Driving to the Basket: A Detroit Pistons Podcast - Episode 100: 2022 NBA Draft Prospects - An In-Depth Look at Jaden Ivey

Episode Date: June 1, 2022

This episode takes a deep dive into consensus top-five pick Jaden Ivey: strengths, weaknesses, fit, and so on. Thank you to Price for guesting again on the show.

Welcome back, everybody, to driving to the basket, part of the basketball podcast network. I'm Mike, joined again by Price, who was with the podcast last week for the Benedict Mathron episode. Bryce, thanks for joining us again. Oh, pleasure's all mine. Fantastic. Sounds like office space, you know, pleasure's all on this side of the table. Anyway, so today we're going to be talking about Jade and Ivy, probably the, I would say definitely the most exciting prospect that we haven't covered yet. but first want to talk just a bit about the NBA finals.

So as we found out a couple nights ago, I'm recording this on Tuesday, it's going to be the Warriors versus the Celtics. And I'm not really looking to do a full breakdown of what the finals are going to look like. But I just want to say, I've been really impressed by the Celtics. And maybe it's the kind of like old Pistons fan of me, not as an old Pistons fan. But looking back, for example, like to go into the work pistons, excuse me, I feel like the Celtics are the team we've seen that resembles them the most in a long time. We're never going to have a team like they're going to work pistons again.

But just the team that everybody works super hard on defense, everybody's a capable defender, and they're very unselfish on offense. So it's just been good to see, and I'm rooting for them in the finals. Yeah, I think I'd agree with that. Like Jason Tatum is a superstar, probable, like, top 10 player, like in the next. five or so years, but even still, like, just the, the team just plays, like, for each other, plays really hard on defense. And you have just, even Peyton Pritchard is just showing out. And I think that speaks volumes when your end of rotation guy is just so committed to the,

the goal of the team. Yeah. So, yeah, it's really definitely a team's team. And, like I said, I've just found a very, I don't want to say inspiring, but I don't know, maybe a little bit inspiring to watch. You just don't really see teams like that very often in the NBA these days and still maintain that you can't win on defense in today's NBA, but definitely the Celtics have made it a major asset, like a major, major asset with, it's just an intelligent defensive scheme with five guys who can switch. And I also feel that's really where the NBA is going. But yeah, definitely Tatum, that would say top 20 player right now easily. It needs to a little bit on attacking the basket just in that he tends to avoid contact and he's still

not as strong as he should be so he gets kind of knocked off a stride a little bit too easily when he's in the air knocked off a stride you get it you get what i mean um but yeah really good team so and i think they match up well against the warriors yeah i'd agree like the length that boston can play with i think could really give the warriors a lot of trouble um this is definitely the most switchable team left or just in general like they can just everybody even Robert Williams is like great at like he's not a guy you want on the perimeter always you're probably going to be playing drop mostly with Robert but time lord can can move and you know if you're just kind of rotating and bringing like help side stuff like he can do that in spades like he you don't lose a lot when

he gets onto the court in that regard. And then you can go small with Al Horford, who I was talking to my friend the other day. He's just a god. Like, he's so good. Like, it is, he is so, so hard to, to, like, play against. And I think he's the connective tissue to this team. He embodies that sort of just unselfish, play the guy in front of you sort of mentality. do what it takes.

Yeah, I mean, you can't not root for Al Horford. Yeah, I felt really good about seeing him against the finals. Apparently, he had played a record number of playoff games to this point. Rather, I'll put it this way, it took him a record number of playoff games before he reached the finals, 140-something. I mean, he's played on a, I don't know if the guys ever missed the playoffs. I think maybe in his early days with the Hawks. But, yeah, just to absolutely agree with you about him being really the connect.

on the team, such a smart player, like, completely underrated in the way of his overall IQ on both ends. I would say that with those two, those last two seasons, like 2017 to 2019, or maybe mixing that up, whatever, it's two really good seasons with the Celtics. I'd say it was a top five center, just a guy who can, who could play really good defense and on offense, could pass, could shoot from anywhere, and just always makes the right decisions. So it's funny how they, you know, he left to go to Philly because he didn't really want to play center. And they picked up Kemba and they've circled around from Kemba back to Horford, who's now basically playing center. And now they're in the finals.

And he's a leader too. So, yeah, I definitely, definitely have a high opinion of Horford also. And when it comes to switching, yeah, like you said, all these guys can do it. And the Warriors are all about switching. They're all about off ball screens. I mean, of course, you've got Curry and Draymond. I mean, they're more special qualities to that team. But I just think that the Celtics match up as well against them as any,

probably better than any other team in the league than defensively speaking. So it should be interesting. All right, let's move on to Jaden Ivy. So Ivy comes out of Purdue, six foot four guard. Again, I'll reiterate this, six foot four in NBA terms. The guy may be a little bit short of six, three. without shoes. Excuse me, six before in NCAA terms.

Just to reiterate again, also the NBA measures without shoes. So, yeah, he could be short of six three, because short of six three, shoes at an inch, you round up, you get six four, whatever. Six foot nine wingspan, 195 pounds. It'll be a shade over 20 at the draft. I played two years at Purdue. So his profile, basically high flyer, super athletic. It does most of his scoring at the basket.

and a little bit of a shaky shooter. But whatever, we'll get into this. So, yeah, as I mentioned, I think his number one strength is his athleticism, which is just really something else. Yeah, he's an alien. Just, I don't know how a guy like him exists. Yeah, he, it's really, it's really just remarkable. Even at the NBA level, like, he'll be a top 10 athlete.

So it just comes down to just incredible acceleration. It's just what you call the consummate fast twitch athlete. He can accelerate on a dime. He's fantastic at turning the corner. He was fantastic at the NCAA. He'll be fantastic at it in the NBA too. Again, this is a guy who we're talking just elite elite NBA athleticism. Just super explosive leaper off of both one or two feet.

Tremendous top speed. He's got very good agility. And pretty good body control, I would say, too. And just fantastic of changing directions and speeds. So, yeah, it's really something else to watch. And it's definitely a translatable skill. Yeah, no, 100%. Like, he makes fast-twitch athletes look slow.

That is kind of the level difference or like this qualitative difference that you, if you will, with Jay Nivey. He's just so fast. he can the first step is probably one of the best the soon as he walks into the NBA, one of the best in the league, and his game just flows from there. Yeah, definitely. It's just remarkable, really, what he can do as an athlete. I've seen him come to John Morant.

