The Bill Simmons Podcast - All-NBA Midseason Picks and ‘Yellowstone’ the Unicorn With Justin Verrier, Rob Mahoney, and Matthew Belloni

Episode Date: January 12, 2022

The Ringer's Bill Simmons is joined by Justin Verrier and Rob Mahoney to discuss midseason All-NBA teams, honorable mentions, Ben Simmons trade rumors, why the Trail Blazers should "blow it up," MVP odds, and more (2:14). Then Bill talks with Matthew Belloni of Puck News about 'Yellowstone' and its streaming debacle, TV shows that were reinvigorated by pandemic viewing habits, the Golden Globes boycott, best options to host the Oscars and more (1:12:21). Host: Bill Simmons Guests: Justin Verrier, Rob Mahoney, and Matthew Belloni Producer: Kyle Crichton Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey, if you're trying to figure out the round one playoff straight for the NFL, check out the Ringer Gambling Show. Hosted by Warren Sharp and Joe House and Ben Solak and Chris Vernon. They are breaking down all the angles this week. Also breaking them down on the Ringer NFL Show as well. Two great podcasts, both football. You should listen to both of them. Check them out.

It's the Bill Simmons Podcast presented by FanDuel. Football is in full action. FanDuel's highest rated sports book is the best place to bet it all. We've been doing pretty well on million dollar picks this year. I love the first month of the season because you have to go into the season thinking,

I think Pittsburgh's going to be good. I think the Chargers are going to be good. I think Seattle's going to be good. And then trying to back what you think in those first few weeks and then zag the other way if you were wrong. You could bet on new and fun markets on FanDuel, like to catch your pass, same game parlays, highest scoring game across the Sunday slate, offensive TDs, the next drive.

They have so much stuff. It's crazy. The app is safe and secure and easy to use. And when you win, you'll get paid instantly. Plus look out for Fanuel Squares this season. Here's what you have to do. Visit fanduel.com slash BS to download America's number one sports book. The Ringer is committed to responsible gaming. Please visit rg-help.com to learn more about the resources and helplines available and listen to the end of the episode for additional details. You must be 21 plus and present in select states. Gambling problem called Win 100800-GAMBLER or visit rg-help.com. This episode is brought to you by Prime Video. You know me, I can't go a day without sports. I really can't. And now Monday nights are all about hockey. That's right. There's a new exclusive home for streaming Monday night NHL hockey, and it's on Prime. All season long, watch Prime Monday Night Hockey deliver unreal

plays, the biggest goals, can't miss moments. Matthews, McDavid, Crosby, the NHL's best. They're all on Prime. Prime Monday Night Hockey. It's on Monday. It's on Prime. We're also brought to you by the Ringer Podcast Network. I broke down episode nine, season one of Yellow Jackets, a terrific show with Joanna Robinson and Chris Ryan. A lot of theories, a lot of theories we did on that one. But you can check out Prestige for that.

And we did Euphoria and we have a couple other shows on there. Station 11 is going to be on there this week. So that's a very good feed. Check that out. New Rewatchables went up as well. Monday night did the 30th anniversary of Juice, me and Big Waz and Van Lathan. So that out. New rewatchables went up as well. Monday night did the 30th anniversary of Juice, me and Big Waz and Van Lathan.

So that happened. FanDuel Sportsbook now legal in New York, as I keep telling you. I'm going to have a same game parlay on Wednesday night that I'm going to try to steer toward the people of New York in some way. So go to FanDuel on Wednesday and they'll have it. But I don't know what it is yet. You always have to wait with this stuff until the last minute because COVID, but that will be happening. Coming up on this podcast,

I wanted to do some mid-season All-NBA awards. So I brought in Rob Mahoney and Justin Barrier, and we tried to figure it out. If the season ended today, who would make the three All-NBA teams? Led to a lot of fun discussions, some fake trades in there. There's no way you won't enjoy it. I'm sorry. And then Matt Bellany from Puck, he came on and we talked about Yellowstone and how it became the most bizarre streaming story of the streaming era and just the impact of that show and how it is affecting multiple streaming services and the lessons we can learn. Talked about that, did a little Golden Globes, talked about the industry as a whole.

So basketball and Hollywood for you today. It's all next first. Pro Chip! All right, Justin Barrier and Rob Mahoney are here. You can see them on the Ringer NBA show or listen for them. And you can read Rob on the ringer.com, a wonderful website as well. We're almost at the halfway point of the NBA. I think technically we are. Some teams have had 40 games, 41 games. And this is when a lot of people start trying to pick all-star teams, stuff like that. I have a much more fun conversation for us. All NBA, which I think matters more. I don't really

care who makes the all-star game. And in general, like, I think we spend too much time arguing about DeJounte Murray or, you know, whoever, um, what is the all NBA going to look like this year? We now have a half season sample size and there's some simple ones you just throw in and then it gets a lot more complicated. The first place it gets more complicated is that last spot on the first team OMBA guys.

Yeah. Because I think we can agree Giannis and Durant and Jokic are all on there. Right? Those three. And Steph, right?

Yeah, but I'm going to say that just those three is like if we're going to go front court Oh, sure. two back court guys however we want to do it. So we're all

So we all agree LeBron is not first team then? Yeah. Well, hold that thought, Varian. Giannis, Durant, Jokic, Curry. Yep. Fifth spot available. So now we're in this whole nebulous,

what is this team allowed to look like space? Because the LeBron stands will be like, well, LeBron should be the fifth guy. He's one of the five best players in the league. You're just trying to leave him off because you hate LeBron. No, I want the team that at least resemble a basketball team. So let's start there. Rob, when you do an all NBA team, what are your parameters? Because mine are, I want this to look like a fiveperson team that would actually be able to play with each other is where I default to. I'm not saying I'm right or wrong.

What is your default? I use a similar framework, although I'm also trying to look at like the play-by-play data. Like, did this guy actually play that position this season? Like, we'll get into the DeMar DeRozan conversation at some point. He is not a guard.

He's not a guard this season. Has not played guard. And I think LeBron is in an interesting space because offensively, he's one position. Defensively, he's a different one. I mean, shit, you can make the argument Nikola Jokic could be the point guard on the first team All-NBA based on function, but he

plays center. So I tried to go a little more by the book on this spot, but this one is hard. The fifth, first team, that last guard spot, I don't know that there's a candidate that really jumps out at you unless you're going with LeBron. What's your process, JV?

Pretty similar. I think if it's within reason, I'm willing to blur the lines a little bit, but like Rob said, it's a lot harder. Even Giannis is a case of he's playing majority of his minutes at power forward, but he's played a lot of center this year. And if anything, you could say that that has been one of his biggest contributions

to the team this year is being able to pivot to center and to cover for Lopez's absence. So it's really tough. It's funny. And we've talked and we've written about it and we've talked on multiple pods about, I don't think it's necessarily positionless basketball, but I do think it's,

you have a point, the point guard position, which not everyone qualifies for. That might be a list of less than 15 people, which is why I think we all value Jalen Brunson maybe a little more than most. He's like, oh, that's actually an old school point guard under the age of 25. Then you have the perimeter guys. And then you have the guys who can basically defend the paint. And those are kind of the three territories. So I don't know if Giannis is a center or not, but I know he functions like whatever a center should function like in 2022. I watched him play Charlotte last night. He was playing center.

I don't know if you would call it center in this day and age. So he is whatever new center is, center 2.0, whatever. Jokic is a great point. Jokic is their point guard, but he's obviously not a point guard. So what the fuck is he? I don't even know how to describe him. That's one of the things that makes him so great. But then you go to

somebody like Durant, it's a little more traditional. That guy's a forward. I even tried to think about it ultra-modernly where it's like, what if we just got rid of all the positions and it's like ball handlers

and wings and big men, but then it actually becomes way more complicated because what is Giannis if not a ball handler? What is LeBron and Jokic if not a ball handler? So you would actually have

five ball handlers. I just don't understand why you can't just also do the five best players. I do like your idea that you can't just also do the five best players. I do like your idea that you keep it somewhat similar to a lineup. But if you have that in mind, I would like a little bit more flexibility because I do think that fifth spot in this first team has to be a guard now. And am I discrediting someone like LeBron and putting someone like John Morant

on that team? And does that feel right? Because he's not the fifth best player in the league. It's difficult. Right. And if you're going to put DeRozan, which he made the point is he's not a guard this year, but he's a perimeter guy. Yeah, right. He could play guard. And I don't

know if there's really a difference between how he plays basketball and Zach Levine plays basketball other than when they're on the other end. If you have like a taller person playing the three, he's probably more likely to guard that person than Zach Levine. But when you watch them, they're both perimeter guys. I think to call DeRozan like a quote unquote forward is a little weird, but at the same

time, that's kind of what he is. So if he's going to be our fifth guy, then why can't LeBron be the fifth guy? That's where it gets confusing. That's a good point. What can a guy theoretically do versus what has he actually done in terms of position? We get into some foreign territory pretty quickly, but I'm totally with you.

DeRozan is his wing, as anyone else we're going to talk about for a backcourt spot. Why we get stuck in that. I don't know. Other than this is the template the NBA has unfortunately given us. Well, one fun thing about, and I'm just, just spoiler, LeBron's not on my first team. Cause you don't like LeBron, man. But if, if LeBron is on that first team and you have Giannis, Durant, Jokic, Curry, and LeBron,

I'm pretty sure that those five guys would figure out how to play together. Yeah. And would be pretty fun to watch. And LeBron would, I guess, be the quote-unquote, LeBron or Jokic would be kind of the facilitator in that lineup. I really want to put DeRozan on the first team even though he's not a guard because I think he makes sense with that lineup. I really want to put DeRozan on the first team, even though he's not a guard,

because I think he makes sense with that team. If it's Giannis, Durant, Jokic, Curry, and DeRozan, I think those five guys make sense together. DeRozan is a perimeter guy. Curry's not a natural point guard, obviously. He really plays off the ball more than anything, but you could use Jokic almost as like the Draymond in that thing. And those five guys make sense.

More importantly, I feel like DeRozan, the season he's had, the impact he's had in the Bulls, the fact that they're the number one team in the East, the game winners he's made, the confidence he's given them, his flexibility, the fact that he's playing the best basketball of his life and has really kind of made himself into a top 10 guy this year, no question. I kind of want to reward him from that. So I think that's my pick. Who do you have, Rob? So I went Chris Paul and I wrestled with this one. Really? Wow. And I think this case is a little bit more holistic. You know, like the Suns are on pace

for 63 wins right now. I would say Paul is the central reason why. And some of that is your team, you weather more when Chris Paul is on the floor. You can keep your spacing, you can sustain runs, you can bounce back faster. But also on a macro level, I think he just makes your team

more resistant to the kinds of issues that we're seeing with some of these other disappointing teams this season. Whatever's going on with the Hawks, that hasn't really happened to a Chris Paul team. And this is a franchise that is coming off a letdown from being up 2-0 in the finals, had a major contract dispute in the preseason

that could have had a cloud over the whole season. And oh yeah, remember when there was massive franchise altering allegations against Robert Sarver that could have sent this whole group into a tailspin. And you never hear a single story about how this group has lost focus, about how they're underperforming,

about how they're not playing up to their standards. I think Chris Paul's the reason for that. So his numbers don't click the way these other four guys do. But in terms of holistic impact, I think CP is your guy. I had him initially in the spot. And then from a numbers standpoint, I just felt like I was overrating him

just because I like what he does so much. You know, he's basically, he's 14 and 10 a night. It's a lot for 14 points a game. It's a lot to put him on first team. But on the flip side, that's a debate that I think is a really important one to hit. He's not about the stats. This is the same argument with Isaiah Thomas, the old Isaiah Thomas from the Pistons. When people start comparing him to the modern guys, they're like, oh, look at his stats. I was there for the Isaiah thing. He could have scored 30 a game if he wanted

to. That wasn't the point of what he was trying to do. He was trying to have the best possible team and only score when he needed to, which is what Chris does. That's why I don't want to hang the 14 on him. To me, it's more of a I just want to commemorate the Rosen. I don't think he'll end up as a first team all-NBA guy, but I really did think

strongly about the Chris thing for all the reasons you laid out. Who do you have, JB? I have Morant. I can put together a pretty good statistical argument for him. Just the fact that the Grizzlies have the fourth best offense. They're clearly one of the biggest surprises in the NBA. They are a half game now, I believe, behind the Utah Jazz. And so they're not too far out from the best teams record-wise in the league.

