeter.
Do you believe that it would be better to include Vanderbilt into the trade package if you're getting a role player like me, or if you're getting a player like Mikhale Bridges rather than trading him for another guard like Dejonte. I feel like he's the third most, third or fourth most valuable player on the team. One hundred percent agree in the sense that he feels a very specific need.
Jared Vanderbilt is the only elite perimeter defender that the Los Angeles Lakers have under roster control, So if you're going to include him in a trade, you damn well better get back a real perimeter defender. I personally would like to have at least two. If you look through the let's just look at the conference finalists. Minnesota had two of them, right, They had Jada McDaniels Anthony Edwards
just in the starting lineup. Right. If you look at the Dallas Mavericks, they had two of them, Derek Jones Junior PJ. Washington. I even argue that Kyrie can guard on the perimeter, right, you can say the same thing about Mike Conley. For the record, Boston has four of them in the starting lineup Indiana. Even if you look at Andrew Nemhard and AARONI. Smith, those are two very
two very good perimeter defensive players. Siakam is a guy who can guard on the perimeter as well, So like you got to have multiple guys that can guard on
the perimeter. So like I would, I would if I was the Lakers, I would not include Jared Vanderbilt unless it was a team demanding including Jared Vanderbilt and you were getting back a high level perimeter defender that I prefer to keep him, and I'd prefer to use trade chips like Ruya Chimura gave Vincent other mid level contracts that do not involve including Vanderbilt, and then I but I like the idea of going after Michel Bridges, a Jeremy Grant, a de Jontey Murray, that sort of thing.
But I'd try to keep Vanderbilt if you can do you eat before and or after you play a game of basketball. So what do you go for from James? I prefer to eat two to three hours before I had a late night run that I played on Wednesday, a private run here in Tucson, and I went to dinner with my wife beforehand, and we had dinner at like six point thirty and the run started at like eight, and I didn't eat my food until like seven, and it felt like I was playing with a cannonball in
my stomach and it was literally the worst. So like, preferably a long time before, preferably lighter. I prefer to have stuff like like usually just like some rice and chicken like that. Chipotle is like the best pregame meal of all time because it's just rice and chicken, right. I just don't get beans in it for me personally, But like again, like that, it's really just something light two three hours before. I'm a big believer in loading
up the day before. I do a lot of like heavy protein carbloating in the day before to try to prepare for playing the next day. Hey, I'm wondering about your perspective on the Star Wars franchise. I like some of the shows that have come out, but I also feel like some are getting away from what Star Wars was originally about. I think they should release less content and focus more on quality rather than spinning out a new show every few months. What's your take on where
they should go. I don't think that there's a I don't think that they're inundating us with content. It's not like there's a ton of it. I actually think that, especially when it comes to dedicated teams, like, as long as there's oversight, dedicated teams can do a quality job. It's not like they're cutting corners there. To me, it's
more just focusing on the right kind of storytelling. To me, Star Wars what makes it great is there's a very basic good versus evil and then there's deep lore building. It's the same thing that makes all those shows great, right, Like what is Game of Throne? What makes Game of Thrones great? You know who the villains are. You know
you're rooting against Sercy the whole time. You know you're rooting against you know, uh Ramsey Snow, you know you're rooting against the Night King, right Like, you have your clear antagonists and there's an obvious like good versus evil type of thing going on, and then there's deep lore building.
Everything is connected. And Disney has just gotten really sloppy with the lore, like shitting all over the Skywalker Skywalker storyline by making it about Palpatine at the end, Like they literally destroyed the entire Skywalker storyline by reincarnating or saving Palpatine and making it about Ray and Palpatine. Right like that that was stupid. That was that was shitting
all over the lore. Right, they stupid things like for cool special effects, they'll have the like the Millennium Falcon, hyperspace jumping in between buildings like in Revenge of the Sitty or in Rise of Skywalker when literally in a New Hope. In the very first Star Wars movie in nineteen seventy seven, there's a scene where Han Solo's talking to Luke and Luke goes, why don't you just jump
the light speed? And Hank goes, if I don't calculate first, there will be bits of us scattered all over the galaxy, like because if you travel at the speed of light and you run into something, something bad would happen. So like, why is it that that was established in nineteen seventy seven, And then it's like, oh, but it'd be cool for CGI if the Millennium Falcon just appeared right in between some buildings, flying around like that's the kind of stuff
that Disney's dropped the ball on. If they get back into the deep story building and into the lore and into the good versus evil, I think it could work. Which, by the way I saw. I've seen some people dislike Ahsoka. I enjoyed Ahsoka. It's a slow start. Season one was slow, but it's no different than Game of Throne Season one was really slow, right, give that story some time. Theron's a really interesting character. They're gonna keep building him out.