I'm not sure I'd agree he's quite there. I mean, Morant is really just something else, you know, even by NBA standards, but Ivy's definitely up there. and it's of course got definite applications at the NBA level just as it did the NCAA level and it's going to make him definitely very, very able as a penetrator. I get Purdue breaking down defenses was one of his specialties. He generally did it turning the corner rather than going straight up the middle. Straight up the middle is going to give you more utility at drawing additional defenders

because you're curling around the basket. It's just, you know, there are easier situations in which you don't. really need to throw a help defender or you find yourself in less of a position to make a good pass. But yeah, well, definitely, when he's jet into the basket, it attracts some extra coverage. So just the ability to break down defenses off the dribble is really just very valuable in itself. And then, of course, just his ability to sky and score at the basket. Yeah, he's not like a really, like crazy, crazy vertical athlete in terms of his max vert, from what I've seen. But he has great hang time.

And that's partially the speed, and he can kind of, like, get right in those, like, windows of space around the basket on either end. And especially on offense, like, that just allows him to kind of make, like, these extra moves as he's falling down, like, almost horizontal to the ground. And it's quite exciting to watch. Yeah, without a doubt. And that athleticism can make him very difficult to stay. stop if he finds even the slightest window, you can get up there to the basket. And yeah, just hard to emphasize enough, just how impressive his athleticism is. So when it comes to scoring at the basket, you know, it's at this point maybe still a little bit

raw in terms of the moves he's flashing. But it's definitely very high upside there at the NBA level. Also, when it comes to other things, you know, other applications of that of athleticism, like attacking closeouts, for example. Didn't do a ton of it at Purdue, but basically if at the NBA level, he's a reliable enough shooter that NBA defenses are going to close out on him. I mean, you're pretty much finished. We've said that about Diallo before because he's just going to blow by any guy who's closing out.

And the help money, it might not even get there in time. And I'd say his definite potential as, like you said, it doesn't have necessarily the max vertical pop that maybe Mathuron does, but could definitely do some vertical spacing as well. well. Yeah. I mean, what other applications do you see the NBA level for his athleticism? You could think definitely about off ball movements, I would say. Yeah, to start with like just being able to relocate, I feel like that will be huge for whatever team gets him. Like, very few guys are going to be able to keep up with him. Obviously, there's great athletes who are very long and

very twitchy and fast, but the first step, the ability to stop and start means he can kind of get to where he needs to on the court. And another aspect I'd like to bring up is the fact that he's going to be a demon in transition. Like, again, that's not like necessarily important, as important for playoff basketball, but at least as an option, I think he's going to, be a huge weapon in that regard and will just tear up teams. Like you'll see him like just take three steps and be basically in the paint, it feels like. It's just, or three dribbles, rather. And it's just kind of unfair.

Yeah, it's remarkable, definitely. His ability to accelerate very, very quickly up to that top speed. And that top speed is just blindingly fast. So his ability to get out there and run a transition with or without the ball. I mean, he is remarkably fast with the ball in his hands. You know, plenty of guys lose some speed, but he doesn't, whether really in the half court or in the open floor, it's remarkable seeing his ability to get from one end of the court to the other. So I agree.

As a transition score, I think he should be very good. So I would say moving on to, yeah, his capacity of our off ball movement, actually, want to cover that. Completely agree with you. Definitely the ability to relocate quick. is great. Also just the ability, like we said with Mathrim last week, to just beat your defender from off the dribble, from off the ball is a skill in itself because it's just one extra way that you can unhinge defense. And I'd say that Ivy should be, you know, one of the best in the league

at that at the NBA level. It's just, just, I know I'm, I know we're both repeating this over and over again, just how fast he can get and how quick, you know, how quickly he can get to that top speed. So it should be a guy capable of opening himself up in the half court from off the ball as well, and that's very nice to have about transition scoring. I think it's worth noting it'll become even more valuable, just overall, because they're almost certainly getting rid of the take foul. The take foul, I'm sure you find it as annoying as I do and as annoying as pretty much everybody else seems to find it. Only guy more annoyed by it than me is Special K. Yeah, he hates the take foul, no doubt about that.

But guys like Ivy will have one less impediment in transition. Because, you know, the guy gets the ball in transition. If the take follow is still there, he's just going to get followed right away. And the idea is next season that take follow is one shot in the ball. So I believe it's one shot. I don't know if it's, I don't think it's two shots. Yeah, I think it's going to be, sorry to cut you off, it's one shot with possession. Yeah.

Yeah. And in some situations that may actually be worthwhile. So, you know, you remove the certainty of two points to give up one point and another opportunity. But again, you might give up one point and then a three. So I doubt we'll see much in the way of take fouls if that goes through. And, you know, by the accounts we've heard from Shams, it's had a lot of support amongst the NBA's board of governors. So another upside, I would say, and this might sound a little bit weird because this is also a big question mark about him is the shooting upside. just in terms of what he showed potentially as a pull-up shooter from three-point range for stepbacks

and also just that if he can make that work it just would make him an exceptionally tough cover at the NBA level. Yeah, I think like as long as he is decent at that, then like with Hamadu, I don't know what you do to guard him because if you play up on him. at all. You're in just a world of trouble. Yeah. Yeah, definitely. Did you like it all what you saw from, what you saw from him in terms of his pull-up shooting? Like, I know we saw him take a lot of, like, long pull-up threes. Oh, boy. What do you think his upside looks like as a pull-up shooter long term? He shot about 33.33% actually on pull-up threes, which isn't a bad mark, but

inconsistent, of course. Yeah. Like, this will be my running, theme with my take on Jaden Ivy is that it's a lot of development is needed. The upside is obviously tremendous, but the rawness that he plays with and a lot of his like details in the game is, I think, going to be the story on him. And you have like at times it looks really fluid. He can just get to his step back. It looks nice. And at other times, his footwork, it's just wild and all over the place. And I'm like, what are you doing? And he looks like me when I try a jump shot. And it's, I'm being hyperbolic, but he doesn't get like great elevation on it.

And there's like issues with his mechanics that we can go into. Or if we want to like keep talking about the positives, there's. there's the fact that like i think that there is legitimate shooting upside maybe not like as an elite three point threat but he doesn't need to be i think that that we've seen steady progress from high school to college year one to year two so i think that he's a fine enough free throw shooter that hopefully you can see him being a decent threat and as long as any amount of teams feel like they have to play up on him, then he's going to be golden.