But I think his best case is actually that he literally flies through the air to the point where when he blocked a shot the other night against the Lakers, he hit his face on the backboard. He's doing things that I haven't seen in a very long time. I don't know if he's like modern Derrick Rose or if he's like Russell Westbrook with the three-pointer. He's basically an origin story superhero figuring out how to fly through the air on a daily basis. And it's just absolutely remarkable. So I think he checks all of the boxes because like you guys, I dinged Paul's case based on the pure statistical record, especially when you like lay it out on a page and you see like how much more Moran is contributing and how efficiently he's doing it.

This isn't the case where he's just like, he's racking up points. I mean, he's shooting almost 40% from three. I just think like he, he does everything for me to give him that first spot. Moran's 25, six and seven.

He's almost a 50, 40, 80 guy, which is pretty great because the book on him earlier in his career was just let him shoot. He'll shoot. Great. He'd give him those, but now you can't. Rob and I talked last week on this pot. He's basically unguardable now. You can't stay in front of him. There's a fearlessness with him that you could see it in that Laker game. Was that two nights ago? Where it's just, he was the best guy on the floor. And LeBron was in that game. LeBron's playing really well right now.

And Ja was the guy. So if you're talking about, if I'm putting somebody on first team all NBA, you have to have some real pedigree at that point, which is what makes the DeRozan case interesting. It speaks to what, how well he's played this year. And people will be like, well, he was doing this on the Spurs.

No, he wasn't. He went not at this level, not this consistently, and not with the level of kind of care that when you watch the Bulls, he's just so confident in every single decision he's going to make now. I'm not saying he wasn't 80, 90% before,

but you watch him now and it's just like over and over again, the right decisions. I have to watch Jason Tatum every night. And he's a guy who some days he'll have it, right? Like he played a really good game against the Knicks the other day, the home game. And it was like, oh, this is Jason is the facilitator and he's not dribbling the ball out of bounds. And he's not taking, you know, he's not dribbling for 20. He's actually like using his teammates. In other games, he doesn't have it. DeRozan actually seems really fun to play with.

And I think one of the things that's been stunning to me is watching Levine, who's in a contract year, who I think was the quote unquote superstar on that team, kind of take a back seat. And I'm not 100% sure he likes it, but 90% sure he likes it. What's your take on the little alpha thing there with them, Rob? I mean, I think it works. Whatever balance they're striking. And the thing about Levine, I think he has a really good all-NBA case too.

I'm sure we'll talk about him. He still gets plenty of opportunities to cook, to create in isolation, to do pick and roll stuff. It just so happens that he's one of the best off-ball shooters in the league. And so he and DeRozan are just a perfect perfect pairing together like there's a really interesting thing going on as we get into the deeper ranks of these guard categories where Levine is exactly what DeRozan needs and Devin Booker is exactly what Chris Paul needs and how you navigate those things and what you choose to reward really

interesting question but I think where DeRozan comes back into this first team conversation is, are we trying to build the best first team we can or are we trying to build the best 15 we can? Because I think there are lots of great guards that you would want to make room for. The third team forward gets a little dicey, I think. And so if we can find a forward spot for DeRozan

instead of a guard, then you can get one of those other guards in down the line. That's kind of how I looked at it. Yeah, that's smart. The fundamental thing is in crunch time, they were playing Caruso and Lonzo and DeRozan and Zach Levine. So you can make a case like Zach Levine is also weirdly a forward in this. I fully admit I did not see the DeRozan thing coming. And it's been awesome to watch. So I guess that the first team question to watch the rest of the way is, what does LeBron have to do to play himself into that fifth spot? Because if he's going to do what he did the last two weeks,

at some point, there's no holding him off. If he's just going to be, you know, 30 plus, nine and nine every night and doing everything. And that just keeps going. And they ended up getting like a six, seven seed Justin, like at some point he can't, he won't be denied. And there's also real pedigree with him, which I think matters with the NBA. It's like, you kind of have to lose your spot, which is why when we talk about Luca later, you really have to have kind of have to lose your spot, which is why when we talk about Luka later, you really have to have a shit season

to lose your spot once you're like a consistent first team, second team guy. But do you see a scenario, Justin, where LeBron seizes this by the balls and by the end of this year, it's Giannis Durant,

Jokic, Curry, LeBron? I actually had him on my first team when I did just an early knee-jerk reaction. Like, who do I think are the five best guys right now? And team when I did just the early knee-jerk reaction, like, who do I think are the five best guys right now? And then when I did the statistical work behind it is when I elevated Jokic.

And I think the biggest difference was on defense, whereas Jokic has just completely transformed himself defensively to the point where the Nuggets are better defensively when he's on the court, whereas LeBron is a negative still and that's kind of a little warp just because he has been able to pivot to center uh and and plug that hole and do whatever is necessary for his team and those those lineups of late have kind of gotten smashed including uh against the grizzlies but that is where it tilts the scale but like in terms of just personal improvement, in terms of LeBron's individual development, he's been on another level even at age 37 to the point

where he's shooting a career high in three-point percentage and a career high attempts, which is the one thing we've been saying about LeBron for the past five, six years. That is the next part of his game that he really needs to adapt to. And while like, I would probably admit that a lot of those attempts are him just kind of lazily running up the court and just like jacking, especially later in the game. But like, he just has this whole new dimension where he's essentially until Anthony Davis comes back playing three and D center,

which is like, it's unbelievable. And we'll see if he like, he logs the minutes in the games in order to still be in the first team conversation. But in terms of just like LeBron's individual progression, he's even getting better, which is wild to say. Yeah, you think about him historically. I've been so fascinated by this small ball center thing with him

because there's so few players in the league who have been able to reinvent themselves as on the court basketball players a few times during their career, right? That's like the hardest thing to do. I think Magic's a really good example where Magic, the first season is not even a point guard. He's really not the point guard for the first three seasons there. It's a lot of Norm Nixon and there's a lot of like sharing and he's really more of a guard and when they win that 82 title that that's like one of my weirdly favorite magic seasons where he's not the point guard really at all and he's almost a triple double the whole season and is this really really

good defensive player back then and it's just kind of playing four positions and filling in wherever you need him and then as he gets older he he becomes the point guard, obviously. But when you look at LeBron, first how skinny he was the first five years. And now he's basically like he came out of the Michael Tarr, Michael Jordan factory and is like playing very similar game to that. And then watching him evolve in Miami and then watching him evolve again from like a power strength standpoint in those last four Cleveland years. That last year that when it was basically just him and he was just bully balling everybody and he had finally figured out like how to get rid of that JJ Barea shadow from the 2011 finals when he could even post up a six foot guy. And now he's moved into this weird three ball center thing or small ball center thing. And I don't know, historically, I think

like all this stuff's going to help when we have the Jordan conversation 50 years from now, or all these different points of his career. I didn't think he could do this. And now I'm starting to wonder, is this kind of who he should be? And would it make more sense, Rob, actually, let's go to break, but I'm going to leave you with this hanger. Would it make more sense if he played with Carl Anthony Towns and Anthony Davis?

Mull that one over, and we're going to go to a break. This episode is brought to you by my old friend, Miller Lite. I've been a big fan of Miller Lite, man, since college days when I was allowed to have beer. I think nephew Kyle is a fan too. Miller Lite keeps it simple for us.

Undebatable quality, great taste. Picture this. It's game day. All the gang's here. You're tailgating outside the stadium. It's a great time for beer. Or how about when you're standing at the grill and the smell of sizzling burgers is in the air? Moments like that. Or when you want a light beer that tastes like beer, that's delicious.

You don't want to load up on those heavier beers and then you only have two of them. Then you feel tired. Your stomach feels full. Miller Lite, it's your friend. It just accompanies whatever else you're doing. You're super happy with it. Opening an ice cold Miller Lite can signal the beginning of Miller time. Miller Lite is the light beer with all the great beer tastes we like. 90 calories per 355 mil can. So why not grab some Miller Lites today? Your game time tastes like Miller time. Must be legal drinking age. This episode is brought to you by Movember. The mustache is back with a vengeance. Look at Travis Kelsey. Before he rocked that Super Bowl ring, he rocked that super soup strainer. Grow a mustache for Movember. You'll do great things too. You won't

win the Super Bowl, but your fundraising will support mental health, suicide prevention, and prostate and testicular cancer research. And if you don't want to grow a mustache, you could still walk or run 60 kilometers, host an event, or set your own goal and mow your own way. Do great things this November. Sign up now. Just search Movember. The ideal LeBron teammate for this stage of his career? Kyle, turn the camera on. Carl Anthony Towns or Anthony Davis? Who is a better fit for him, Rob? I mean, defensively, I have a hard time seeing it with Towns. I think we all do.

Just because LeBron, he does want to take it a little slow defensively sometimes in the regular season. He will have some possessions where he's kind of standing around when he should rotate. But it's almost like he's a better teammate for Davis than he would be for Towns in a lot

of ways. Because really it applies to this whole Lakers team. LeBron is their last best chance on so many of these possessions because of that three-point shooting. Like his ability to hit that rock back three with two seconds left on the shot clock, it's really the only chance they have of sustaining half-court

offense. And so a Towns team would be super dynamic, super interesting, but in terms of getting the best out of a player like Davis and what he could give you defensively, I just love what LeBron does and that his version of the old man game is apparently just taking 30 footers and being great at them. It's inexplicable. It's certainly a dimension of his game. I did not expect at any point. This was the shot everybody wanted him to take for eight years, first eight years of his career. And now teams like begrudgingly just have to go up and guard him 30 feet from the basket because he's made enough of those weird off-balance threes, which now all of a sudden he's barreling into the paint. He's going to get any call. The refs are going to give him anything. And he's become this hard. So I almost want him more with spacing. What do you think, JV? Eileen Davis, for the reasons Rob mentioned,

although who's the best point guard that Towns has ever played with. Yeah. Because Towns is potentially one of the greatest offensive centers of all time right now. Like, we can get to him later, but he's verging on a 50-40-80 season from center. And so I can't imagine how much better offensively he would be coming off of a screen for LeBron James. In the same way that LeBron took Davis to another level and just even eased his burden

in terms of leadership and all that other stuff that we ding Davis for and now we ding Towns for, I would love to see them play together. I just like the way Towns' career is going versus how Davis' career is going.

People are like, well, Davis got hurt. That's not fair. I don't like 20 pounds heavier Davis. And I've said that on multiple pods. I don't like the center direction that he's going. And I think he's going to have a hard time staying on the court. I really liked what I've seen from Towns this year and we're going to get to him later, but that's a weird team. I wouldn't want to play with D'Angelo Russell. I really like Edwards. I'm not sure I'd want to play basketball with him 82 times a year and in general

like the pieces are just odd but I like how Towns has played and I think that team I think they're 20 and 20 right now or somewhere around there but I do think that team could I don't want to say go on a run but I do think that team could finish four or five games over 500

and I do think they have talent let's go to second team. So our final candidates. Now I'm wavering on DeRozan. I wonder if I cheated with DeRozan. Because it's basically Jokic is the center. Giannis is the center forward. Durant's a forward.

Curry's a guard. And I wonder if I should have had to put a second guard there. What's the rule? You guys rule for me. Where are you on it, Justin? I think he's definitively a power forward, if only because that has been the story of his season

and what's helped the Bulls be so successful this season is that multi-guard lineup. And so I kind of lean that he's a forward. Yeah, I feel like I'm cheating putting him at guard. I don't want to cheat. So who would it be if it wasn't Rosen? I'm going to stick with my original one, which was Rob's pick of Chris Paul. I think that's

the right pick. It's the right pick. It's the ethical pick. I'm an ethical guy. I care way too much about this stuff. And I feel like if I'm going to cheat and put DeRozan on there, then that opens the LeBron discussion. And now we have to argue LeBron DeRozan.

And I'm not sure who's been better. So I'll put Chris there. All right. Second. So Giannis Durant, Jokic, Curry. Chris for me and Rob. And Justin has John Morant. Second team.

I think we all have LeBron. Yep. Do we all have Embiid? Yeah. We all have DeRozan. Rob, you and I have John Moran here, right? That's right. He has to be here. He has to be on one of the two teams.

So then, Justin, do you have Chris Paul here in the Joss spot? Yeah, I have Paul. Okay. I think that's the top nine in some order, however you want to do this with the two teams, which now leads to the second fun discussion. Who's in this 10th spot,

which really is supposed to be a guard? And I had Donovan Mitchell, and I think that's the right pick. Who do you have, Rob? I got to be honest, I really wrestled with this one in part because of Mitchell. I ended up with Trey Young somehow.

