The Ringer NBA Show - A "Plausible Eventual Possibility” With Nate Duncan | Group Chat

Episode Date: November 11, 2020

Justin, Rob, and Tjarks are joined by Nate Duncan to talk about recent reports from Kevin O’Connor that Russell Westbrook could be had in a trade and from ESPN that a forced trade by Westbrook or James Harden is a “plausible eventual possibility” (1:15). Then they discuss potential landing spots for Chris Paul (21:30), the Thunder’s new head coach Mark Daigneault (33:30), Marc Stein’s report that the Atlanta Hawks are pursuing Jrue Holiday (37:30), and some draft talk (50:30). Hosts: Justin Verrier, Rob Mahoney, and Jonathan Tjarks Guest: Nate Duncan Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hello and welcome to group chat. The ringer's weekly MBA discussion where we talk about literally everything because that's what happened in Ukraine an entire offseason into two weeks. I am Justin Varyer joining me today, Jonathan Charks. What's up, guys. Rob Mahoney. What a time to be alive, Justin. What a time to be alive.

And our special guest today, a man of many podcasts from the Dunkdown basketball podcast, Nate Duncan. What's up, man? Excited for my ringer debut. How's it going, guys? Hey, it's going great. So today we've got a lot of news up top. We're going to talk about Chris Paul, potentially going to the Phoenix Suns. We're going to talk about some Houston Rockets scuttlebutt that just keeps picking up steam by the week. We're going to talk about

a new coach in OKC, who we can't pronounce his first name, or his last name, sorry. And then we're going to get into some draft preview stuff in the back end. First, we're going to take a quick break. And then when we come back, we're going to get to all that stuff. So a lot of news to get into here. Nate, as the guest, I'll give you the choice here. What do you want to talk about? It's got to be Rockets, right? Let's do it. So the report from ESPN today is that James Harden and Russell Westbrook have expressed concern about the direction of the franchise through direct conversations or discussions. I don't know what the difference is with the representatives and the Rockets front office sources said.

yada yada however the concerns expressed by hardin in westbrook that houston's window as a contender could be closing has left the organization fearful that the superstar's commitment to remaining with the rockets could be wavering and probably our favorite part of this report neither player has requested a trade at this point though the scenario has become a plausible eventual possibility so what a line It's a lot of words here. And credit to Tim McMahon, who along with Woj, wrote this story. I imagine having to phrase this delicately is a true. You could do a masterclass on that. But Nate, what is your just reaction to this report here? Don't put all your assets in for a Drew Holiday Trade now because James Hardin could be available at the deadline. Yeah.

I mean, so we had a segment in last week's podcast that we didn't end up doing. because we ended up talking Drew, frankly, funnily enough, and then also some mixed stuff, but there's a lot of James Harden's smoke going around. There was like little reports where it's like, you know,

maybe something will happen down the road, but it was really flimsy, but there was enough to suggest that something was going on. KOC also reported on the mismatch the other day that Russell Westbrook could be had. Another just like, you know, there's a lot of stuff going around here. So Rob, what do you think is going on here?

Are we going to see Hardin moved anytime soon? I mean, that's going to be up to him, right? Him and Westbrook both in terms of what they feel the long-term stability of that team is. But the Rockets are right to be concerned. Like, you look at this roster, you look at what it was capable of already, the significant amount of reconstruction that would need to take place in order to making it to something different than what it was, I don't know how you would feel really bullish about this group.

And so, you know, if you're James Harden, I think you're right to look around the league and say, okay, what could my options potentially be? And as Nate was saying, if you're these other teams who are mulling, you know, offers for Drew, mulling, you know, calling up the Wizards to talk about Brad Beal, I think we're pumping the brakes on a lot of that stuff because if James Hardin is available, that changes the nature of all of those conversations. I mean, this does feel somewhat inevitable, though, right? Like, this was always going to happen. If they lost their coach, they lost a general manager, like, who wouldn't be concerned if you were the star, right? Like, that was, that was always going to be the conversation. Now it's a matter

of what Houston can do about it. And to me, what stood out to me was talking about how they haven't paid the luxury tax the last three years. Like, it's time to spend some money if you're for Tito, if you, if you're keeping this team together. Well, and not just not paid it, but gone out of their way to not pay it, right? Like, there's a difference between those two things. And when you have James Harden salary and Russell Westbrook's salary on the books to begin with, improvement looks like paying the luxury tax. Yeah, we talked about this a lot on our show that they just don't have any options to improve. They basically are at the tax right now.