Yeah. I'm not sure I agree about the free throw shooting. And I think that there are some other flaws that could really hinder him, even if teams are willing to respect him to a degree at the three point line. Like, yeah, I definitely see upside there. The pull-up shooting. Pull-up shooting isn't something you need to have. It's something that's very, very nice to have,

especially if you can get like he, Ivy liked that stepback and that stepback's a great tool to have. He wasn't great at it, but in terms of, so it's a good place to transition, I suppose,

the negatives and shooting inconsistency was definitely one of his negatives. Chibi noted that on unguarded threes, unguarded catch and shoot threes, he shot a very high percentage, however, on very low volume. He had 17 unguarded catch and shoot threes all season. He loved to take guarded threes,

whether they're difficult threes, you know, on the catch and shoot in which he shot only in 33.3%, same as he did on pull-ups. He took almost as many pull-up threes as he did catch and shoot threes. And man, was he just taking a ton of them in both capacities from well beyond the three-point line or just a high degree of difficulty stuff? And you've got to wonder what his percentage may have looked like if he was just taking more run-of-the-mill, just easier threes.

Yeah, I noticed that too, that the shot selection in general, is probably like one of like two or three maybe biggest question marks with Ivy and is going to need a lot of development because you're right like I noticed that he would settle and this kind of reminded me a little bit of Lamello back in 2020 because at least. Oh right, that guy. I remember now. I'm just pointing out the fact. that Lamello took a lot of shots that I'm like...

Oh, they were awful. Like, he still does. It's gotten better. And that gives, that would give Ivy fans, I think, a little bit of hope that a guy as talented as Ivy can be coached up to take, make better decisions. Yeah. That's, I think, because you're right, he settles. And or he'll just, I think, get, like, caught up on, okay, I need to make a shot and

forcing something and then we get into like issues with his mechanics on his shot like the platform is is pretty narrow like if we talk about a j griffin for for a little bit like his platform is like um like it looked like he grew up in texas because it's just huge and massive and sprawling oh super wide yeah super wide stance yes yes and and ivy's is is in the other direction of like his knees almost knock a lot. I noticed, like, I can't even tell you. I spent, like, probably, I watched maybe several hundred shots of Ivy's in slow motion. So, yeah, I looked for every single shot that I could.

And the knees tend to knock. Like, he is prone to, like, shooting, like, in front of his face a lot. And you have like a fairly low release point. And like the mechanics like with his gather look pretty good. But the release point and the footwork, I think kind of combined for partially why we see these shots that like just look like they're kind of being pushed and are very flat and hit like the tip of the rim. like furthest out into the court. Yeah, his mitts could be ugly. Yes, yes, absolutely.

And I think that it, I don't see necessarily a ton of room for him to become this amazing three-point shooter. But I think he could get more consistent. Yeah. At least in like, and again, if he's taking more normal three-point shots and can at least be an option to spread the floor, if you're playing like five, out or you're playing, you know, like one man deep, four out, uh, that, that I think you'll, you'll have at least enough where he can exist in a modern NBA office, offense, excuse me.

Yeah. I, I mean, I'd say at the NBA level, if you're almost anybody, like, as a perimeter player, or at least if your offense isn't completely playing around you, like as you see with Vianas, you see with John Moran's, that's, you really want to be pretty darned reliable on those catch and shoot threes at least like consistently 36 and above, 36% and above, particularly on your wide open threes. So like again, you know, so unless Ivy becomes like one of those guys you really want to play around. We'll talk about that a little later. I'd say you'd certainly on Detroit, again, when we talk about the fit, you want him to be higher percentage. But, you know, when it comes to consistency, definitely the guy finished with a mark of around 36%. He started

fairly strong. He had a couple of big games that really inflated the percentage. In the last 13 games before the NCAA tournament, he was 12 of 51, which was needless to say, not something you wanted to see out of him down the stretch of the season. So yeah, his mechanics are a little wonky. He gets the shot off quickly, which is nice. But, like, you can expect his volume of threes to increase at the NBA level, and you want to be, yeah, just you got to have those mechanics, right? Like, some of his misses were, like, when he missed, it could be real bad, like, really. really ugly. And I think the free throws go along the same lines. And free throw shooting can be, you know, is a decent metric for a prediction of how a player is going to shoot from the perimeter as well.

It's not the be-all end-all. But 74.4%, it's not really what you want to see. Like, even a lot of misses looked bad. Like just the ball, the spin, it would, yeah, it was just bad looking. So not only does that make you worry about the three-point shot, that would make me worry about three-point shots, you know, and how long how that's ultimately going to come along. But you're also just leaving a lot of points on the board. And NBA teams will be happy to just tack him on the weight of the basket. Like not deliberately followed, but they'll feel a lot better about following him rather than giving him an open opportunity at the red, not an open, but an easier opportunity at the

rim if they think he's going to shoot in the low 70s, what, mid-70s? Yep. Yep. And it was consistent year-to-year, too. Yeah. And this, too, is inflated by some big games. I think he was like 14 out of 15 in one game, which was really an aberration. And so I'd worry about that.

It's a weird combination, like a guy who can, well, I guess it actually mirrors the way that his shooting went, which is that, you know, he was like a 36% shooter, but highly inconsistent. And then you have also his free throw shooting alongside that, which was quite poor. they get 75% for a perimeter player, especially when who's who's going to be driving to the net quite a bit, is bad. Improvable, but it just makes me worry about that form. Yeah, and that's not even, I think, his, like, necessarily even biggest area of improvement. Mm-hmm. What would you say that is?

Oh, in my opinion, it'd be the shot selection. in general, and that would extend into the mid-range. I think that, as has been mentioned a bunch, the lack of mid-range game is just, like, astounding. He is, like, awful in between the paint and the three-point line. As inconsistent as he was, and he was very inconsistent, his three-point shooting was markedly better than his midi game. And it is, and I'm not saying, like, a player needs to be a great mid-point, or sorry,

mid-range shooter in order to be a good player. I think very few guys are able to do it well. But the fact that it's that bad, I mean, it's bad. It really will, like, making that, like, two-level score and makes even more. pressure on his development to improve as a three-point shooter. And again, like, he can draw a contact because, like, he gets guys out of position, like, nobody's business. It is, like, guys get off tilt all the time. He can really just, like, make guys, like, look like fools. And, And yeah, and then I think to bring it to the next point that I want to bring up is passing reeds.

I wouldn't say he's a bad passer, and I like his handle. I think it is a very functional handle. But I question some of his decision making with the ball in his hand. It feels very simplistic. Yeah, definitely. I just want to circle back briefly to what you said about his in-between game. definitely. It is remarkable how basically not of one he has. It's basically absent. He took 22% of his shots on two-point jumpers. This season shot 32% on those.