And I went back and forth on it and ultimately came down to this for me, that I don't think it makes sense to hold it against Trey Young that the Hawks have been one of the worst defensive teams in the league. He contributes to that. But his jurisdiction, the offenseks have been one of the worst defensive teams in the league. He contributes to that, but his jurisdiction, the offense,

has been off the charts, has been great. It's more of a maximalist approach in terms of him dominating the ball, but I think he's been so good at doing what he's supposed to do that I give him a little bit of an edge over Mitchell. And then I come back to, if Trey Young were allowed to play

with Rudy Gobert, what would that team look like? And could he do the things that Donovan Mitchell does and more? And I think the answer to that is yes. So Mitchell's 26-4-5, 46-35-88 splits. Utah is the fourth best team in the league. Trae Young is 28-4-10 46-39-90

there's crazy advanced stats with him too and like his for a short guy his PER is really high and like there's all kinds of

good stuff with him true shooting all that stuff I have to hang it on him that the Hawks have been so disappointing that was why I had him I had Mitchell on him that the Hawks have been so disappointing. That was why I had Mitchell over him.

That's it. And I don't even know if it's his fault, but he's the best guy in the team. We know he's the engine of that team. And that team seems super unhappy and disjointed to me. And it's hard for me not to hold against him. I feel the same way about a couple other guys that we're going to talk about later,

including Tatum and Brown. I think it has to be hung on them that the Celtics look miserable. Could you blame the coach? Sure. But those are the two best guys in the team. And if the team is disjointed and continually falling apart in fourth quarters at some point, I got to blame it. So I'm going Mitchell. I do think Mitchell's past the, which I need for the first, second team, like the alpha test. Like there are games when he's just toe to toe with whoever he really does

feel like he's the best guy in the court with whoever's going to, not that Trey doesn't, but, um, you know, Utah's the fourth best team in the league. He's the most important guy in that team, I think.

And I feel good about him in that spot. Who do you have, JV? I have Trey. And it came down to Mitchell and Trey as well. Ultimately, I sided with Trey just because he's a much more dynamic offensive force. He's

one of the best offensive players in the NBA. He's really rounded out the game that I think he's shown past two years. He's basically a more efficient version of what he was last year. And last year he was still good statistically. And really, they have similar cases too because they're both offensive

dominant teams now, which is weird to say about the Utah Jazz. And ultimately, is Mitchell giving much more defensively than Trey Young? And then you get into the debate of, well, how much is the other parts of the team factoring into that? And so I leaned Young. I don't know. Maybe this

is also recency bias because we're talking about falling apart in the fourth quarters. I just watched the Jazz lose to the Detroit Pistons in Detroit last night without Rudy Gobert. And so maybe that's just recency bias. But I actually think they're pretty similar. If I'm going to lean one way, it's going to be Trey just because of how much more dynamic he is offensively. So I watched that Utah to Trey game as well. As you guys know,

I've been slow to come around on Cade Cunningham. I haven't been anti-Cade Cunningham. I've just always been a mobile guy in that draft. And I had some questions about Cade. He seemed like a third or a half a step slow to me, the speed he played at.

And I wasn't sure at this level. I just felt like he was a tiny bit in the wrong gear. That game yesterday, that was it. I'm like, alright, I was wrong. Cade has arrived. Cade demolished

the Jazz and was doing it on both ends and is this really inclusive leader guy. It was all the stuff where Salo was saying the entire time, but has this ability to... I mean, they're fucking running post-ups for Trey Lyles in crunch time of a Utah to Trey game

and they're winning. And he was, you know, he took the challenge guarding Conley. Sometimes he'd end up on Mitchell, but, um, but I had the game winning block and was just kind of all over the place. And you looked at the rest of his team and you go, my God, this team sucks. Like, how is he doing this? So anyway, I just wanted to mention that. But, um, with the Mitchell thing, yeah, I see the point. I just, Atlanta's 17 and 22. And it's tough for me to be like, I'm going to reward you with my second team all-in-day spot.

I thought the same about Beal last year. At some point, can you at least go 500? So I think Trey's circling it. There's some decent signs that this team might come around. Like even you look at their point differential, it's only minus 0.7. It's not like they have basically the same record as Portland. Portland's 16 and 24.

Portland's minus, almost minus four. You know, Sacramento's 16 and 27. They're almost minus five. Atlanta's in these games. They're around. And it just seems like they need to make a trade. They're the classic, we have too many guys team. So even if it's like,

who knows if the Simmons rumors are true. And I can't imagine that's what Daryl would want for Simmons. But it does feel like they're a two for one or a three for one at some point. I think if ballots were cast today, I think it would be Mitchell. And exactly for that reason, like there's just an ocean between those two teams

in terms of performance. But if the Hawks or a Jazz regression can turn that into a gulf instead of an ocean, I think Trey's going to get a lot of groundswell support. So we have a top nine

and we have that 10th spot, which we think is Mitchell versus Trey right now. And then you go to the third team. I'll just tell you who I had. Gobert. Did we all have Gobert? No, I have Towns.

Wow. Well, I have Towns as well. I had Gobert, Trey Towns, Booker, Levine. And that actually fits all the qualifications. The toughest one for me is Draymond. And I really struggled between Draymond, Gobert, and Towns. And I really value and love what Draymond does. And that's, throw the stats out. I didn't want to look at them. It's just like his impact on Curry, all the stuff he does for them, how great he's been on defense, what he's like as a leader,

the fact that that team's 39 and he's such a big piece of it. So I basically, I had 16 guys for 15 spots is where I ended up with. And Draymond got bumped. I don't feel great about it. I'm hoping he could play his way back on. The shocking thing for me was Towns, who I've never really enjoyed.

And I think he's been really, I like watching that team. I think he's been really, I like watching that team. I think he's been fun to watch. So that's my five. Gobert, Trey Towns, Booker Levine. Who do you have, Mahoney? So I have Mitchell, and then I have Levine at the other guard spot.

I have Draymond and Gobert. And then the last forward spot, I just didn't see a lot of great candidates. I think Towns might be the most elegant solution to see if you can plug him in there because I went with Luka Doncic, who has missed games, who has underperformed. see a lot of great candidates. I think Towns might be the most elegant solution to see if you can plug him in there because I went with Luka Doncic, who has missed games, who has underperformed

by his standards at least. He's had his weight floated in the media, which is how you know things are going great. And yet, at some point, you just circle back to it and it's like, Luka's just better than all of these other guys who are in the running here. And so even in an underperforming season, I think I'm taking Luka over Towns.

I think I'm taking him over, you know, if you want to make the Paul George argument, if you want to get into Devin Booker territory and kind of move the positions around, whatever you want to do, I'm kind of squeezing Luka in, or I guess Zach Levine in at a forward spot to make that work.

So I had Booker, Booker's 24-5-5 this year, 44-41-88. He missed a couple games. But I actually thought he was kind of a no-brainer. I'm surprised you didn't have him in. But he said, Devin Booker hive's going to come at you now. I know.

And they are fierce, let me tell you. But it was Levine or Booker for me. That was kind of the spot I was trying to figure out. And Eileen Levine, who, as we mentioned earlier, is just one of the best shooters in the league, along with DeRozan, has been unbelievable in crunch time this season. And I think he does a lot of the

stuff Booker does a little bit more efficiently. Like, again, as I was saying, he isolates just as much, but does it more efficiently. He's still running pick and roll. He's still involved in creation. I mean mean the kind of shooting that levine gives you is very very rare this is like clay thompson level spacing impact and if we're going to put derosen rightfully on the first or second team for how good he's

played i think you gotta you gotta doff your cap to the person who's primarily creating the space that he's allowed to play in levine is 26 26-5-4. And as you said, almost a 50-40-90 guy. 49-41-87. I had him on my third team. I thought he was a no-brainer too. JB, who'd you have? You could be the tiebreaker here.

Sure. I have Mitchell. I have Levine at a forward spot because he has played, I think, a majority of his minutes that small forward. But again, what are positions? Draymond Green at forward, Towns at center,

and I have Luka at guard. Luka is the case where the statistical evidence is just unbeatable. You look at it, he's basically averaging a triple-double, even though he is, in some ways, just not living up to his standards. I do think it's the classic case of like, we have set the bar so high that we don't appreciate what he's doing already.

I also think it introduces an interesting conversation about like how many games played should matter because everybody has pretty much missed a couple games. Luka also had that injury. Then you get into the part of like, well, was he conditioned enough? And did that lead into the ankle injury? So I don't know. Did you guys ding anybody for not having enough games? I thought I had more leeway with that stuff this year

because of COVID, but Luka's played 25 of 40. That seems right at the precipice of, is that just too few? So Luka's 25-8-9. That team has really started to play well the last couple weeks, which we can talk about quickly in a second.

My thinking is Luka will end up on second or third team by the time this season's over. And that's why it's important to do these midseason things because it's a nice little snapshot. I personally decided to penalize him just because he showed up overweight and out of shape, as you mentioned.

By the way, when you said how they leaked the weight, it reminds me of when ESPN turns on people and they would leak the salaries of the person. And it was like, once the salary came in, they're like, oh, they're going to get rid of this person. Hypothetically speaking, of course. Yeah, hypothetically. The weight thing with Luca is a little

similar where it's like he's 260 pounds well how did that come out Luca's not telling anybody that he'll be on this team and just quickly we should have the Dallas discussion I've been impressed by Kidd that team plays defense those guys know who

the roles are and they have guys like Brunson, who I think got really helped when Luca was out. I, you know, Brent, if I was a GM Brunson would have already been on my team. I've always liked him. I just, I remember when he would, he'd fall to like 33, 34 in the draft. That was stupid. But, uh, Bullock has been good for them. They have some shooting. They have this weird, if we can just keep Porzingis healthy this spring, we might actually be good. They have a big trade exception.

I think for like, might be like 10 million, something like that. So they have easily the chance to get somebody. Everybody thinks Goran Dragic is going there as soon as Toronto buys them out, whenever that happens. So they're going to add two players,

but the breadcrumbs are in place for Mavs. What are you seeing, Rob? I mean, the question for them in season is how do they get better than this? Like if their defense is going to be solid, their offense is going to kind of come and go, I would assume with Luka a little bit. Like if he's able to get back into form,

maybe their offense can knock on the door of top you know, top 10, you know, up into the top five kind of territory because he's shown he can be that. Yeah. But short of that, this is not a team that they do have this trade exception. They have the option to either pay Jalen Brunson or trade him at some point. And for as much as we all appreciate Jalen Brunson, it's a very different proposition when you're paying him 18 to 20 million dollars a year. proposition when you're paying him $18 to $20 million a year. So if you're not willing to do that, are you trading him? And if so, what can you get back in the door?

Because the team has needs for sure. The question is, can you service those in the season versus is that more of an off-season, longer-term project? But they've turned it around in a big way. I mean, just this little stretch they've been able to put together has been really impressive.

That's the question, right? If you want to keep Brunson past the trade deadline, you have to be willing to pay him long term. And do you want him to be the third guy next to Luka and KP? Because that is ultimately what's going to dictate the fate of the franchise and where Luka goes five years from now. And I like Brunson. He's done a lot of good things, especially when Luka is out and booing that team. And I think he would be really good on most teams. But do you want to saddle your future to Jalen Brunson if you have one of

the best guards in all of basketball? It's a tough one because that's the position where you don't want to overpay somebody. It's just too easy to get point guards over and over again. Look at Dennis Schroeder, who, by the way, if Dallas is interested in a Dennis Schroeder, Jalen Brunson trade, call Brad Stevens because I think he would entertain it.

I really like Brunson though. I value him. And I do think if you're Dallas and Luca is going to be making $40 million a year, you've got Porzingis for this year and the next two at 30, you're not going to be able to trade him. You're not going to have cap space anyway. So why wouldn't I just try to sign Brunson for four years, 60, something like that, try to lock him down a little bit of discount. And I know that that's somebody that can play with Luca. I know that's somebody that can run the offense when Luca's out and he's getting better.

Like right now he's 16, five and four. What's he shooting from three? 34%, not terrible. But he's 50% field goal, which is unusual for point guards. Usually the point guards that are always in the low forties. He's a really good like finisher slash kind of foul line jump shooter type guy, which is, I think that's one of the reasons I like him. He's a really good finisher slash foul line jump shooter type guy. I think that's one of the reasons I like him. He's just old school.