And they've got those five good players, maybe six with Daniel House, although his situation is in flux, shall we say. But, yeah, they need more good players. And yeah, maybe the $5 million mini mid-level is not going to get it done to make you a championship contender again. But we know right now that they're not a championship contender. And so you have to try to do something. And I don't think that James Hardin is going to get moved before the season. If I'm the Rockets, I would at least want to give it a shot and say, hey, Russell Westbrook,

now that you're healthy and you're not coming off coronavirus, you don't have a quad injury, maybe we can look a lot better. But if it's clear that they're not a championship contender by the deadline, I think then all these options are on the table. Yeah. Let's start with the Rockets part of this right now. Just because if you're them, how do you avoid a potentially calamitous situation? Like Nate is saying, they don't really have many options just to improve on the fringes if they don't want to pay for it.

So is the only real course here that try to find a new home from Russell Westbrook? And is that probably like the toughest task in the NBA right now? Well, hold on. Like what about using the mid-level for like a surge of Baca type? I mean, that's make you a contender, maybe, but I make you win some games. Then you're still a 50 win team, and you can sell Hardin on that,

and you don't have to blow the whole thing up that quickly. If they could get him, absolutely. I expect his market to exceed that, though. Yeah, maybe. And it's Houston the kind of team right now, you take a pay cut to go to. You know, knowing, like, you don't know how long Hardin in Westbrook

could potentially be there. It's one thing to sign up for a cheaper deal to play with LeBron and AD in L.A. or something like that. But as this report is showing, this Houston situation is pretty unstable in terms of the dynamics there. What did they need realistically

to get better? Because they were just so outclassed in that Lakers series. In ways, and yes, the whole Westbrook not getting guarded thing was a major problem. You know, if you can just guard him with your center,

then things get a lot easier defensively. I mean, your number one hope is just that he's better. I don't know how realistic that is, but you have to just, that's the bet that you made when you traded for him. But, like, they had no fast break points over, like, three games, basically. They're getting killed on the offensive glass. They get the ball out of Hardin's hands.

None of these other guys can do anything. I mean, the list of reasons why they lost to the Lakers is, like, one of those printouts that you hold out, and it just, like, reaches to the floor. It's ridiculous. It's like a CVS receipt. How much are you guys buying it? CPS? I buy like shampoo and I just get like the Magna Carta length of a receipt right now. I mean, look at that hair. That doesn't come cheap.

It's true. I mean, so let me throw this out there. So if getting an impact guy could be difficult because of the luxury attack implications because of how much money they actually have to spend. What if they just had more depth? Because I do wonder how. how much the style that they played last year is taxing on those guys, especially key guys like James Hardin, who we saw had to guard more big guys when they went super small, when PJ Tucker, who, God, if he misses extended time, like, what do they do?

And he's a guy who might be griping for an extension this offseason before we even get to James Hardin or Russell Westbrook. I wonder if they just break up whatever mid-level they have available to them and just try to get like a couple guys at the big man position, maybe another wing or two, who will just soak up some minutes because the drop off between what they have with their starting unit and everyone else is pretty significant. Rob, what do you think? Well, I mean, I think the finances are getting tight pretty quickly once you start breaking up

the mid-level. And this was a franchise that, you know, when Darryl was there, was very successful, finding undrafted guys, finding second-round guys, finding players like a Daniel House, you can plug in, and they still only had basically six viable playoff rotation players. like that's a huge problem. So any depth is going to be welcome for a team in that position. I just don't know how you find it without really, you know, really getting creative, really digging to the bottom of the bucket.

It's just going to be tough to turn up those guys at a thin air. Yeah. And just to be clear about their financial situation, with the guys that I would expect them to bring back. Ben McLemore, you'd probably guarantee him for $2.3 million next year. With him, with those top six guys and, you know, Maybe if you bring back Austin Rivers on another minimum, for eight players, you're already, you've got $8 million below the apron.

So even if they wanted to pay the tax, they are, they wouldn't be able to use the full mid-level because you would just run out of space below the apron to do that. Because if you use the full mid-level, of course, we all know where you're hard-capped at the apron. So you're looking at that mini-mid level. And once you split that up, that's 5.7. and you're basically getting down to what would be the veterans minimum in terms of actual cash. So if you're going to split that up, it doesn't really even make sense to use it at all.