I mean, he is absolutely, he was absolutely terrible on pull-up twos. He, you know, is his runner, floater, not really very reliable at all. And, you know, as quick as he is, NBA teams will still take advantage of that, you know, inside the paint. you know, whatever help defender comes, we'll just back off toward the restricted area. And the center is not going to try to challenge him outside the restricted area. It shoot 62 and a half percent on attempts at the rim, only 24 percent assisted. So that's impressive, but total lack of him in between game. But definitely what you said about, his decision making, his ability to make the right reads and passes.

This was brought up with Jalen Green last season. I think it's as big of a swing skill. Probably bigger, actually, even significantly bigger swing. swing skill for Ivy than it was for Green because Green's a good three-point shooter. I mean, just really know if Sands or Butts, even off the move. I mean, Green can make his threes. They proved that this year. He did it well in the G-League before that.

And especially for a guy like Ivy who's going to depend a lot on driving the ability to make the right reads or passes could really be the difference between him being able to take advantage of the gravity that he's going to attract or him not being able to take advantage of that and forcing up a lot of bad shots or just turning the ball over a ton. Yeah, you took the words right out of my mouth. It's his swing skill, for me, at least, as a second option. And the fact that I felt like he kind of only made like the very most simplistic of passes. And I felt like he oftentimes was two-handed passes that were somewhat mid-air.

I'm like, I don't love that. it feels like his turnover he might not be like super turnover prone but i feel like especially on drives that he could get exploited by just the the sheer intelligence of NBA defenders more than he was in college like you just have a whole other level of instinctual players who are going to be guarding him or who are going to be on the help defense and and will be able to interrupt passes. And so him being able to draw that gravity and then exploit it is a lot like how I felt about Jalen Green, where it's like if he's going to be the primary option as like kind of this vehicle for just generating efficient offense, because he can do it for himself. I was pretty

confident in that. But if he can actually be that number one guy who kind of like sets the table for a franchise. That was going to be the key part of his game that needed to improve. And then you get Ivy, who I think has obviously great upside. And I don't want to say that he's got like Jalen Green upside because I think Jalen Green is maybe as a prospect a little bit in another echelon. Yeah, I would agree. Yeah. But Ivy, I think, is like right up there. Like you definitely could see him being a fantastic second option, if not even a guy you build around, but the passing even more so is going to be how he gets there, is being able to exploit the gravity that he's going to draw because teams are going to respect his ability to get to the pain. And if they don't have to respect

the past, then he has nothing. It's like the inverse problem of Killian Hayes. They don't have They don't have to respect Killian Hayes getting into the paint so they can just play against the pass. And with Ivy, I don't think it's that weak as with Killian Hayes, but it's the swing skill. Like Killian Hayes is, can he shoot and then can he get to the paint? Ivy is can he pass well enough to warrant having the ball enough? Yeah, absolutely agree. Yeah, and you saw it a lot at Purdue. just, I don't think the guy's

court vision and just passing IQ is particularly high. I mean, it's one thing if you're just bringing a guy into the league who's just raw at it, and you look at it and you say, okay, maybe we can train him into it. I just don't think his core vision is very good. And I just don't think his decision-making about, just the feel about when to make the pass

and what's the right pass to make. A lot goes into being a good facilitator. Like, just the ability to see the floor, to know where your teammates are going to be, even if you can't see them. And just being able to, like things at the NBA level move at, you just have to be able to make split-second decisions on both ends, but particularly if you're handling the ball, like just being able to make that split-second judgment of,

do I have a lane to the basket? Is it better for me to attempt this shot, you know, to try to get to the rim? Or is it better for me to pass the ball to a teammate who might be in better position? Where is that teammate? how can I most effectively get him in the ball? Is it going to we do a turnover if I try to make this pass? And I don't think Ivy has that. I think like at Purdue, I think he just showed it.

He doesn't know where guys tend to be. He can only, like you said, make really direct straight line passes. And he can just find himself kind of among the trees, so to speak, and then either force a bad pass or just take a bad shot, you know, even if he's around the rim. And often when you get that close to the rim, and I mean, the first, fact that he's going that fast means he's going to get there quickly. If you can easily find yourself without options. And this is a, you know, kind of a minor point.

But the guy often could just find himself too close to the rim and bowl somebody over. Like he, you know, that'll be an issue at the NBA level if he, if he can't, you know, control his body and just ends up taking a zillion charges. But yeah, the passing, I mean, do you think it has any possibility, you know, there's any high possibility of it getting there? Do you think that this is just probably what he is? Yeah, I mean, I think that there is room for improvement, like realistic improvement, especially with how weird the Purdue offense was, like watching it.

I mostly watch NBA basketball. So watching like this old-timey Purdue like team that runs basically through Zach Eady, like if he's weird or not, yes. I'm sure you saw that. And I feel like that like kind of alters how a defense is going to play. And so we guess we haven't really seen Ivy play in like a modern NBA system with you have the bigger floor. The, you know, the three point line is further out. And and then you can like really see Ivy like be one of those people who maximizes the increased space because of his speed. And maybe that'll make it easier on him. I agree totally that you'll see his percentage on everything go up if the pass is at least open to him.

And I feel like you're right. He plays himself kind of out of the pass. But what do you think his, what would you say his sealing is as a passer in the NBA? I mean, do you think that he has a lot of space to improve? Do you think it's just a question of Rannis? Or do you think that it's a question more of just his overall court vision and passing IQ? Or both? you think it's a mix of the two i would say it's a mix of the two i would say it's like maybe like he

could get to like halfway to like a john morat like court vision like jaw is a very very special passer and i think that's a huge reason why he works in the nba given like his lack of like elite shooting um yeah and obviously the the athleticism is just like fantastic and in pretty much every regard for job. But you have like, if he can at least be, I think there's room for realistic improvement and then you have a change of scenery, then maybe it'll come along. But I don't think it's like sky high. I don't see a world where he is like a true point guard.

Yeah, I agree with you there. And now a quick word from our sponsor. The NBA playoff action is nonstopic draft King's Sportsbook, an official sports betting partner of the NBA. This week, new customers can bet just $5 in any team to win and get $150 in free bets if they do. Looking to turn a small bet into a big payday during the NBA playoffs, the draft king's same game parlay as you can do just that. Create your own parlay by combining multiple bets like which team will win, total three is made, total rebounds, and more, and boom, you have a shot at an even bigger payout. Right now, all customers can place the same game parlay with three or more legs and get a free bet back up to $25 if one leg doesn't hit. Down with the drafting sportsbook app now. Use promo code TBPN, bet $5 in any NBA team to win their game and get $150 and free bets if they do.