He's not the guy who's just either he's jacking threes or running the corner. I would keep him, but you're right. If you're going to trade him, now's the time. Like a Marcus Smart kind of like a little ambitious maybe?

What else am I getting maybe? Mm-hmm. What else am I getting back? It's tough. I mean, he's the bird in the hand, right? Whereas Dallas has made so many mistakes over the past couple of years just chasing after the brass ring or whatever glossy free agent they think that they could attract to that market.

And on the one hand, it's tough to say we're putting a ceiling on this team in some degrees by bringing on a Brunson, by relying on Bullock and some of these other guys they brought in over the offseason in order to just be better, right? Just to put anything that will work next to Luka. Yeah.

On the other hand, like, I do wonder if it forces, if you bring him on long-term, forces Luka to be off the ball a little bit more. And I wonder what that opens up just for that entire offense and for Luka in general. Is there another level to Luka by putting in more ball a little bit more. And I wonder what that opens up just for that entire offense and for Luka in general. Is there another level to Luka by putting in more of a pass-first point guard in there that can make them better

overall? The problem with that, of course, is Luka actually has to give up the ball, which seems to be the biggest issue in Dallas. So I don't know. He's frustrating. As much as I love him. See, we deal with this in Boston. With the Boston fans. Where we're like, we just need to in Boston with the, with the Boston fans where we're like, we just need to get a point guard for the Jays, which we do. The guy, those guys need a

point guard. They, this is part of why the offense is so stagnant. They've never played with an actual, like if you just put that, you could say it's for a lot of teams, but I think you could really say for the Celtics, if you just put Chris Paul in the Celtics, think about how awesome that would be for Robert Williams and the Jays like how the team would immediately fall into place everything would make sense guys would get the ball in the perfect spot it would just be amazing

now 20 teams could say that if you just put a first team all NBA point guard if you just put a first team all NBA who's one of the best point guards of all time on that team it'd be pretty good but when we, people like my dad we need a point guard, he's one of the best point guards of all time on that team. But when we, the people like my dad's like, we need a point guard. It's like, all right, who's the point guard? There's like seven of them.

Like, can we get Tyrese Halliburton? Maybe. Could he be that guy? I hope so. But in general, the list, there's like two types of point guards at this point in 2022. And most of them are not the old school point guard. Most of them are like

the Dame Lillard. I need to be in the best situation for me. I'm going to take the most shots. I'm going to have the ball a lot. And you're, you'll have to figure out how to get yours. Dame Lillard is not like a real point guard, plays point guard, but he's not, he's not a, I'm looking out for everybody else. And that's like what the Jays have missed. The Jays, other than Kyrie, don't laugh, when he showed up the team, when they had the 16 game winning streak to start the first year and Kyrie was just like, and he was hoodwinking all of us, but it was just this, oh my God, this, what an amazing teammate. And he's really so unselfish and he's just all about, and we won 16 straight and the Jays, that was really the only time ever that they were in an awesome situation

with a point guard. Cause he was like looking out for them, but then taking over games at the end, which is what a point guard is supposed to do. I just don't think those guys are out there. So going back to the Jalen Brunson thing, I value what he does. Cause I do think like he's an old school type of guy.

I, do you guys feel like Cole Anthony or Jalen Suggs can potentially be like that? I don't feel like Cole Anthony is the old school, I'm worried about everybody. But I do think Suggs has that in him. I don't know. What do you think? They need time.

And I think the thing about Brunson is it was clear the second he got to the NBA, this is a guy who knows how to create space, who knows how to use his body, who knows how to create those finishing angles knows how to use his body, who knows how to create those finishing angles. Suggs, I wonder sometimes. And it seems like he's a guy

who's still in so many ways adapting to the speed and length of the league. Yeah, I kind of want to, I would love to flash forward to year three or four and see what he looks like and see how dramatically

different it could be. Because if he gets that sense of place, he could be really good. If he doesn't, he could get swallowed up and become yet another unfortunately forgettable

Orlando Magic point guard, you know? I think Cade, Cade doesn't have the traditional Chris Paul point guard stuff, but has a lot of the inclusive stuff we're talking about. Like, I do think he puts time and thought into who else is on his team,

where do they like the ball, how can he make guys better, things like that. Any last words on this, JV? I mean, if you're looking for lot into who else is on his team. Where do they like the ball? How can he make guys better? Things like that. Any last words on this, JV? I mean, if you're looking for a pass first point guard, who's in need of some work these days and playing time, there's a guy in Philadelphia, I think, who would love to be on the Boston Celtics. Oh my God. Yeah. Well, can they take Marcus Smart and a bunch of semi-assets for him? I feel, so the thing that came out today about Simmons, actually, let's take a break and we'll talk about Simmons.

What does possible sound like for your business? It's having the spend that powers your scale with no preset spending limit. More cash on hand to grow your business with up to 55 interest-free days, and the ability to reach further with access to over 1,400 airport lounges worldwide. Redefine possible with Business Platinum. That's the powerful backing of American Express. Terms and conditions apply. Visit amex.ca slash business platinum. So there's a report today. I guess

Mark Spears said it on a podcast about how Philly is trying to tie Tobias Harris to Ben Simmons, which I had heard, but I just, it seemed so unrealistic to me. And I actually went through all the teams trying to figure out who would take Ben Simmons while also taking Tobias Harris and the, this year plus the next two at 120 million, whatever it is. And of course you have to go right to the horse's mouth, Sacramento, like of course,

of course they would consider doing that. And what's weird is Sacramento could actually do that. There's, you know, you buddy healed would have to be in it. Harrison Barnes would have to be in it.rison barnes would have to be in it um hal burton and then you you have the tristan thompson and bagley contracts and it's like is that enough for ben simmons and tobias harris if you're philly you get hal

burton so you're taking a big bet on him which i think the advanced metrics people love him and i i haven't talked to daryl about this but Darrell has that famous motto. I guarantee his motto likes Halliburton. Halliburton had that stretch without Darren Fox where he looked awesome. So you get Halliburton, you get a shooter in Buddy Heald. You have Barnes as the much cheaper Tobias Harris person. And then you take a couple of contracts and you give up Simmons and Harris. I actually think Philly would have to consider that. So just Philly side, Rob, would you do that? Would you think about it?

Oh, for sure. Okay. I think part of the metric is, are we sure Tobias Harris is a better player right now than Harrison Barnes? Are we positive of that? We're not. They're probably a draw.

He's just a more expensive version of him, right? And I think Barnes gives you a lot more defensively. Like gives you a real presence at that four, which is kind of where they have an absence right now. Like before you could plug Ben Simmons into that spot when he was playing if you wanted to. But when you're relying on Tobias Harris to be a defensive big for you in a lot of these games,

it just puts you in a really tough spot. And so if you could get something like that, where not only are you getting a stout forward to plug into your lineup, but a really good shooter, a great point guard prospect in Halliburton, like that's a really attractive package. You're not hitting that top 20 to 25 player threshold

that we've heard so much about, but you're checking every other box you could pretty much get. And Halliburton gives you shooting, which I think if they get a point guard back, it has to be somebody who can space for Embiid. It just has to. It can't be a point guard who's like,

hey, he's great, except he's not a really good shooter. It's got to be, you need spacing, number one. What do you think just on the Philly side, JV, of that? I don't hate it. Are we sure that Barnes is enough of an upgrade on Tobias Harris? As bad as Harris can be at time and as overpaid as he is,

Barnes has been pretty mixed over the past month or so. He's had a rough season. Yeah, he has. But he's also like, you're trading for somebody from one of the most depressing teams in the league. I guess the catch for me, if I'm Daryl, is just Harrison Barnes at $20 million

with a contract that goes down every year and expires next year is easier for me to flip than Barnes, than Harris, who's basically untradeable. Yeah, I guess the tough part is, is it enough of an upgrade to where you are willing to forego the chance at Damian Lillard?

Do you just have some sort of intel that that guy is never going to come loose, that Bradley Beal is totally fine in Washington just cashing those checks and all those other guys? You have to take the opportunity cost off the board. And when it comes to that, I would probably lean at the very least playing this out in the off season, as opposed to bringing on a Halliburton and a Barnes now.

I like Halliburton, I think more than most. Cause I do feel like that would be a good team. Like all of a sudden I, I've accomplished a lot in that trade that I want to do. The Sacramento side of it, they're just in a conundrum because they have this Fox-Halbert issue. And I just would rather make my bet on Halbert. I just would. And Fox is overpaid and he just leaves me cold. I'm sorry. I know the stats are there. He's a great guy, but I just watched it too many

times last five minutes of a game. I don't like the choices he makes. He's in this weird no man's land where he's respected enough and he's highly paid enough that it feels like he needs to be in the mix in the last five minutes of the game. But I trust his instincts and the things he's going to do probably the least. So if I could, if I can't trade him, which I don't think I can, I also can't keep him and Halburn together because that Halburn and assets just going to keep going down the longer those guys play together.

And I could take the flyer on Simmons and I could turn Barnes into Harris. And you could argue I'm getting the two best guys in the deal, just fundamentally. So I'd have to think about it if I'm Sacramento. What do you think from their side rob i just never understood the fox simmons thing period and getting harrison there just i mean he like he as a shooter could open some things up like positionally okay i just i don't

know that i'm taking that weird fit and all that contract into my organization and then try to figure it out even if i'm the kings It just seems a lot to have to sort out and to give up Halliburton, which is no small thing. That could be a future pillar of your franchise. And if you're the Sixers, you would definitely have to be sold on Halliburton. Could we be a contender if our best playmakers are Halliburton, Seth Curry, and Joel Embiid?

That's a big question. And even with Embiid passing you know, passing better of late, playing better of late, you have to really be sold on Halliburton as that kind of player. And if he's that kind of player, I don't know that you want

to give him up if you're the Sacramento Kings. I agree with you. What do you think, Jamie? From the Kings side? Yeah, I don't know. I think you would have to reboot your entire franchise

around Ben Simmons. I think you would also have to trade De'Aaron Fox, which could be difficult because he's had mixed returns over the more recent games, too. I think he would also have to trade De'Aaron Fox, which could be difficult because he's had mixed returns over the more recent games too. I don't know. It's weird too because

I don't think the Fox-Halliburton backcourt works. And I also wonder, if we're going to flip this back to the Philly side just quickly, do we think Halliburton-Curry or Halliburton-Maxey works long too? Because I know Halliburton's three-point shooting is good.

I believe the statistics are good, but he has kind of like a windup and he's more of like a hesitant shooter. Yeah. I don't know. I think there's a framework here, but there are probably a couple of things that need to be tweaked.

So maybe it's Fox, Barnes, and Heald for Simmons and Harris with some sort of pick swap in there at some point. Maybe that's where this ends up. And maybe if you're Philly, that's just the best you can do. I just don't think Daryl's going to do that. I really think he, at this point, you've come this far.

Why not just ride it out? And who made that point about Lillard or Bale just waiting? Did you make that point, Justin? You're almost better off with the pipe dream of that. Plus the way Lillard has played this year, it actually seems more conceivable. You trade for him. There's other issues about, am I sure I want to trade for Damian Lillard? Like who's about to hit his mid thirties and the arrow seems to be pointing down in the history of small point guards. Am I trading for a guy who his time has passed

as a top 10 guy? I don't know. All right, third team, just wrapping it up. I have Gobert, Trey, Towns, Booker, Levine. Who'd you have, Rob? I had Mitchell, Levine, Draymond, Luca, Gobert. Justin?

And I had Mitchell, Luca, Levine, Draymond, and Towns. All right, so let's do apologies. I'd like to apologize to Draymond Green. I value what you do. I should have found a place for you. I would much rather have you on my team than Carl Anthony Towns. This is no reflection on how I feel about you

as a basketball player and a winner and a great teammate. When I'm done at the end of the year with these awards, I hope you're on my team. That's my apology to Draymond Green. Who are you apologizing to, Rob? I'd like to apologize to Devin Booker to get the hive off my back primarily, but also

he's just been totally credible as an all-NBA guy this season. It's just a numbers game on who you have and who you don't absolutely worthy. If he gets in there, I'd also, I mean, I'm not really apologizing to him yet so much as explaining,

but I think Jimmy Butler is going to be in this conversation once he plays some more games. Yeah. We've seen a lot of different versions of the heat this year. The through line when he's played is he's great in every version of their offense. I think he's going to be an all NBA guy when all is said and done, but just hasn't played enough right now. Yeah. And he's great in every version of their offense. I think he's going to be an all-NBA guy when all is said and done, but just hasn't played enough right now.