You probably should just use minimum. So you're really looking at one guy, $5.7 million. That's their flexibility as of now. The tough part with this, too, is like, we discussed the CVS receipt length list of grievances with their playoff performance. So much of that, to me, seemed spiritual. It was like they just folded so quickly that there are definitely imperfections with the roster and with the rotation, depth being a huge one of them,

lack of secondary playmaking being another. But like Russell Westberg wasn't healthy, did not look great. Even if he had been healthy, maybe he would have been sufficiently stifled anyway. We don't really know. And then the team just kind of collapsed on itself in the middle of that series where if everything had been perfect,

if the stars had been aligned, maybe they're more competitive. It's hard to even get a feel for what a best case scenario for the Rockets would have or could look like because they were that bad in the playoffs. At least in that round in particular. This is really more a James Harden conversation in terms of what does he want?

Because if he has to go somewhere else, he probably has to change his game somewhat, right? He can't join a contender and get like 25 ISOs a game, hold the ball, the entire game, do whatever he wants. So if you're Houston, you're telling James Hardin, you can stay here and go after Kareem's points record and do whatever you want to do, will win 50 games.

And I'm not sure Hardin wants to go somewhere else and try to change his game and win a championship. So in that case, maybe you just do nothing and run it out. Well, wouldn't an organization change what they do to fit a James Hardin type? It's more about the star players, though, right?

Like, if he's going to go play in Philly, is Joel Embed setting 50 screens like Clint Capella and Hardin dribble the whole game? Probably not. So, I mean, part of why they lost last year, number one, the OKC series, they struggled a little bit more than expected.

because they forced him out of that ISO game with Lou Doort. He couldn't do anything against Lou Doort in isolation. They had to go back to a conventional pick and roll style, which they eventually made work, but that was a little bit different than that ISO style that you're talking about. And then against the Lakers, they just double teamed it. And so I think if you're James Harden, you're not thinking my style doesn't work,

but you are thinking, hey, if they're just going to double team me, I'm making the right play, giving the ball up, and these other guys can't do anything. So I want to go somewhere where if they double-team me, we have enough to actually take advantage of that. Well, I don't want to skip over, you know, as we're talking about, you know, moving Hardin, moving Westbrook.

Like, I don't want to skip over the short term of this, which is not to suppose what or who Woj and Tim McMahon's sources were. But a lot of times with these reports, it's a flare going up from a player side, from an agent's side. Like we've said, saying, spend more money, saying, make this roster better. It's a warning shot to the franchise. that the players might not be exactly thrilled with their current circumstances.

So there is this whole intermediary period where the rockets are going to try to remedy whatever the situation here is before we have to talk about nuclear options like trading, one of the best offensive players in NBA history. I mean, I guess we should talk about Westbrook trades, right? Like, is there even trade that makes sense for him out there? Is there a trade that makes sense for Westbrook? And you're also selling Hardin on trading Westbrook, who wanted him there in the first place. Like, this is part of the issue with the superstar era, right?

is like a guy like Hardin gets to call a certain amount of the shots, gets to have a certain kind of influence, can put your team in a certain position. And when you end up in a bad place, they can also leave. What do you think, Nate? Do you think there is a potential destination for Westbrook? Oh, gosh. I mean, not if anybody's smart.

Now, I mean, you could, the Rockets had a quote unquote untradable guy last year, and Chris Paul, who was kind of in the same situation as Westbrook is this year. contract-wise and being viewed as a relatively toxic asset. But the way that they moved him for Westbrook was, number one, they took on a contract that goes even longer. And number two, they had a bunch of draft picks that they included in that trade, that they now no longer really have.

And so with that being the case, I don't really see it. Maybe Eric Gordon is someone else that they could consider moving, but they also have no young talent on this team, right? The Capella was really their last bullet to fire there, plus the first round pick in that trade when they picked up Robert Covington. Tucker Covington, yeah, those guys have value, but you're going to, those guys both are really efficient in terms of their salaries. And so who are you going to trade those guys for where you're going to get players are going to help you win a little bit more? I mean, they're in a very, very difficult situation. And I think maybe that's a little bit of why Darrell Moray is.

longer there as as well and it maybe some of this comes down to Tillman for Tita his willingness not to spend both previously and in the future it's just a difficult situation I mean and I think I wouldn't necessarily trade James Hardin right now just because I think so much more is going to be available at the trade deadline as well and you want to at least see how this year goes but it does seem like it's fait accompli at this point I mean I mean, to go off on Nate's point, Mike Dantone just quit, and now he's an assistant. He's like, I know, I'll just be the assistant somewhere else. I don't even be head coach anymore.

Yeah, people are running away from this situation. I can't really think of anything that would work for Westbrook that wouldn't just completely tank the rockets. Like, I think a dream scenario would be the trades we talked about Chris Paul, potentially going to the Lakers, where the Lakers just aggregate every single salary they have in the books, and they just dump it on Houston. but then Houston isn't much of a player as much as I'd want to see what Westbrook could do as the third option around AD and LeBron.