That's promo code TBPN, only at drafting sportsbook. Minimum age and eligibility restrictions apply. See show notes for details. So I think there's one other problem area that's definitely worth drawing attention to, and that's his defense, which was very hit or miss at Purdue. Oh, to speak, to say the least. Yeah. Just questions about, can he make the right reads? Like does, yeah, I don't know. It's, I find it kind of hard to put into words. It's just, it was just all around. Could be quite ugly at times, you know, letting guys back door him, not making the right reads out of ball screens, just not positioning himself properly to stop drive so he could stay in front of guys. And it was, this is another area, just like his passing. It was hard for me to tell whether it's, well, slightly different.

on this one. It was, it's just, it's just hard for me to tell where maybe poor defensive IQ ends and just the lack of real effort begins. And those are both bad because, you know, bad defensive effort. And at the end, the NCAA level is sort of a red flag. But yeah, what did you see really in that respect? And definitely what, what do you think the, what do you think we're looking at in terms of IQ versus just effort? Um, I think with the athletic tools that he has, I, I, I somewhat, feel a little bit similarly about like him to aunt edwards because the thing about edwards is it was like okay he has these great tools but the effort and sometimes the the reeds weren't there however we've seen the the NBA that with proper effort it's come up and and he actually can be like serviceable

as a defender and so i think that there's uh upside for him to be serviceable. I don't think it's ever going to be a strength because I do have very serious concerns about his IQ. Yeah, so I'd probably say that he's a guard, so it matters less. But even still, I think

he could be a guy who could get hunted a little bit in the playoffs. But with the right, with the right effort, he's staying in front of everybody. Like, you know what I mean? Like, he can at least, like, I think be a better ISO guy and a better guy in rotations with just a little bit better positioning. And with that speed, like, you hope that, like, it kind of comes along a little bit.

Yeah. So, I mean, what did you see as his primary defensive weaknesses at Purdue? Effort and being terrible on rotations. Gotcha. Yeah, he did have those issues on rotations without a doubt. And just those instances also in which he just got caught ball watching and his assignment ended up well past him toward the basket. And of course, at that point, there's nothing you can do.

I mean, just to reiterate, I mean, you think that he can get himself to somewhere in the realm of like a net even presence on defense or maybe just a minor negative. Yeah, that's kind of how I see it, that like there is upside for him to not be awful which is better than I could say about Trey because Trey was never going to be a good defender in the NBA. So I think, yeah, a minor negative would be my realistic hope for him.

And with a guard, that's fine for me. I'm okay with my guards being minor negatives, at least one of my guards being a minor negative on defense. If, of course, the offense is then comparatively justifiably good. Yeah. I mean, for me, it would

hurt a little bit, kind of like kissing goodbye to the notion of having this sort of defensive lineup that the Celtics have. I've just, I've really enjoyed watching it. And though, I know we agree, and I think this is pretty much an indisputable fact that offense trumps defense in the NBA these days.

This is how the NBA wants it. And since the rule changes, like, I said this in the show before. Like, it was great. And in the mid, you know, mid-mid, early mid-2000s, early to mid-2000s, if you were a Spurs fan or a Pistons fan, and you loved watching your team just completely eat opposing teams on defense. It was not fun at all if you were a fan of another team. I mean, I don't doubt that these were incredibly boring games to watch.

So the NBA wanted more scoring, and the NBA, as recently as 2018, wanted more scoring, hence the Freedom of Motion Rules, which I think kind of made things go a little bit too far. But, all right, any other concerns before we move on to fit? One thing I think we should say that is the length is good. Like, he's three and he's like six foot nine. I've heard six foot ten. I mean, a similar length to Mathrin, but with like a smaller frame. Because Mathrin is about like going to be six five inches or so in the end.

He's six-foot, six-six and shoes about it. He's six-foot-four and one-quarter without shoes. Okay, thank you. Thank you for that. But Ivy is going to be obviously smaller than that. But the length and athleticism means that he can at least cover ground and get his hand up. And he had some really nice blocks at times. I'll give him that.

Like, he can get up into the air in a hurry and can really punish guards who are, just a hair slow on getting their shot up. Yeah, definitely. He could come out of nowhere and, you know, he had some decent weak side blocks. So I agree. That'll help him at the NBA level. It's always nice to be longer than not to be longer. So he's definitely got a good wing span.

It's funny. I think back to, I mean, if you think back to Reggie Jackson from 2015, 2016, he was able to make himself a decent enough defender. Reggie doesn't have good defensive IQ. But, you know, that was a weakness of his before he came to the distance was his defense overall. But he was able to make himself a decent enough defender just by working hard and having an obnoxiously long wingspan. Reggie Jackson without shoes is about six but two. He has a seven foot wingspan.

I mean, the guy is, I mean, that's obscenely long for it. Yeah, I mean, just imagine that. So length can go a long way, just length and effort. and that athleticism can help too. Of course, we've seen John Morant, who I don't think is quite as long, and it has excellent athleticism, but it's a big minus on defense, like a big minus on defense. Yeah, and the Memphis Grizzlies have to build their team around that.

It helps having Jaron Jackson on your team to kind of eat some of those tougher defensive assignments. Yeah, do you think that? Ivy could be better than than Jha? Because I feel like I don't really know what the situation is fully with Jah. I mean, I'll admit to that why his defense is quite so bad if it's just an issue of effort

or if it's or if it's an issue a combination of length and effort and IQ or what. I would like to think that Ivy can be hopefully significantly better than that at the NBA level. I think that because Ivy's like passing is never going to be as good as Jaws, I mean, at least except in like the very, very most unlikely of outcomes,

that you'd hope that he's going to be not just a huge minus, but just a little minus on defense. And it's kind of like, well, if you liked the idea of a athletic-ish two guard who's not very good at defense like Anthony Simons, then this kind of transitions into the fit with the pistons. You have at least like a potential option there of a guy who can generate offense next to Cade. Yeah.

Oh, I'd say I just want to go back at, I looked up around swings, man. He's at 6'7, so not too bad. But he is 20 pounds shorter, excuse me, 20 pounds lighter than Jaden Avi is right now. Jaden Avey is a guy you can see put on more mass as well. So, yeah, just to, like Trey easily bullied around and easily hunted in a way that I think he would not be quite as much if he weighed 20 pounds more. Yeah, impressive that Ivy is as fast as he is, you know, being quite built.