There's all that interesting stuff going on with Balen Skull and Ahsoka and all them in that other galaxy. Like Ahsoka, Season two I think is gonna be more fast paced and a little bit more interesting. Right. This Acolyte series is something I'm super super excited for. It dives back into the good versus evil thing I saw. I had this theory that I put out on my other podcasts. I have another podcast. It's called The Two Sun's Podcast. You can see the link for it, or not the link,
but the logo for it right there. I do it with my buddy Luke here in Tucson. We cover all that stuff, TV series, movies, all that kind of thing. Star Wars is a major like Star Wars is my favorite bit of nonfiction, so that's what we spend a good amount of our time on. But like, we're gonna be covering every single episode of The Acolyte starting next week. We're gonna cover every single episode of House of the Dragon.
We're recording tomorrow an episode that's covering the end of Bad Batch as well as we're doing We're gonna do it. There's a book that we both just read called Revin, so we're gonna do a like kind of a summary action to the Revin book. That's obviously legends, but it's another Star Wars, a bit of Star Wars content. So, like, make sure you check out the Two Sons podcast hop over there. If you guys would subscribe and support that show,
I'd really appreciate that. But I was talking about The Acolyte with my buddy Luke, and in that show, I was hoping for them to get into some of the history of the Sith, which is by far my most interesting element of the Star Wars universe. I'm really fascinated by Palpatine's a grand plan to overthrow the Republic, right. I find it super fascinating. It dates all the way back to Darth Baine destroying the Sith, going into hiding and trying to take over the galaxy with subterfuge rather
than through force of arms. Right, that's if you've ever read the Darth Baine books, you know what I'm talking about. But the Acolyte, I think is going to target that concept.
And I had a theory about that, and then I saw an interview yesterday that the Star Wars Instagram feed released where Dave Filoni was interviewing the director and he's like, so, tell me about the Accolte, and she's like, I've always been fascinated by the Sith and the idea of an apprentice who crazy their master's power and needs to go find a new apprentice so that they can do that. And I was like, yes, Like this is exactly what I want from a Star Wars show. So I'm very
very excited for the Acolyte. I most importantly now that Dave Filoni is their creative director. Dave Filoni is someone that I think has the appropriate amount of respect for what makes Star Wars great, and so I think that we can kind of take the twenty fifteen stretch to now in all of the stuff that they botched with the sequel trilogy and some of the weird stuff they've done. I think we can kind of just put that to the side. Now Dave Filoni has real authority to fix stuff.
Let's see if Dave Filoni can can write the ship here. You said early in the season you would not change the Nuggets starting five. After losing to the Wolves, do you still believe it should be those five, and what changes would you make overall to the team come back better next season. I would try to run it back. They were up twenty in Game seven, you win that game. I think they beat Dallas and I think they're in the finals, and I think they would have beat Boston.
Don't overthink it. You got a bad matchup and you still had him on the ropes. You just blew it. And Jamal Murray didn't play well. He was also injured, and Yokic had a bad shooting season and wasn't as good defensively. I think both of those guys are gonna come back way better next year. I think they're gonna come back as the hungry team. So like I wouldn't tweak anything that said, there's some of the realities of the roster situation, It's very possible that Contavious called what Pope,
ends up being poached by another team. We'll see if they do. Then obviously what you're sliding like a Christian Brown into that spot. But I'll be curious to see if they are able to kind of replace him with a more of like a league average type of replacement player. That said, in terms of who I should who I think they should be looking to add, I think the main piece that they need is they need another offensive
player that can compromise the defense through dribble penetration. One of the issues for Denver was they initiate through two man game and through Jokic's ability to impose himself physic in the post Jaden McDaniels and Anthony Edwards erased Jamal Murray from that series for the most part, and Nikole Jokic was just getting overwhelmed by size on the inside. Another way to compromise the defense is through dribble penetration. Denver just didn't have a guy who can do that.
Last year they had Bruce Brown. They didn't have that this year. So, like I would be looking for an athletic guard that can beat somebody off the dribble, because if you can beat somebody off the dribble, that's just another way for them to have some more resilience on offense. What's up with the sunglasses new style? So I've had sunglasses on for a couple of these episodes, just holding my hair back. To make a long story short, I've never had hair this long, and I'm trying to figure
out how to do it. It's my hair super curly thanks to my mom, and I have literally no idea what to do with it. So I'm learning the sunglasses. They just hold it back for right now. I don't know if I'll end up. I'm not going to get into the specifics, but I'll try a few more things. But something that's like something about me. I am very much a practically minded person. Practical like, I'm obsessed with practicality.