I don't know. It just seems too difficult. And then I guess they could still find a way to move Gordon or Covington. But then you're really just kind of tearing down what Darry had built. And they're kind of in a situation here where they're almost cleaning up the mess that Darrell left behind.

Like as much as we say that Darrell wanted to leave Phil, it does seem like he left them in a pretty no-win situation there. Well, I was saying even once Russell Westbrook, that once that trade was made, I was saying to myself, these are the actions of a man who does not expect to be working for Tillman Fortita for too much longer. And that's what turned out to happen. McMahon had reporting recently that it was actually James Hardin and Fortita who wanted to bring in Westbrook and Morrie wanted to try to.

to make it work with Chris Paul and that, you know, he was forced to acquiesce to that trade. And then, you know, they made one more attempt to make it work with Westbrook by throwing in the rest of their chips at the trade deadline. So, you know, is that Darry's fault? No one will really know he, I mean, I'm sure he could have fought harder against those if he really believed in it or he just kind of saw the writing on the wall and knew that he would have other offers, particularly after the Hong Kong incident, maybe he wasn't that interested in working there either because the rockets have such a huge China footprint.

And so being with an organization that doesn't have as much of that would be a lot easier for him as well and easier for Fertilla. Who knows? But it's not a surprise that he's no longer there, given the tenor of his moves, changed so suddenly it seemed like in that 2019 offseason. Yeah. Can we look at this from Philly's perspective just real quickly before we move on here?

So I do think it's interesting that this is coming up before this season. And maybe there isn't enough time for Hardin even to force his way out of that situation before the games actually play here, or at the very least, training game starts. And I do wonder if this comes to a head, as we've seen many times before, and James Hardin just says, I want now immediately you got to trade me. I wonder if this accelerates the trade process because a lot of what we were saying when Darrell Mori first got to Philly is you don't make a James Hardin trade.

You don't make just an earth-shattering move with either Joel or Ben before you get a look at them. Maybe he'll just massage the fringes and try to figure that out later. What if that situation is forced? His hand is forced and he has to make a trade. James Hardin's on the market tomorrow. You don't get your trial run with Joe and Ben. Would you do a trade before or would you just risk Nate that he goes somewhere else?

Oh, I would, if you're saying the only way they can get hardened is to put Ben Simmons in the deal, I would do that in a second. They probably would need to include some other salary there as well because the sixers are in their own luxury tax situation. Right now, you'd want to even it out. But yes, absolutely. I mean, this is controversial here for my first ever ringer podcast appearance. But I think Ben Simmons is one of the more overrated players in the NBA. Oh, wow.

We're just dropping takes. I love it. Just because he's so, he's in the same way that Houston has struggled to deal with the Russell Westbrook. Now, Simmons gives you more defensively, but probably less from a scoring standpoint. I just think it's really, he's a really valuable player, but he's just so hard to build her on. and there's a difficult fit with Embed who needs to be around the basket as well. Harden just fits so much better. I mean, you know, Ben Simmons, to me, unless he learns how to shoot, really has a ceiling of,

you know, around the 15th best player in the NBA. And that's if he just continues to evolve in the ways that he has, whereas Hardin, we think of as a top six player in the NBA. And so when you have a chance to pair two guys like that, Embed and Hardin, I think you just have to do it. And I mean, there's no one else that they're trading for James Harden, right? Like, I mean, that's the only way you're getting. You're not getting James Harden without trading Ben Simmons. So I would do it.

And I would do it pretty quickly. Yeah, but I think this is more of a trade-the-line conversation. I just seems so, I mean, I guess you never know, but it just seems hard to believe this would happen like in the next two weeks. This feels like four or five, maybe next off season. It's probably a more realistic timeline for all this. We're just laying the groundwork out here. We're just a couple of guys kicking around options, no big deal. Yeah, the specific scenario was posed to me.

I answered that hypothetical. I agree with you, John. I think it's more likely a trade deadline thing at the earliest. It's just like you guys are saying, it's too much change. It's too crazy right now. But, you know, this is everyone kind of being on notice. And if things don't improve and I don't expect them to, then trade deadline is probably where it's at. I mean, here's the thing.

Front offices around the NBA are having the same conversation. They're gaming out this same stuff, whether it's the timing, whether it's, you know, Philly's going to get into this with Ben Simmons or not. Like all of these are possibilities that are feasibly on the table and you have to consider, even if it does seem pretty far out. Right. Now, let's pivot to a discussion that might happen or might come to fruition a little sooner than the James Harden one.