But yeah, like you said, good transition into the fit. Like you said, I think that transitions us well to the subject of fit, which is definitely going to be a big factor with Ivy in Detroit. So it's like we said in the last episode about Matherin, like I have some of before that. It's less about simple talent than it is about value. And fit can be a big part of value. And Cade's in the picture. I mean, Cade, the opportunity to draft Cade really change the phase of the rebuild for the Pistons because fit with him is going to matter. He's a guy who's going to be playing heavily on the ball. So, yeah, that just brings up the question of what value can I be bringing to the Pistons as a guy who maybe

be, you know, I think that the hope of the average team that drafts him is that he could turn into really a weed guard who's attacking from the perimeter with a ball in his hands on heavy volume, but he's not going to get that opportunity in Detroit. Yeah, exactly. I mean, Cade Cunningham is just in like a different realm as like a creator for himself and others. And you definitely want to be running offense through him rather than him like having most of his offense being created for him. I think that would be kind of a too far of an overcorrection to like Kade being overly ball dominant, which I think we all could appreciate at least having another guy who can

just go out there and least get his own shot next to Kade. And in that way, I feel like Ivy is a potential fit. I'm not as enamored because, again, again, the shooting is so much more raw, like we already discussed, with Matherin, who is just way further along in that regard. However, Ivy obviously has like attributes that I think could be compelling next decade, but it's more of an uncertain fit, in my opinion. Yeah, I would say that Ivy might have the higher ceiling in terms of what he can provide maybe higher than Matherin, but he's got a lot further to go in order to get there,

and his development is going to need to cut, in my opinion, just right. Like, we've talked about what Matherin could bring. I mean, he's a high-level shooter off the ball, you know, moves super well, can shoot motion threes, can shoot catch-and-shoe threes at a high percentage, and hopefully can provide some handling as well. With Ivy, I feel like you're going to always have a lot of his potential locked up and his ability to attack the interior. And I think that's why, like I said,

I think the average team that Dresson is just going to hope he can be that lead guard who's just who's on the ball a great deal. And in Detroit, I think you'd need to see him really develop a lot as a shooter, develop a lot as an off ball mover. And I think that the way that Maxie has played next to Hardin, since Hardin's arrival in Philly is a pretty good analog, just that Maxie went from being really, the primary handler on the perimeter, and he's not great as a primary handler. But it's really playing

off of Hardin, just really catching off the move or catching at the three-point line when Hardin passes and either shooting, which you can do at a high percentage, or driving into the interior and making a pass, just moving super well off the ball. So I feel like that's the trajectory Ivy would need to take in order to be a good fit with Cade. Because like you said, Cade's just in an entirely different realm as far as his ability to run an offense. Yeah, I kind of like that. comparison myself. It's not like a one-to-one by any stretch because Maxie and Ivy are very different players. However, if you kind of add like a little bit more shooting to Ivy's game, then I think maybe he'll be like a version of Maxie, and that's a very good player to play off of like a primary

handler in the back court. Just so I think as like a optimistic fit, that would probably be what we would hope for if we do land Ivy at five. Yeah, I just, when it comes down to him as opposed to Mathuron, I just feel like, yeah, with Ivy, I think his likely a trajectory toward being or is likely a route to being a really effective NBA player is just if he can get that playmaking down. And then you just give him the ball on heavy volleyball. and just say attack the interior, break down the defense and try to do something with it.

And if he's going to be that good fit with Cade, he's really going to, you're really going to need to see that shooting really, like you said, really need to come together. And it's just going to, it's also going to require a certain sort of buy-in. I mean, not everybody with Ivy's skill set is going to want to be playing a secondary role. I mean, Maxie, to his credit, just really embrace that role immediately, which I think just, really said a lot about his character and his focus on being a team player. But also was made possible by the fact that he made a gigantic improvement his three-point percentage.

I mean, he's only over 40% in the regular season in the playoffs. Yeah, no, exactly. If we do end up with Ivy, which I think is actually somewhat realistic, given the way that the draft order worked out, that he'll at least there's a good chance he's there, even though a lot of people have him ranked higher than fifth just because of like weird, uh, uh,

team needs with the top four or particular team needs, at least in terms of their back court. So I think it'd be fine experiment. And if we're bad, then we get another shot next year because we're on like the long time table and we don't need to rush it. Yeah, that's true. Um,

so how would you see the actions working between Cade and Ivy? It's assumed that Ivy can get it together as a shooter, that he can buy in fully into that off ball role. And, you know, in addition to just the Pistons having a secondary creator, you know, how would you see actions between he and Cade working out in the half court? Yeah, I think that obviously Ivy's going to be a tremendous, like, off ball player in terms of at least his ability to relocate. That's going to be an option for him. and so if we can get like k to draw either like penetrate with like his iso dribble stuff or run like pick and rolls

then what you're doing is you can be k can be dishing to ivy and ivy will then have the option to shoot or if he gets like a good close out then drive in and alternatively what i would really like to see in an ideal world is Ivy is able to then also draw pressure on himself and then get to Cade and then you have a mismatch like going that way where Ivy is then opening up offense for Cade, which I think would ideally be what we want in a back court or like its secondary creator role as a guy who can not just take ball handling pressure off, but just open up the court for Cade.

because he is just so much like the obvious first option on our team right now that we're very easy to like game plan against. Yeah, I think definitely I agree with what you said. You got a guy who can do number one take the onus off of K to do everything, which, you know, you don't want that to last in any case. Even you look, you look, it's just not good to have a one-trick pony offense like that, no matter how talented the player is. But what I could see is, you know, K, penetrating, driving.

drawing attention and then Ivy can either catch the ball at the three point line and attack through disjointed coverage or he can catch the ball off the move particularly like it's very nice to have a guy who can explode from above the break rather than just along the baseline. I think it's along the baseline it's a lot easier to defend and then Ivy's definitely get the acceleration and speed to do that. If Ivy can be a guy who can relocate quickly like you said around the perimeter and and shoot at a decent percentage like and just catch the ball. set and shoot quickly, though that might be asking a lot, given where he is right now as a shooter.

You know, bonus points there might be able to do some vertical spacing. And that just gives you another option that doesn't force you to rely completely uncayed. Now, if he doesn't get the shooting together, I feel like that's, and even just if he doesn't, like he's going to need to be a guy, I feel like who's going to be, in order to play this role, need to be dashing around the perimeter a lot. Do you feel like he was kind of a disinterested offball mover at Purdue? Yes, although at least in this respect, I kind of give him a little bit of a break just with how like forced that offense could be or at least I would say not force clunky. And there's not a lot of space for Ivy to find driving lanes.