I want things to be convenient. I like things to be easy, and my hair is irritating the shit out of me. I've been growing it out for like nine months, though, so I'm not about to cut it right away. I'm gonna try to see if I can make it work. But like if it's a few months from now and I'm still struggling, like I'm gonna cut it just because, like I hate dealing with inconvenient shit like constantly having
to do stuff with my hair. But yeah, the sunglasses, I'm just putting them on my head to hold my hair back. I'm aware that it's tacky. I'm trying to figure it out. Just bear with me as I try to work through this new phase of hair problems. You touched on a couple of videos ago that every series should be looked at in a vacuum. How do you think the Lakers would have fared if they would have been the eighth seed instead of the seventh. Would they
have dethroned okay See Dallas in Minnesota? I think they would have beat I think they would have beat okay See. I think that they presented similar challenges to Oklahoma City that Dallas did, right. I think that specifically, one of the things that the Lakers could have done to Okase's front line that even Dallas couldn't do is Anthony Davis can just bully his way around the basket against that front line, and I think that that would have caused a lot of problems. I think the Lakers would have
beat Okay. See. By the way, I was consistent about that all season. I thought the Lakers were the fifth best team going into the postseason run, and I thought that they should have. I thought that they would have beat Oklahoma City. Dallas is tough. Dallas is a matchup that the Lakers have struggled with pretty consistently over the last two years. I would have picked the Lakers over Dallas if Jared Vanderbilt was healthy, but he was not.
He wasn't healthy. So with Jared, because Jared Vanderbilt was the one guy the Lakers had that could actually bother Luca kind of fits into that big, strong forward type that you need, like an Aaron Gordon, like a Jason Tatum type of player. But Jared Vanderbilt was out, so I think the Lakers would have just lost to Dallas. Now, in a to see world where Jared Vanderbilt was healthy, I think they would have beat OKAC. It would have
been roughly a coin flip to beat Dallas. I probably would have picked the Lakers, but it would have been close. And then Minnesota, I think the Lakers would have beat Minnesota because I think Minnesota would have struggled against the Laker defense for the exact same reasons that they struggled against the Dallas defense. But the Dallas matchup is just
really tough. The Lakers have struggled with Luca pretty consistently, and because Vanderbilt was injured, I think even if they were the eight c they would have lost to Dallas. A lot of Team USA players didn't go on a deep run in the playoffs, for example Lebron, Steph kd, Anthony Davis, Embiid. Will that rest help Team USA? Absolutely, not just the rest, but also the competitive motivation. Not being able to compete for a championship will make them
want to compete for this Olympic trophy. I have a feeling that the Team USA is going to go on a crazy run. I think that they're going to dominate, and I think they're going to win the gold. I think that this is going to be an opportunity for the American basketball players to prove that even though the world is catching up, that as a country individually, they are still head and shoulders above the rest of the
teams individually. Now, if you I think if we combined all the players of the world into a single world team against USA, that's where It gets tricky, right because now we're talking about Luca Jokic gianness like that. That could get really tough, really fast, shake shake Gilders. Alexander's on that team, right, But like and that would get complicated. But in terms of individual countries, no country in the world can hold a candle to a Team USA, and
I think they're going to demonstrate that this year. Should Anthony Edwards start over Jason Tatum and Team USA, No, I think Jason Tatum should play the two. I would go Steph Tatum, kd Lebron, Anthony Davis. That would be the lineup that I'd use. And then in specific matchups against really big front lines, guys that like Jokic in Serbia, that's where I would play Embiid because I think matches
up better with Jokic. But I think alongside other stars, AD is a better player, and I think Tatum is better than Anthony Edwards in a vacuum, but especially within the context of playing alongside the other stars, I think Tatum would be their route to go. But I mean, Steph Tatum, Katie Lebron, Ad, they should beat the shit
out of everybody. That's that's a legendary team. I'm very lucky the Volume sending me out on Wednesday in July, right before the right before the summer league, to see a scrimmage for Team USA versus the Canadian national team. Very very excited for that. I think that should be a fun game, especially if Jamal Murray plays, because it'll be Shay, Jamal Murray, Dylan Brooks like that. That should
be a really fun game to watch. All right, guys, that is all I have for today, and we're gonna be back on Monday morning covering some the first side of the ball for the NBA Finals. We're recovering Boston on offense, film and everything. Then we'll get into Dallas on offense on Tuesday, and then we'll get into some interview stuff on Wednesday. As always, I sincerely appreciate you guys for rocking with me and supporting the show. I'll see you on Monday. The Volume