Yeah, and he's still at... When does he come back? It's still a little while, right? I can't even remember what he's hung up with right now. Yeah, he's only played 23 games. He's missed 17, and I think... So, yeah, I had the same thing. I mean, if you're just doing best 15 players in the league,

he's still on the list. Who would you like to apologize to, Justin? James Harden. Similar statistical case is Luka Doncic. He's basically averaging a triple-double, but unfortunately, he's as big as a left tackle on Georgia, and you can't count on him from game to game to the

point where he was even out last game with some sort of injury. So, I'm sorry. Couldn't agree more on Harden. So Harden is 22, 8, and 9. 33% from three-point this year. A little down on that one. Free throw attempts are obviously down.

The ones, the jump out ones, I had five guys that I felt like were bubble guys for me. You mentioned Harden. Draymond, I mentioned. Luka, we all mentioned. And I think Luka gets in there by the time this is done. I really wanted to talk myself into a Drew Holiday spot and Milwaukee, Milwaukee's just not playing well enough. And I don't even think that's

necessarily his fault, but you know, you watched last night, they lost again. They lost to Charlotte. They lost a game that, game that basically they fought back. They tied it. Lomelo made a move I've never seen in my life where he was going right to left and looked like he was going to throw a right-handed, one-handed skip pass into the corner, jumped in the air, changed his mind, and just

shot a 10-footer and it went in. I honestly have never seen that. And then Milwaukee fucked up the last possession. But Holiday, I think he's in my top 20 this year. But the Milwaukee thing, I just can't. And then you mentioned Butler and Harden. Harden is just like, he's a DH now. And for people who say, no, he's playing himself in the shape,

I just think this is what he looks like now. I had a video on my phone of him from the All-Star game four years ago, and he's at least 20 pounds thinner. You have one job. You're a professional athlete. Stay in shape. He's just not in shape, and I think this is who he is now. Those would be my five. I think there's three other guys that we just have to mention as kind of lurking. One is Van Vliet.

Yeah. Just kind of stunned by Van Vliet this season. I don't fully understand it, but he's, I don't know. He's like from a different decade. He's from like the early 1970s, like everything about his game. I don't understand it, but I think he's been a big reason why that team hasn't totally gone away and his competitiveness and his shot creation

and all that stuff. Second one is Tatum, which I'm definitely not making the case for him, but he's having a big season. I thought I had his numbers in front of me, but he's still 27 a game. If you catch him on the right night of me, but he's still, he's like 27 a game.

If you catch him on the right night, you would assume he's one of the 10 best guys in the league. He's not. Then the third one, just have to mention Jared Allen. Yeah. I agree. Because I think he's as much as I love Mobley and as

much as I've enjoyed Garland, I think Jared Allen has been the most important cab. I think all the advanced numbers back that up. He unleashes them in a bunch of different ways. And could you, him versus Gobert for that third team center spot. I think you could have an argument about it. Gobert probably gets it,

but it's at least an argument. Is that crazy to even mention Jared Allen, Rob? I don't think it's crazy, but I do think we might be edging toward crazy if we're mentioning him ahead of Anthony Davis. Really? Who hasn't been great, but he's still Anthony Davis.

Yeah. There's only so much we can... I rented the same thing with Paul George, too, who has his own games played issue, and it's just kind of miscast in the role he's been asked to play this season. But do we punish guys

who are put into roles that are too big for them if they're like a little less efficient than usual? Or in Davis's case, do we really think like Jared Allen is a better player

than Anthony Davis or has had a bigger impact this season than Anthony Davis? I think right now that might be the case for Allen, but by year end, I would be shocked if AD hadn't played, you't played his way into this conversation

in some capacity. I think that's fair. Yeah, he just hasn't played enough. I didn't even really consider him for that regard. I mean, in the case of Allen, like Allen, yeah, the numbers aren't jumping off the page. It's basically 17 and 10 or 17 and 11, but he's also shooting 70% from the floor.

And every time you get into 70s, I feel like you definitely have to be in the conversation. It's so bonkers that he's exactly what the Nets need. Yeah. And that he was this afterthought throw into the trade that the Rockets didn't even want. And the Rockets were like, look, we don't want that guy. But if you can reroute him for a non-lottery pick like put that pick in the trade, like that would be attracted to us. And that's really cool. Listen,

he's stepping on DeAndre Jordan's minutes. Anyway, we've got to get rid of this guy. That, I mean, that was really terrible. Davis has played 27 games. He's basically 23 and 10 really has left me cold.

Yeah. And I left me cold all stars. He is absolutely the starting center. And by the way, Dame's the point cold. Yeah. And on the left me cold all-stars, he is absolutely the starting center. And by the way, Dame's the point guard. Yeah. And we didn't mention Dame at all. He doesn't deserve to be even considered.

And it's been kind of a precipitous fall from him dating back to the Olympics where we had Dame as this like prize of the next guy to go out and get and who could he swing it for and oh my god the dame sweepstakes and then he sucked in the olympics and he's been hurt ever since and i don't know what to make of it anymore i certainly don't think the trade package for him is what it would have

been i don't know six months ago that's not the wrong assumption right no and right now you have to consider not only is he getting to the wrong side of the age curve, not only is he a point guard who doesn't really play defense, not only is he a guy whose game kind of comes and goes with its shooting sometimes, is he just going to have a long-term injury in his abdominals for the rest of his career? Like, is this going to be a lingering thing we have to deal with? And if you're a team like the Sixers, who's going to be in the business of, can we win the championship this year? They're like, we'll deal with it. Yeah. I mean, I think they'd sign up for it, but you'd have to, uh, you'd have to be very confident in your medical staff for sure.

Portland, if we're is as our friend KFC says in the blow it up, blow it up rankings, I think Portland and Sacramento are one a and one B in some order, but Portland, it's clear what they have to do. It'll be interesting if they actually do it. They should trade McCollum and they should trade Lillard and they should try to start over. They have a lottery-protected first-round pick this year, which they're going to be able to keep.

But I would be... You guys disagree with that? I would be shopping both of those guys. There's a month left. You've got to trade both of those guys, I would think. Especially with Anthony Simons putting up like 40 a night at this point. What are you holding on to CJ for? I think getting a high draft pick makes so much sense for that team. Worst case scenario, you just flip a home groom for some other star. Maybe you're the team luring Bradley Beal to Portland to play with Damian Lillard or something. This season is going nowhere. You have a lot of teams that are

vying for that 10th seed. The Sacramento Kings are going to be going after the 10th spot. It's the NBA Finals. What is the point? Yeah, the CJ trade market, I think, is a little tougher than maybe people realize. It's a big number. He's making 30 a year, you know, and, and just like to put a trade together where the salaries add up becomes hard to eat. There at least has to be one guy in that trade who's making 20 plus, but just in general, I think they might've missed their window with some of this stuff. And I don't blame them because they were a fringe contender in the West and they had Dame and I certainly wouldn't have traded Dame a year ago.

But now, at least with McCollum, they might've missed the window. I think Dame will still have value. The only other person we didn't talk about was Paul George, which you mentioned briefly, but he was absolutely going to be on this list and he just got hurt.

And if he can come back in time, that's another guy. So the guys who can still play themselves on this list, I think Luca, Paul George, Butler, Draymond Lingering, and then Harden if I don't know.

He could go on one of those Harden runs. I will say this about Harden. I think his case is very difficult so long as the net solution to every problem is let's just play Kevin Durant 48 minutes. It just does not reflect super well on Harden, especially when't know where it's coming from but it's persistent that they either want to clear space for him when he's a free agent or they want to make a move for him or three way or whatever and I find it

hard to believe Durant would sign off on that when he was the one pushing for Harden last thing before we go Fandel MVP right now Curry is plus 140 which is interesting because I know we penciled him in a first team NBA, but he's actually not having like an awesome Steph Curry season from a statistical standpoint. Not to defend my guy, Steph. I do think teams load up on him in like

the craziest ways. And there's a degree of difficulty to his numbers. And this is people are using making excuses because you like them. He gets mauled every game. The other team knows he's almost like a running back or the other team is just putting eight guys on the line because they know you're going to be handing off to this guy 25 times. Every single possession is a struggle for him. And I did think he was starting to wear down the last couple of weeks from it, which, which is why I think the clay thing is so important. My point is he's the MVP favorite, but I don't feel like he's having one of his greatest seasons. I think his team is succeeding, but I don't think unless he picks it up and goes on one of those Steph streaks, I don't see him winning the MVP with what we've seen in the first 40 games. Do you guys? I think he's probably the favorite right now. Is he not?

He's the favorite on FanDuel, but I'm saying I think people will start to pick apart the statistical resume when we get to game 70. They'll be like, wait a second, we're going to vote for this guy? He's had five better seasons and he was better last year and they're going to do the whole thing. And I think kind of

undermine it a little bit unless he picks it up. I believe it's a career low in field goal percentage and three-point percentage, not counting that five-game season where he broke his hand, which is like, you know, you take note of that. But I think you hit it, Bill, where it's just like he basically

unlocks everything on that offense. He draws so much attention. He gets guys involved. He allows Draymond to effectively be a designated hitter on defense. And I do wonder what's going to happen if Klay can play up to Klay's standard, or even just stand in the corner

and shoot and be an outlet for Steph, how much better Steph would be. I guess I would throw Durant in the mix because of that. But like you guys have mentioned, the Nets are struggling right now. I think they've lost five of seven, so it's not exactly like they're peaking in the same way the Warriors

aren't. Well, they're struggling, but the Warriors' offense has been pretty cold lately. If that continues, who among us could be blamed for a wandering eye over to Kevin Durant, who's doing 30 points on 60% true shooting? He is rock steady. He's there every night.

You know exactly what you're going to get and he delivers and delivers and delivers. Kevin Durant's going to be a very appealing candidate for a lot of people. And so Steph is going to be up and down as his shooting goes. KD's just going to be there.

He's going to be there in the conversation all year long. KD's 38-6 this year, which is ridiculous. It's very on par with his 2014 MVP season where his stats, it's one of the great offensive forward positions ever. He's second in the

fan duel right now. He's plus 210. I think those odds should be way closer than that. I think to me, it's like Steph and Durant are the co-favorites right now. Durant's been unbelievable. And Giannis has been great too, but the team's success of the fact that they're 25 and 17, when for the most part,

him and Holiday and Middleton have been together. They lost Lopez, obviously, but you wouldn't say that the Bucks have, they've had injuries, but everybody has. They've had COVID stuff, everybody has. I wouldn't say they've been ravaged by anything other than the Lopez piece. Jokic is 15 to one. Giannis, I'm sorry, is plus Lopez piece. Jokic is 15 to one.

Giannis, I'm sorry, is plus 850. Jokic is 15 to one. Embiid's 27 to one. LeBron is 30 to one. DeRozan 36 to one. John Morant, 46 to one. That seems too high. There's a world where there are five games behind the Warriors and Phoenix. They have the deepest team. They're basically COVID-proof in all these different ways. There's so many guys. JV, isn't there a world where Jha just goes to another level

and we have a 2011 Bulls-Derek Rose situation? Nobody else pulls away. All of a sudden, they're close to a one seed. It's not inconceivable, right? Yeah. I mean, they're built for the regular season. And on the one hand, that helps Morant's case because they could theoretically just jump into the top three, maybe even vault a team like the Jazz or even the Suns if they decide to take it easy with Chris Paul down the stretch. On the other hand, I wonder if people weaponize that against Morant

because they are so deep and they were able to be successful while he was out for that little stretch. 10-2. Yeah, so that's a tough one to really shake off when you're trying to say that this is the most valuable player

in the entire league. I wonder too, if Steph is the default number one right now, if we profile what, to get a little electoral with this, like what a Steph MVP voter looks like and what they value, are they going to flock to a story like Morant who could be ascendant and incredible? Or would they fall back into, you know, Durant or Jokic or Giannis? I mean, there's just so many credible options.