And I guess it's like kind of impressive that he was able to have as much success as he did. I'm talking just in terms of when he doesn't have the ball. Like it seemed like he was just waiting to get the ball. Yes, yes. I think he also suffers from like a disappearing act, something that I kind of dock Paulo for to. I felt like he and Paulo in particular of the top guys can be pretty invisible when the play isn't going through them.

Yeah. So I feel like this would need to be, off-ball movement being something he'd really need to emphasize. size. At Purdue, I feel like he had two modes on the ball and waiting to get the ball, often stationary. So at the NBA level, he'd really need to be buying into moving around a lot off the ball. But it's also just if the shooting doesn't come together, like, I don't see much of a fit at all. Like, do you see much of a fit? Like, if Ivy continues to be a shaky, inconsistent shooter next decade, I feel like that would really ruin things.

You're asking me if I think Deeran Fox would be a good fit next to the lead. And the answer is no. Yeah. That's how I liken it. Like Ivy in a less good but also likely outcome, like a medium good outcome is like kind of a version of Deerrin Fox. And that is not a guy I think we want on our basketball team. Yeah, I would agree. I mean, I'd say this is the primary risk in picking Ivy is that like if,

on any other, on many other teams, like if he's kind of like a shaky three point shooter, but he's good enough on offense to make decent reads, make decent passes, then you can sort of run through him as a lead guard, but that's just a role he's not going to get in Detroit. It's like things are going to have to cut right with his shooting. And I don't think either of us is necessarily like super confident about that. No, no, I wouldn't place money on it.

Yeah. So that's definitely something I would say to be concerned about. So he's got, he's definitely got the upside there. if everything breaks right, then, you know, great. I think you've got a good number two guy next to K to set from the defense. But, yeah, I think it just deserves to be emphasized that there's not necessarily, I think, a high chance of that happening. I'd place a decent chance.

But, like, if he doesn't get it together that way, then, like, this pick has not gone well for the Pistons. No, that's, I think, entirely fair. But also, when you have the fifth overall pick, getting a guy. with that level of attributes, I think is a pretty good outcome, like even if it doesn't go well, just because you can at least, you're betting that there's a chance that he actually changes the direction of your franchise. Yeah, I just feel like his ability to do so on the Pistons will be less so than if he had his own team, so to speak. Like, just that on the Pistons,

you're going to be asking him, they'd be asking him to play a significantly different role. and you just got to hope that he finds a different way to be as effective. So I just feel like he's got a longer distance to go. Does you still feel that you would take Matherin over him at number five? Absolutely, like every single day of the week. I'm more and more confident in my Matherin take as time has gone on. Gotcha. Yeah, I mean, Ivy, I would think long and hard between the two,

just because Ivy's potential upside, if he can bring it together is just so tantalizing. but it comes down to two things again just that fit and what he'll need to do on the pistons in particular to provide that kind of that sort of value you know versus matherin who i just think has as a higher just a greater chance of providing high value to the pistons you know with much less in the way of changes in terms of his progression trajectory of his progression all right so let's talk ceiling and floor. Yeah, unfortunately, his floor, I would have to say if he's just a guy, you know, if the Pistons draft him, he doesn't get the shooting together or just,

it's also possible that he doesn't really get it together in terms of reads and passes. And then he's just a super athletic guy who will be constantly exploited by NBA defenses, even if he's not on the Pistons. I mean, like, Ivy's got holes in this game. We've gone over them. NBA defenses will ruthlessly exploit any weakness that you have. Yeah, I think that a, like a worst case scenario is that he's like faster Hamadu. Like everything goes completely off the rails.

I should clarify. Yeah, but would you say that that's an entirely unlikely outcome? I wouldn't say that it's the most likely outcome, but I think it's like, I mean, I think that it's a realistic floor. Yeah, I would have to agree with you there. What would you see as a ceiling? I mean, with a guy like Ivy, he almost has, like, in my mind, two ceilings. It's like, oh, everything, if he hits all of his, like, milestone markers that we're kind of putting, like, with the shooting, passing, blah, blah, blah. Then you're looking at a guy who's, like, a version of John Morant with a better shot, who's longer and potentially less exploitable on defense.

but less passing. But with less passing, yes, yes, that is key. And if you're looking at, and so that's a guy who rightly would be considered for number one overall. And there has been a little bit of buzz that he could go higher than four or five, which is kind of where people are mocking him right now. And so if you really bet all in on that super like 1% centile outcome, 99% percentile outcome rather, then okay. However, I think more realistically, he's kind of a guy who is like kind of Deerrin Fox, maybe a little more functional because the shooting doesn't look as bad. And that's not like something

I love, but he could also morph a little bit because he's still pretty raw. Maybe he morphs into a more off ball guy. Yeah. Yeah, I think I think that would be. ideal in any situation, but particularly with the pistons. Yeah. I know this is going back to fit a bit, but I feel like with any player, if you have to say, well, it could work out, you know, if and then, you know, multiple conditions, then the fit just isn't particularly good. And you could say, and to be rightly said that any, any championship need needs multiple handlers, but it's just so important that neither of those handlers, that those handlers provide like one plus one equals two value,

at least. And that's, you're not getting really bad value between them because they lose a lot when they're off the ball. And Cade, I think he'll be a good shooter, but he's by far at his best on the ball, too. Yeah. Oh, right. Breaking a balance. Just, yeah.

Yeah, definitely. Yeah. And it's about, it's about finding, you always want your key players to be more than the sum of their parts. It's a problem when they're less than the sum of their parts. Yeah, that's why, like, max contract players can be like, they add even more than one plus one equals two. they add like one plus one equals 50.

Well, that would be nice. It goes really well. Like with LeBron and AD, like when they are both healthy and LeBron's a little older, yada, yada. But basically that's a combo that is dreamlike. You're like, what do you do? You just lose. Like, and they ran over teams in the bubble. Yeah, yeah, definitely.