And frankly, a lot of guys who have a similar kind of impact organizationally speaking to what Steph does. Steph won the first half narrative MVP, but it's a long season and people get bored with narratives and they move to other narratives. And we've seen it over and over again, which is why LeBron at 30 to one has to be considered. I mean, he's already, he's got, he's having an above average LeBron statistical season,

right? He's 29, seven and seven. Usually he's 27, seven and seven, something there. So he's a little bit higher, but he's kind of kept them together. Now the schedule has been abysmal. I think, I think they have 21 wins. 16 of them were under 500 teams. They get pretty much destroyed. Anytime they play a good team. Memphis wiped the floor with them the other night. Schedule's getting much harder. They still have a lot of hard games left. I think to me, it's more realistic that they are a 9 or

10 or 8, whatever, in the play-in than that they would get a 5 or a 6 seed. But it's still LeBron. LeBron brings narrative stuff with him. His age. Magic Johnson tweeting about it, so it can't be ruled out. At gunpoint, just for the best odds right now, I think Durant at two to one is the best bet

because think of how many weird things that that team's had all season, where you've had no Kyrie at all. He's played two games. You've 25 pounds heavier James Harden, whatever he is. You have no center. You have all these people coming in and out. And he's just carried a ridiculous workload for them.

So I think they would be the co-favorites to me. And I'd probably, if I had to pick right now, I'd probably lean toward Durant. It's crazy that that sounds, just because of how Curry's been shooting the last couple of weeks. Well, Durant's actually in a pretty good position odds-wise because with

Kyrie coming back, they're going to get better in the games that Kyrie plays, but there's also going to be this narrative thing where Kyrie isn't around.

He's a part-time player, and so Durant's still going to get a ton of credit for everything the Nets do. I think he's in that sweet spot where he's

going to be able to hit on both those cylinders at once. And fortunately, it's not a GM of the Year award, so he's not going to get penalized for that. Go ahead, once. And fortunately, it's not a GM of the year award, so he's not going to get penalized for that. Go ahead, Justin.

Sure. Yeah. I mean, we talk about LeBron pivoting the center. I mean, Kevin Durant has been doing that for a full calendar year to the point where Blake Griffin is in air quotes center, taking charges and flopping all over the place. But Durant is effectively the rim protector in these sort of lineups. So if we want to make that a big part of LeBron's case, that should already be baked into what

KD has been doing for a while. Last rant point, just on that weird Nets team. In a weird way, I admire Harden and Kyrie because for somebody to play basketball, which is really hard to play, and just gain weight and still be able to be

as efficient and decent as Harden's been is kind of amazing. And then you watch Kyrie, who hasn't played all year, all year, and just comes in like he's a hot pocket out of a microwave and can just put up 22 in Portland and then just not play for another week. In a weird way, it kind of exemplifies why they're such interesting players historically. You know, like Kyrie is, that's who he's been. He could not do anything for three quarters and then scored 27 in the fourth. And, you know, he could be all of a sudden

the best player in a finals game. And you're like, oh my God, Kyrie. He can just kind of come and go. So this is perfect for him. And then Harden, just like his footwork, know-how, hoops IQ is enough to overcome the fact that he's just slower than he used to be. Nobody usually loses a full step and can still put up offense like he has. I'm weirdly impressed, even though I'm mad that he's not in shape.

Just wanted to make that point. It's why you get in the superstar business, right? Like if you could be the Brooklyn Nets and know all year that you have some of the best guys on the floor for any game, or you could be the Utah Jazz who have four times the point differential the Nets do and are just living in angst every day

over like, are we actually good enough to do this? To which the answer when you lose to the Pistons is not looking so great. Yeah. All right, guys. Well, we could hear on Ringer NBA show tomorrow. Double dip with Waz, right? Waz is on?

Of course. Tomorrow? Yeah, yeah. Okay. Good to see you. Thanks for the help. Thanks, Bill. We'll see how our picks hold up,

what, three months from now? Three months from now? We'll see. We'll see how many we actually got. Thanks for coming months from now? Three months from now? We'll see. We'll see how many we actually got. Thanks for coming on. I appreciate it. Thanks, Bill. Appreciate it.

All right. Our friend Matt Bellany is here from the Puck newsletter, former editor-in-chief of the Hollywood Reporter, and his newsletter has become a valuable asset for people who care about industry stuff. Recently, you wrote about Yellowstone and what the hell happened. And it actually was a text exchange between us a few weeks ago. My dad was so outraged that he couldn't find Yellowstone on Paramount Plus. I think he just missed one. It's his favorite show. And then had to basically download the old Paramount app and watch it with the commercials.

And he's basically like, why did they do this? Like, this is the most popular show we've had in 10 years. It is owned by Paramount. They have a new streaming thing. And it's like, why did they do this? So then you figured it out. So tell us what you figured out. I mean, the thing with Yellowstone is it gets to the core

of why media companies are just kind of flailing in this modern tech world. And Yellowstone is a perfect example because that show happened almost by accident. Nobody thought it would be a hit. It was languishing. The project was at HBO for years with Robert Redford attached to be the Kevin Costner character. That didn't work out. So then the Harvey Weinstein studio took it over and then he goes down in the Me Too scandal. It eventually ends up

on the Paramount network, which as you know is a linear television cable network. Nobody knows where it is. Do you know where the Paramount network is? Nobody knows. Well, I knew where it was only because it turned it i still have cable and it it just spike became paramount one day right yeah it's like i don't

know what i don't understand what this is most of their days are are they they air top gun on a loop or they then once a week they have yellowstone that everybody watches so it ends up turning into this big hit when people started catching up to it on streaming and via word of mouth during the pandemic. But the fact that it was on Peacock, which is not the Paramount streamer, Peacock is the NBC streamer,

is like the source of much, much regret within Viacom, which owns the company. They had the chance to buy it. They didn't buy it. It was only three or four years ago. Viacom did not have its own streaming service. Its sister company, CBS, did. They're all owned by the same family,

but they were two separate companies. So they didn't have their own. They were going to... They shopped it over to the CBS streaming service, but they decided not to buy it because at the time they're like, oh, you know, we're trying to make our numbers. We're trying to, you know, maximize the value. They did the same thing with South Park. South Park ended up on HBO Max and Yellowstone ended up on Peacock because they just didn't see the value down the line. Cut to three years later,

you and me and most people are watching most of our shows, especially scripted dramas on streaming. And they have this whole bet the company philosophy where we're going all in on streaming. And the biggest hit of the past five, seven years in the Viacom family is not on the Viacom streaming service. Huge fail. So there's a lot to unpack there. First of all, I had Kostar on my podcast summer of 2019. And Yellowstone, it was the first time I'd had him on. I'd met him a couple of times. I was really excited to have him on.

And he was there ostensibly to promote Yellowstone. But we ended up really not talking about it. And it didn't seem like he cared that much about talking about it. It seemed like it was a show that was smart for him to do. He was obviously getting paid a ton of money for it. And it didn't seem like he cared that much about talking about it. It seemed like it was a show that was smart for him to do. He was obviously getting paid a ton of money for it, but I didn't get, it was certainly not a phenomenon by any means. And I don't think he felt that way either. And the sense I got from him was like, yeah, I'm on this show. And you know, I get, I get to pick my own schedule and I get to live at, where's it, Montana, Wyoming, wherever. And it's like, I like being out there. And that was it. So the pandemic flips everything because, and we'll talk later about

the shows that the pandemic had, I think the biggest effect on, um, from in terms of a catch up thing. Yellowstone to me is number one. I didn't watch Yellowstone until the pandemic. I never probably would have ever watched it. I never would have found the time to bang through 20 episodes. But once we got into like month two, month three of the pandemic and you're just looking for anything to watch. Right.

So the show skyrockets. So you have that. There's no way to, I don't think, predict the catch-up ability of Yellowstone. And then the other piece is they made the classic mistake that we've seen these people do over and over. They did it with Netflix, right? In the late 2000s, early 2010s, where they look

at it and they go, ah, we'll make some money. We'll sell the streaming rights. They won't, they won't really turn out to be that much. That to me is crazier that they didn't at least put in little loopholes. Like you'll have the streaming rights for four years and then we get them back like something like that they just like basically gave it away for a bag of cash and it had no foresight at all for where the world was going that's the crazy part because you look at these companies and it was exactly that it was a cash grab you know look at disney disney about five four or five years ago they sold their their movies, like all the animated movies, all the hit movies, everything that is popular with Disney, they sold it to Netflix. And if you went on Netflix for many years, you could find all the latest Disney titles.

And then all of a sudden, they announced, oh, wait a second, we're going to do Disney Plus. And we're going to have our own streaming service. So they spent the next couple of years trying to claw back all of those movies for their own streaming service. And it's just money. I mean, this is just... Media companies have to meet their quarterly numbers and these executives get bonuses based on whether they hit their numbers. The easiest way to hit your number is to sell a show for a big price upfront. And the long-term business ramifications don't hit home for a few years when you probably won't even be in that job anymore. Right. I remember I told you this story when 30 for 30, when Netflix bought the first volume of 30 for 30 from us.

And I think they might have the rights to the second volume too, but it was around 2011, 2012. And they just gave us free money for stuff we'd already done. And at the time, the people running ESPN smartly took it, right? Like, why wouldn't they? Oh, they're going to give us, I forget what it was. It was $100,000 for each doc or whatever it turned out to be. And it's like, this is great. We're getting paid again for stuff we already did.

But nobody at the time realized, oh, Netflix is grabbing all this content. Everybody who's selling it to them thinks like, oh, this is free money for us, but they don't realize they're building a competitor. What's weird about the 2017-18 range was people understood the competitor part. And yet they, so, you know, if we're going to say in their defense, they just didn't see what was going to happen

with Yellowstone. And I don't think any of us did. And you look at the difference between season one, season two, and then what season three became. What did it like triple? The audience tripled because of the pandemic? Yeah, the audience, there was a definite spike between two and three. And the only X factor there is the pandemic.

People had a chance to catch up. That first season of Yellowstone is incredibly soapy, incredibly hook-driven. It gets you in. It's a Kevin Costner TV show. There's an escapist element. There's long sequences of just horses and beautiful country.

Super bingeable. And you can have it on. You could be doing something else. Maybe four things actually happen in an episode. You can kind of look up. Right. And if you're trapped in your apartment or your house during the pandemic and you can't go on that vacation that you've always went on, you had a little vacation

when you watched Yellowstone. So it totally makes sense that they got a big bump there. But then all of a sudden, it's like everyone's caught with their pants down. They're like, holy shit. What did we sell this for? Where is it? This is on Peacock? And I talked to a source at Peacock. It's the number two show on Peacock.

Number one is The Office, obviously. But it's the number two show. And they get huge spikes every time a new group of episodes land there. Yeah. So the way they have it is, what, 90 days after the last episode, they get all the episodes. Right. Which is infuriating for fans because you see the ads you're like oh great a new season of yellowstone is coming

like you know where where can i find it and it's like unless you you know go to paramount network and either dvr it or watch it live which who does that you're not going to see it live or you can buy them on amazon but that's annoying and you have to pay per episode. So Paramount is in this bizarre situation with their own app, Paramount Plus, it's called. But I still also have Paramount, which I think a lot of people do. And Paramount's like the ghost ship app that, for whatever reason, is still able to run Yellowstone, the new episodes, with commercials. But you have to sit through the commercials. But they don't want you to go to that app. They want you to go to the other app where they have all the stuff where they've been paying for, you know, 1883 and mayor of Kingstown and the challenge all-stars and all

these shows they're making. They want you to go there. And meanwhile, it's, it's like somebody built a new house and then there's this other house down the street that they, you know, the plumbing doesn't work, there's no electricity. And it's like, oh yeah, you still have to go there to get all the food. And Yellowstone is basically the food. It's honestly, I don't think we'll ever have a more bizarre streaming thing, but that fundamentally, like, how do you not put some sort of loophole in there that you get the rights back in five years? Like whoever makes that decision should be fired. There's a lot of people that

are pointing fingers at a lot of different people, but the one thing you mentioned to remember is that Yellowstone was not Yellowstone at the time that deal happened. If this was something that right out of the gate was a huge, huge hit that everyone was clamoring for, then you can harp on them a little bit more.

But it wasn't like this was this fast out of the gate, everybody wanted it type situation. So meanwhile, there's Taylor Sheridan who does Yellowstone. Yeah, I think the Sheridan verse, do you call it the Sheridan verse or Taylor time? Or what are his shows called? Maybe Taylor's version? Yeah, you're right. There needs to be a name. there needs to be some kind of a branding here like shondaland or you know the shonda whatever there needs to be something

because the guy has like 10 shows in development so how is he doing this like is he on the limitless drug what is going on did he find nzh for nhz 48 i don't know. He did write Sicario, though. Maybe he's familiar with that world. I think the guy, I mean, and he writes all of the episodes of Yellowstone. There's no writer's room. There's nothing. It's him and his computer. And this guy is a pretty fascinating guy.

He was in a previous life, he was a bouncer at Scores in New York. And he lives on a ranch in Texas. And he's just kind of a solo guy know, solo guy that writes these scripts and they turn into good TV shows. It's a, it's a good show for what it is. It's like the best, it's basically dynasty for this generation. You tapped into something that I think really helped it during the pandemic. Cause I know I've talked about it on the podcast, my wife and I, um, you know, we would watch just go with it without him saying that. Cause we wanted to go

to Hawaii. Why do we want to go to Hawaii why do we want to go to Hawaii because we've all trapped in a house with each other for six months and we were picking these shows that's why one of the reasons she loved Emily in Paris or whatever that show is she got to go to Paris for 10 episodes totally and I think Yellowstone was a show that tapped into that

even like Ozark was kind of like that even though I don't know if I want to go to the Missouri mountains or whatever it was at least it was different than where I was living in the same house I was looking at every day. Someone told me that was the same for kids with Cobra Kai. When they were home, they're like, oh, you know, these kids are in high school. By the way, I agree with your, your kill off Daniel La Russa idea. A lot of people are onto that. I thought it people are onto that. I thought it'd be more controversial.

I love that idea. Everybody's like, get that fucking guy out of here. He is holding the show back. It has been Johnny Lawrence's show from the beginning. Yeah. But it's even worse now

because they're trying to make the La Russas the core of the show. That's not what the show is. No. It's a Johnny Lawrence Miguel show. Shea said it best. Those are the heart of it. So with Yellowstone, Costner,

who had one of the great movie careers of the last 30 years. He really did. Like last 35 years, I think him, Hanks, whatever your list is, he's on whatever that list is. And those guys didn't win an Oscar for Best Picture. The guy directed Dances with Wolves and won best picture.

Right. But did not, he never won for best actor, but he won for best director. I mean, that's, that's arguably tougher than, than what those other guys did.

Yeah, no question. So he has this unbelievable career and then he moves into this next phase of it with Yellowstone. He's also, he's made, I mean, I can't even imagine how much money

he's made over the years. I know he lives in Aspen and some famous $70 million house in Aspen, like didn't really need to work anymore. And it seemed like the Yellowstone thing was partly paycheck, partly, oh, I get to be outdoors. I get to live in a fun place, all that stuff. And now this has reinvented him. And you, I think you had in your fun place, all that stuff. And now this has reinvented him. And I think you had in your piece about he has all this ability. He's almost like LeBron on a series of one-year contracts where he can basically decide his own destiny every year. And he's holding hostage over that.

I mean, that show is him. It doesn't get greenlit without him. It doesn't work without him. He's up to $1.2 million an episode this season. Seems low. Yeah. Yeah, that's pretty good for a 10-episode show. And yet now he's doing a bigger deal where he'll get an overhead

and he'll get to have his own company. If they were smart, they would try to do other non-Yellowstone things with him. Yeah. I think they're probably figuring that out, what to do with it. Because obviously he can't be on the prequel. But they'll figure something out. And Yellowstone is one of those shows where it could go

seven, eight, nine years. And shows don't do that anymore. Most Netflix, most streaming shows go two, three seasons most. And they don't renew them because they get too expensive and people aren't subscribing to streaming services for the fourth, fifth season. They want to spend that money on new shows.

So a linear show like this, it's a hit. They could do that for, it could be a soap that goes 10 years. This show is a complete anomaly. It's almost like in football, if there was somebody who played wide receiver and also safety, right? There's no other show that can get mass audience like this, right? That isn't completely mocked by anybody who has an IQ over 90 that can reach middle America. I've told this story before on the pod, but I think people forget sometimes with content, how big America is and how many states are in it.

Because there was one time, it must have been like in the late 2000s when Leno was still the Tonight Show host. And back when the TV options on an airplane were just terrible, right? They would just funnel. It would be like, we have NBC programming for you. And they would just show it on the one TV. And it was like, here's the Tonight here's the tonight show with Jay Leno. And my reaction was like, you gotta be fucking kidding me. Like set me on fire. This is going to be the worst hour of my life. So I put like headphones on to listen to music and I could hear

people laughing. And I'm like, what are they laughing at the tonight show? And it was like two thirds of the plane, like just laughing at the tonight show. And I was like, Oh, okay. This makes sense. No wonder he still has an audience. I'm looking around in the plane. I'm like, I get it. This is, he's hitting all these people. So we've seen this with CBS shows. We've seen this in certain shows.

But not with a show like this, like a kind of like a semi-prestige show with an A-list star that feels like it shouldn't be good, but it is. And it reaches a lot of people. It's like a fucking unicorn. It doesn't win Emmys. That's the one element of it that is still missing.

It's not quite on that level. It is a soap. It's a Western soap, modern Western soap. Great idea for a show. But this show started in the Midwest and South where people who were inclined to watch a Western checked it out and then the word of mouth funneled

out to the rest of the country. I got emails when I wrote about this show from my in-laws. I have in-laws in Mississippi in the South. They were all over this. They're like, Yellowstone, Yellowstone. When you are a broadcaster, which these networks ostensibly

are broad, you've got to reach the broad audience. And people don't realize the most watched show on TV is NCIS still. It's crazy. Well, and also you're getting old people. Like my dad, this has been his favorite show. Totally. Since the moment it came on. And for two years, he was like, you got to watch Yellowstone.

I'm like, all right, cool, whatever. I never watched it until the pandemic. Then all of a sudden I'm on the phone with him like, oh, I'm halfway through season two and we got to talk about this. And like, I totally got it. My dad grew up in a different generation. Like you look at the movies from the forties and fifties, half of them are cowboy things were back then they were called the Cowboys versus Indians, all that. And it was just what, 20 years of programming, 30 years, maybe. John Wayne's one of the biggest stars in the world. And that whole being out, like the Jeremiah Johnson type of movie was a movie that was made all the time. And now it's kind of gone. So Yellowstone almost brings back this old era of like, we're outdoors. We have good guys and bad guys there's some horses there's going to be some people riding maybe chasing each other there's going to be some violence but it is it's it's basically out of like 1948 totally and like you know they bring in it's got a very retro feel they you know this season they brought in the the activist woman who you know has arguments about gmos and rights. And you

got Kevin Costner being like, I don't know what the heck that is. You got the casino stuff. Yeah, you have a whole... The thing with the show is that there are a lot of shows that appeal to that older audience. The difference with this one is that they're getting at least a portion of that younger audience of the bi-coastal audience

that typically doesn't pay attention to that stuff. And they have this kind of coalition. that younger audience of the bi-coastal audience that typically doesn't pay attention to that stuff. And, you know, they're, they're, they have this kind of coalition. It was a politician. It would be like very, very strong in the general election.

Cause you have this coalition of the left and the right. Seriously. And Costner, I mean, he looks fucking great in a cowboy hat. You know, he's somebody that as he gets older, Oh my God.

He, it was probably one of the reasons he picked the show, but I think for a show like this, for it to be as big as it is, how many actors could be in that costar part? It's basically him and Hanks. Is there anybody else?

It has to be somebody who's 16 over. Did you see that, the 1883 show where Hanks did a cameo? He popped on, yeah. Yeah, well, that was weird. Like, what was that all about?

He must just be a fan. I think he was a fan and he was probably trying to impress one of his kids. It could be the only things I could think of. Yeah, he's on for three minutes and that was it. Yeah, and not even that interesting of a role. Billy Bob Thornton also did a cameo. That was kick-ass. He was like the sheriff and he kicked ass.

Hanks was just like a... I know he's like a history guy, so maybe he thought being a Civil War general or something would be cool, but don't know that was bizarre he had a weird fake beard on who else would you say hanks costner is there anybody else uh in that in that role i mean over 60 well i think redford's a little too old now he's probably 80 um you got to be over you know costner's only 66 years old yeah i think he's in his 70s, but he's not that old. Who's a guy that could

do that? I'm telling you, that's the list right now. Because Damon's not old enough yet. It's like Damon 10 years from now could absolutely have been. And maybe that's where Yellowstone goes. Maybe that's where Matt Damon's career goes. Like seven years from now, he's just taking over Yellowstone.

Yeah, if he's not a crypto billionaire. What percentage of the company are they giving him for those ads? Has to be like three to five percent. Oh my God. If they're going to pay $700 million to change the name of Staples Center, what are they giving Damon? A lot. He was the last person I thought needed more money, but it's the less that he knows.

Everyone needs more money. Everyone needs more money. 1883 is a good show. My dad, of course, loves it. My dad, as I said, Jeremiah Johnson's favorite movie of all time. But I was surprised my wife liked it. It's her

favorite show. I didn't anticipate this. Well, the lead is a woman. They have a female lead. And she identifies because she has this weird take about how she would have been amazing in the 1880s. My wife, she was like, I would have been able to do all the stuff. Nobody would have messed with me.

I would have kicked ass back then. Like, all right, I'm not going to argue with you on this, but I think that, and plus Sam Elliott, everybody's love forever. Yeah, that's a very specific take. I would have died in two days. That was my take. I'm dead immediately. I can't

see. My eyesight's bad. I get allergies. I'm immediately getting killed. I'd be that one, the girl who got bitten in the ass by a snake and died. Like that would be perfect. You get smallpox. You're just wiped out. Yeah.

But that's with the Sheridan thing though. I think it's really hard to create the spinoff show. That's actually a good show. That has not happened a lot of times. It is. But the thing is, it's not really like, yeah,

it's a spinoff, but it has nothing to do with Yellowstone. It's just a wagon train show. Yeah. You know, you, you,... Yeah, it's a spinoff, but it has nothing to do with Yellowstone. It's just a wagon train show. You're interested because you're like, oh, okay, this is how they got to Montana. But it's really just a Western wagon train show with some cool things.

They did a whole episode across the river. They do. There's a John Dutton lineage thing, though. I think they do an okay job of at least making it seem somewhat related. Like the same way Melrose Place, when it launched,

Kelly and Steve and Donna came on the first couple episodes to at least give it a little umbilical cord. But they can't have those characters on. They're not born yet. I know, but you have to watch it

and kind of go, how does this person remind me of Costner a hundred years from now I think it's their goal to me that's a little bit of a stretch it's a reach it's you know I guess to me it's just a western wagon train show

that like they have some kind of barrier every week that they have to cross and you know they have they have characters that are sort, you know, they have characters that are sort of similar in feel to the Yellowstone characters, but, you know, obviously 1800s. You left out one important piece.

Incredible facial hair. I was going to say the mustaches. Unbelievable. I wonder how many of that is people growing the facial hair themselves and how many of it is like wigs and face wigs, basically? Because it really seems like the facial hair. I think that's a priority for Taylor Sheridan, honestly. I think so, too. And I wonder about it because Tim McGraw, what is he in his 50s now? Yeah.

No gray. No gray in that facial hair. Looks great. no gray in that facial hair looks great so so like how does that work it's like the ben affleck facial hair like when you're in your 50s like the facial hair goes gray first for most guys right 100 yeah you get you lose it maybe at the top but really the face is where it goes so these guys are you know there's they've got to have facial hair dye which i know is a thing like just for men beards or whatever but like that you got to be aggressive about that you got to do facial hair dye, which I know is a thing like just for men, beards or whatever. But you got to be aggressive about that. You got to do that shit every day. You know, one of the things about 1880s is that I talked about this with Chris Ryan yesterday and the prestige posh of Joanna Robinson. I think our move for people like us, you basically have

to own the saloon or the brothel. That's the only way really for us to get currency. I guess the pharmacy maybe, but I think those are the three places you have to... Because if you don't have that, you're just going to get your ass kicked. I have to be able to offer something. But how do you... The saloon is tough because it's constantly getting shot up

and your tables are getting broken by dudes falling on them right i don't know how you probably business brothel better for me brothel probably too yeah that's probably better so pandemic shows that were reinvented yellowstone is number one on my draft board i think ozark's number two oh really ozark was huge pre-pandemic though i think I think it was pretty huge, but not... I think it's bigger now, and I think we're going to find out. Although it feels like it came out so long ago.

Who knows how season four is going to go? The last season came out right as the pandemic started. Right. So it was sort of like everybody's first binge watch when there was nothing else to do. But that's my case. For me, I hadn't watched it. Everyone's talking about it. there was nothing else to do. But that's my case. I, for me, I hadn't watched it.

Everyone's talking about it. I got nothing to do anyway. I'm like, all right, banged up the first two seasons, watch the third one. And I was talking with Mallory Rubin about it yesterday. Cause she did the same thing.