Yeah, I mean, LeBron was pretty much the point guard at that stage. and yeah, that was just, that was a really good combination, definitely. Okay, so moving on to listeners submit it, this has become a long episode already, so we're just going to go with one that we have in the docket. So with regards to Isaiah Stewart, what do you think the value of a center is, it can switch everything in terms of the de-emphasis unsized from the five-spot that's been demonstrated in the playoffs. Yeah, this is, this question with respect to what we've been talking about

probably a couple episodes back in terms of, or maybe this was last episode, whatever the case, like about the change in how centers, how certain traits amongst the percenters are valued in the playoffs. I know that we, I think this is, yeah,

we talked about Aitin the last week, right? You and I, I can't remember. Yeah, we did. We talked about, like, Aiton and Stewart as, like, a version of, like, a, I did at least talk about him as, like, like a potential Grant Williams, ask if the three ball really comes along?

Grant Williams or, or, uh, I guess I feel like a TB, yeah, I mean, if, if the three ball comes along, I feel like he'd be Robert Williams without the verticality, but with, with the, with the space, but yeah, in any case, this is just, this is in the, in the realm of, you know, what we've seen from centers in the playoffs, like how valuable switch coverage is and how teams have been very willing to go small, even with guys who can't really serve on the pick and roll. To a degree, we're talking like Cleaver and Traymond played center against goodness gracious hell. I'm forgetting which team the Warriors played in the first round. Yeah, even played center to a point in the Grizzly series. But yes, I've been informed by prize behind the scenes that it was

the nuggets they played against. So in any case, yeah, you've seen just the success of, we've seen just how useful the ability to switch effectively is for a center and how drop coverage isn't, you know, centers who are very focused, whose utility really comes from drop coverage, lose some value because they're going to be exploited. So I think this question is around, well, how does Stewart fit into this equation? Can he be a successful postseason center for the pistons? And what do you think? I mean, why don't you start? Yeah, I, it's just tough because, um, If you think about like Al Horford, and I love thinking about Al Horford as a basketball player, but Stewart is just nowhere near, like, his level of, like, fluidity, especially in range.

He's very fluid player, but, like, the ability to, like, extend himself, like, on the perimeter and just be so multi-positional on defense. Like, Stewart's very much a five. and that's something that I think, like you can play Horford next to another big and it still works, you know? Like, Stuart, I think, is less of that flexibility. But maybe if you're thinking with like the most optimistic lens possible,

okay, his game actually improves because he is so switchable because he is so good at staying in front of guys even though he's not the fastest cat. Yeah, definitely. Stewart is an excellent switcher. I mean, Stewart is just a high-level defender overall. He's a good interior defender. I mean, he's a solid rim protector.

He's very hard to beat in the paint in general. And he has a high-level switch defender. I mean, legitimately excellent switch defender. I mean, teams, you saw it, like, for example, Edwana even tried to throw Tray Young at him, and Trey Young is very good at exploiting sort of, is very good at exploiting good matchups against centers. And he couldn't get by him.

I'm missing somebody else, whatever the case. Stewart can stay in front of almost anybody. I'd say the issue with him just comes back to verticality. In the regular season, you really want a good role man. And in the playoffs, when you've seen teams just go small,

like with Cleaver or when Draymond played center, I mean, these are kind of niche situations in which it was just the best thing to do and it was worth giving up somebody who may be stronger on the boards or who may be able to catch lobs. So in niche situations,

in the playoffs. I would say, you know, sure, you've got Stewart ready to come in and maybe start at center or just provide really good minutes. But I feel like you would still want somebody who was just the stronger interior score, a vertical spacing threat, and just a better rebounder overall, I think at the starting center spot. I just, unless you can find, if you, like, it's like I've said in the past, if you can find a guy who's a really good role man at power forward, then Stewart becomes a lot more palatable. But, yeah, I would say more just situationally useful as a starting center maybe in the playoffs rather than just the suited to start overall just based on where the league is going.

Yeah, I don't think that that's actually like a really bad outcome for Stewart either if he's going to just come in and be a matchup center. Yeah, definitely. I think he's got a lot of utility in the postseason. Like, you know, you bring him in and he could be a very good matchup in like series. like what's the, I mean, I hope, you know, if the Pistons can somehow somewhere manage to find a guy who can play good drop coverage and switch coverage and shoot threes and as a vertical space are great, where they would find such a guy who knows because that, you know, this one even

exists right now. And, but whatever the case, yeah, I mean, if you just have him and he can come in in certain matchups where it makes perfect sense to go small and to have an extra switchable center, then great. Yeah, I think as well, long term as the bench, you know, energy center, matchup center. Or, yeah, if you can find the power forward who's taller and can run the role. Yeah, like, it's also that question of, like, athletic balance, too, with the team. And just not getting, like, caught slow-footed, because that, that also impacts, like, how teams are going to scheme against you on defense and how, like, they know where to cheat,

and that's really key. even more so important than in the postseason when it's all about like where you can exploit the small inefficiencies. I think back to the series of the Lakers in the bubble against the nuggets and how important Dwight Howard was. And that's, I think, another example of just like having guys on your roster who can just come in and be good and be a problem in the right situation. like you know they they didn't play dwight Howard or javel mcgee at all um against the clippers or who was that they they played the nuggets the nuggets yeah yeah yeah so um they only uh but they came in and they were just like a force um and that against a really good player and like like

Dwight Howard just gave Yokech so much trouble. And it's not that Dwight Howard is like this perfect, like, center, but in that matchup, he was the right call in that situation. And so having a guy in your back court long term, or sorry, front court long term, talking about too many guards here, in your front court, who can just come in and provide a different look for you?

I think that's really valuable. and maybe Weaver saw something in how the league is going with the switchability and and Stewart will become just only even more valuable as time goes on because he is just so solid overall defensively. Yeah. And I think you brought up something about the athleticism that I cannot believe. I forgot about this because I am constantly harping on the value or the pitfalls of not having too many kind of MBA athletes in the starting lineup.

up and, you know, Cade and Bay are functionally, like, somewhat below average NBA half-court athletes. Yeah, with Stewart there, you've got three. And that's a problem unless you've got, like, really two elite half-court athletes at the other positions. But, all right, well, this certainly turned into a long episode. So why don't we call it here? Thanks again, Price for joining us. Yeah, no, this was great. I love watching tape, and this gives me an excuse to watch even.

more they not be throw up clunkers. Just, just rimming shots out. Yeah, great. Yeah, presumably to somewhat more enjoyable things about it, too. But I was definitely impressed that you watch that much tape on a shooting form. So, yeah, if you want to follow the podcast on Twitter, it's at To the Basketpod. That's T.O. Not the number two.

That's a quick programming note. It won't be an episode next week. We'll be back the week after. And, yeah, next episode will be Keegan Murray. So thanks for listening. Catch you that.