I don't really remember anything that happened. I watched 30 hours and two weeks. And now I don't, I don't remember where we left off. I could barely remember the, it was like this. Oh, you don't remember. I mean, I remember the last remember. It was like this blur. Oh, you don't remember?

I mean, spoiler alert. No, I remember the last, yeah. The last scene was pretty rough. Yeah. So I think Ozark was helped. So here, I'm going to throw out a wild card here of a big pandemic show. Survivor.

I know so many people that just like, either they watched the first couple seasons and then dropped off and have started in, especially because they can watch it with kids and kids are home. You can watch it. And I know people that have burned through season after season of Survivor.

Which one is it? That's Paramount+, right? That is on Paramount+. Although I think they also put some on Netflix and elsewhere. Because there's seasons of The Challenge on Netflix. elsewhere. Yeah, because Paramount... There's seasons of The Challenge on Netflix. Oh, I'm aware. Paramount Plus has The Challenge.

They have 90210, Melrose Place, Survivor. They do have some binge ones that I think is part of... But they've also done, I think, a decent job of at least introducing new shows that feel like they spent money on them. You know,

mayor of Kingstown is a show that easily could have been on Showtime or stars. Oh yeah. Um, that I'm sure Jeremy Renner TV show, people would bid on that, but because Taylor Sheridan had that relationship with Paramount and they were so desperate to get,

you know, stuff that wasn't Yellowstone onto that service. Um, it makes sense. It went there. Two other pandemic shows. I think Euphoria, we saw in the numbers this week. I think a lot of people, especially younger people, caught up on that first season. It wasn't a lot to catch up on either. And it felt like there was more anticipation. It felt like more of a niche show

when it was on. And now it feels bigger to me, especially with people my daughter's age. She says that's one of the shows for people her age. I mean, you let your daughter watch it? I did. It's pretty graphic. Listen, I'm past the let my daughter stage with basically everything. She can drive now. I'm hopeless.

Yeah, I know. It's funny. Zendaya put out a statement like, this is for mature audiences. Be careful. It's like that's like advertising to teenagers. It's like, please watch this. You know, defy your parents and watch this show. Well, think about they have her who is already a big star when she's on the show.

But she's a bigger star now. Yeah, she's one of the biggest stars in the world now. And she's still at that show. It's amazing. And she won an Emmy during world now. And she's still at that show. It's amazing. And she won an Emmy during the pandemic. And Spider-Man just came out and that's like the biggest thing of the pandemic. So it makes sense that those numbers would go up. So I think that one.

And then the last one, I think it would have happened for the most part anyway. But Succession, anybody who didn't watch that show ended up catching up with it during the pandemic. And I think it's one of the many reasons why I think it became kind of it's the championship belt holder right now for Prestige TV. There's no question. Oh, definitely. The thing with Succession though is that it is very much a

you know, bi-coastal kind of elites show. It is not the Heartland show. It is certainly not Yellowstone. Sure. And as much as it gets attention and media coverage and It is not the Heartland show. It is certainly not Yellowstone. As much as it gets attention and media coverage and awards, can you imagine being a Jay Leno fan in Iowa and watching that show and being like, what are they talking about?

JoJo? It just doesn't... I don't think it comports to that. I could be wrong. I may be misstating it, but I see the numbers. And may be misstating it, but I see the numbers and for as big as Succession is amongst people

we know, the numbers of viewership they're not huge. It's the successor in that way to Mad Men and Breaking Bad. Totally. There's always going to be those shows that have the kind of prestige TV audience. I don't know. Are you watching Station Eleven right now? No, but we have a bunch of, uh, prestige TV audience. Like, I don't know who's, are you watching station 11 right now?

No, but we have a bunch of smart ringer people are, are love that show. I, I just haven't been in the mood yet. Yeah. It's, it's tough.

I mean, it's, it's literally like about a pandemic and how everyone dies, but, uh, but it's, it's, and it's never going to have a huge audience.

It's just never going to, but the, this quote unquote, you know, the, the, the tastemakers like it. Peacock and Paramount, we should mention quickly. I think HBO Max separated themselves a little last year, but still is not on the level of Netflix and Amazon just from reach. Peacock and Paramount seem to be the ones that are kind of jockeying for that little brother spot with all the streamers.

Totally. They're the mid-market baseball team trying to compete with the Yankees, Red Sox, and Dawg. It's a great analogy. They're not quite the Royals, but they're maybe like the Anaheim Angels trying to compete, but without the fan base and the revenue. Yeah, and they don't have the general manager of the Rays that can do a lot with a little. They need that because they're not quite there yet. Peacock, especially.

It'll be interesting to see what happens because Peacock is putting all the Olympics on Peacock for the first time. You don't have to have a cable subscription to watch the Olympics. You can have Peacock instead. So it'll be interesting to see. things that have hit for them. One was the wrestling deal, which I think was successful for them. It basically imported over, over a million subscribers and gave it some sort of an identity. And then the peacock was the second thing. Other than that, like they made a, they made a lot of sports moves that I just, I just don't think people go there for sports conversation or even some of the sports stuff. And I think the Olympics will be... There's sports stuff on Peacock? Like beyond... Yeah, they have a whole day of talk programming

that I don't think people are aware of. Yeah. But I think the Olympics will be a nice test for them. Wait, before we go, can you explain the Golden Globes fiasco in two minutes? Oh, God. Yeah, I can. So the Golden Globes fiasco in two minutes? Oh, God. Yeah, I can. So the Golden Globes were not on television this past Sunday because the entire entertainment industry

has boycotted the Hollywood Foreign Press, which gives the awards, because it was revealed last year that they didn't have any Black members and that they had made some questionable ethical decisions and policies over the years. So a group of publicists decided that they wanted to boycott. Then all the studios boycotted. Netflix said they wouldn't do anything.

And all of a sudden, NBC says, wait, we can't have an award show without any talent. So we're canceling the show for 2022. It'll probably come back 2023 if the boycott ends. And the Golden Globes group has done a bunch of things over this past year to diversify and to end a lot of the questionable practices. And yes, we are talking about a silly

Hollywood award show. That's been terrible forever. Like really, genuinely awful. What was the Taurus one for Best Comedy one year? It didn't win. It got nominated? Yeah. But was the tourist, the tourist one for best comedy one year? No, no, it didn't win.

It got nominated. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But the thing is, people like the golden globes. They like seeing celebrities in a small room interacting with each other. It's film and TV.

It's the first award show of the year. So people come back from new years. They're like, Oh, you know, I'll watch this after football. Like it's a, it,

it was other than the Oscars, it was the highest rated, um, you know, film and watch this after football. Like it was, other than the Oscars, it was the highest rated, you know, film and TV award show. So people do like it. And now Hollywood has sort of killed it off and over this, you know, kind of grandstanding over this ethical practices. And like my take on it is these are silly Hollywood award shows.

Who cares? You know, some of these other bodies aren't great either in their ethics. It's like the sports equivalent would be like if the Golden Globes was the IOC, like the critics choice is FIFA. Or, you know, it's like they all have their own, they all have their own, you know, ethics problems.

And even the Oscars, like it's just a political contest. You know, there's campaigning and advertising and events and these voters are wined and dined. They're all kind of silly Hollywood award shows. It'll end up being like what happened with the Beverly Hills Hotel when everybody boycotted it. And then, what, two weeks ago,

we had the Polo Lounge. It's back. Oh, God. Have you been there lately? Yeah, it's hopping. I mean, it is like. It is mogul central. It's the last place people can pretend that Hollywood is still a big deal.

Yeah. Well, it's back. And I'm sure the Golden Globes will be back. I just think... I never took the award seriously, but I like the idea of celebrities in a room. And I like the idea of somebody trying to measure what mattered the most in TV and movies. But it's just always going to be flawed to the point of,

how is that process ever going to work? Especially now. Now there's all these other elements and you got to make sure every category has the right representation. It's like, I just feel like the voting stuff is going to fall apart this decade. That there's a lot of people that think that,

especially because award shows are really a product of traditional linear TV. And how do award shows work in an on-demand streaming era? Are they going to even be a thing? And young people definitely don't care about them. The Oscars had, they sunk to 10 million viewers last year. The Oscars were terrible last year. And granted, nobody had seen the movies and they had COVID protocols, but they didn't

even try really. It's like, does it? And I think there's a lot of ramifications of that. If people stop caring about these awards, then certain types of movies won't get made. Some of the movies that you and I love the most might not even get made if they don't have an opportunity to win an Oscar and get that broader audience. We'll see this year

because the Oscars are at the end of March. People do care if Will Smith wins an Oscar. That is a storyline that I think most people care about. And if the audience isn't there for that show, then, I mean, he's one of the last people that I think anyone would care is this person going to win an Oscar or not. I agree.

And they're trying to get... The ratings typically go up when there are popular movies that are nominated. They're desperately trying to get Spider-Man nominated for Best Picture. I don't know if that's going to happen, but their best bet was probably to try to get Tom Holland and Zendaya to host the show.

Right. Which would be a coup. Because they're together, they're dating, and they're in the most popular movie of the year. Julia Lipman had a great idea for this. For Oscar hosts. The ringers, Julia Lipman. Yeah. You know how there are the four Chrises?

Yeah. Just four Chrises. Four Chris broadcasts. The four Chrises are the hosts. Just all four Chris's. Yeah. Just four Chris's. Four Chris's broadcast. The four Chris's are the hosts. Just all four of them. They probably wouldn't do that because it's four white dudes. My idea is Ben and J-Lo.

Oh, wow. Is Ben and J-Lo on play? No, no. I mean, nobody has said this is happening, but my idea is I think that would be huge. They're fun. Yeah. She could do a dance and sing her song that's funny totally funny so that's what i mean though it

needs some sort of gimmick like that it's like ben and j-lo the four chrises i don't know about zendaya and tom highland holland because i'm not sure i want to see tom holland host like a small dinner party at my house much less the oscars he can sing and dance though. He was in Billy Elliot. I know he can do stuff like that. But in Zendaya, like you said, she has a huge following. Young people do care about her. And maybe it's just her by

herself. No jokes. She's just kind of... Apparently, she's pretty shy in person though. I don't know that she might need someone a little more outgoing to deal with her. Who knows? I don't know what they're going to do. And I don't know if it'll even matter

if anyone cares about the Oscars, regardless of the host. Kieran Culkin? He'd be great. He's not famous enough, though. That's the thing. They run into this problem every year is that they need someone super famous.

This show goes around the world. And most people don't even know who Kieran Culkin is. Ben and J-Lo's an amazing idea. You're right. The four Chris's, they can't do that. I just like the gimmick. Ben and J-Lo, though, they're famous enough. They hit a bunch. They are super famous. They would love them.

Even Ben and Matt, they would probably do. Ben and Matt would be great. They thought about getting Clooney last year. People thought that Clooney would do it because S know, they tried it. They thought about getting Clooney last year. People thought that Clooney would do it because Soderbergh was the producer, but Clooney was shooting his movie and didn't want to do it. Like they need someone like that who's a massive star like The Rock or someone who will just say, you know what?

I'm going to take this one for the team. I'm going to help out the industry. I'm going to host the Oscars. People just don't want to do it. There's, you know, you're going to get torn down. People are going to say, whatever you do is not great and there's no benefit. Or just have Kimmel do it because he was good when he did it. Kimmel's good.

He's right there. He's on your network. But he's done it so many times that they don't consider that special anymore. Yeah. Makes sense. All right. You can subscribe to Matt Bellany's newsletter twice a week, Sundays and Thursdays. You interviewed me for it. We did like an hour long interview. I think you probably used 20% of it. We just went way too long. It was like, it was kind of like what we're doing now.

Yeah. We ended up talking about 90210 reruns on Pluto. And the challenge, yeah, Pluto. Trying to get Pluto reinvented. You can check out the Puck newsletter. It's excellent. I would highly recommend it. Yeah, puck.news. You can check out the Puck newsletter. It's excellent. I would highly recommend it. Yeah, puck.news.

You can sign up for it. It's called What I'm Hearing. And there's a free version. There's a subscriber version. You can get both. All right. Good to see you. You too.

All right. That's it for the podcast. Thanks to Justin and Rob. Thanks to Matt. Thanks to Kyle Creighton for producing, as always. Thanks to Dylan Berkey and Steve Cerruti.

And I will be back on this feed with the Mega Playoff Preview. Multiple guests on Thursday's pod. I will see you then. I don't have a few years with him on the wayside on the front side never I don't have

a few years