So earlier, no, I think it was yesterday night, Windhorst and Timbantam said a report that the Phoenix Suns have had discussions about acquiring Chris Paul. The talks have been ongoing and continued to gather traction, but there is no imminent deal. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd been talking about this for a while. We've talked in the past about the Sons as kind of a prime candidate to do something. They clearly found something in the bubble, but it does feel like they need to level up just a little bit in order to maintain their status as a true contender in a playoff.

phrase. Nate, what do you think about the fit with Paul and Booker together in Phoenix? It's about as good as any of these Chris Paul destinations. The Suns, you saw that they did a lot better when they had a true point guard in Ricky Rubio last year. I mean, that position had just absolutely been miserable for them. They do need one more off the dribble score. And also, you know, it's rare that I will focus on these sorts of aspects, but it'll actually take this franchise to a legitimate place. To have Chris Paul, Hall of Famer, the head of the Players Association,

if they can get him and show that they are a real organization again, that's really important. And Booker really took strides last year playing off the ball. I thought some of the cutting that he was doing, his touch time was down. It wasn't just set up the pins and knock him down in a pick and roll every single time because he had a point guard in Rubio. And now Paul is a much better shooter off the ball as well.

Yes, maybe he'll control things. He's not going to push and transition as much as a big part of their game. But I think particularly because it's not going to cost the Suns that much to get Chris Paul, particularly because they have salary cap space and they don't have to match the salaries as much as another team would. I think I like this possibility quite a bit for the Phoenix Suns. I think the space part is big too, especially considering the free agent alternatives, right? Like the other ways the Sons would conceivably go about improving their roster in free agency at least aren't spectacular necessarily in terms of what could be on the board. The Paul, you know, plugging Paul into what they do makes a lot of sense.

Just the question is, are you comfortable with the timeline that he puts you on in terms of you potentially have to be looking at replacing Chris Paul in a couple years just by age alone, much less his contract? And are you comfortable with that situation? I mean, the opportunity cost is so low. That's why I think this makes a lot of sense. Yeah, so just very quickly, just to lay out the groundwork. So you would assume that the package going back to OKC in this would be Rubio and I guess Ubre and then maybe there would be like a pick for sweetener. So that's why we're talking about that.

And like just other options, I think, on the free agent market. Well, yeah, here's why this is so sexy though. actually for the Sons. They have the $17 million in space, but they wouldn't necessarily have to use that space to absorb Paul. They might be able to use that space. Rubio and Ubrey together, that's about $31 million. You need to get to $33 million to do a legal trade for Paul. So let's say you use your space similar to what the Lakers did last year. They used their space first and then they traded for Anthony Davis. Here the Sons could use their space, then trade. Rubio and Ubre plus another $2 million in salary.

You could throw Ty Jerome in there if you wanted to and you could get there. So now you actually, Chris Paul and a $18 million free agent, now you're talking a little bit here. Yeah. And if you wanted to chase a free agent like a Fred Van Vlee, you would have to renounce all of their like the Sarich types in order to get to a number. you think that could be competitive without even knowing that you can get them, right? Didn't this kind of feel like

though the first, like here's the offer that's out there? It's kind of rumor for the whole lead to kind of digest. It's like Oklahoma City leaking it out there saying Phoenix was going to give us this because my thought was like

because if you're Chris Paul, you have some kind of room to speak your mind in this. And I saw a report I kind of believe where it said he wants to play in New York or Los Angeles next year. And if he's not going to do that,

I would think he'd want to go for a title contender. So if you're Chris Paul, like, yeah, the sons will be good with you. We're not a title contender. Do you really want to go to like a market like Phoenix and not contend for a title versus push for a Lakers, push for the clippers? So that part to me is the thing is like, is Chris Paul going to buy in to fighting for an eight seed in Phoenix versus some of other options? I mean, I don't know about CP specifically, but NBA players are kind of into Phoenix. Like I think if the franchise hadn't been such a mess, they would be pretty into going there. You know, you can live pretty comfortably.

Like there's, it's not a bad place for an NBA player to set up shop. I'll say that. Tyson Chandler might pop out of a closet when you least expect it. No, but I mean, look, what contender is really out there for Paul?

We talked like briefly about the Laker situation. That seems like a bit of a pipe dream. If you're going to New York, like you're not going to Brooklyn. And if you're going to the Knicks, like you're in a worse situation than the suns. I do wonder, and the Thunder have,

I think it was Winhorse who said this the other day. Like the Thunder are probably going to be working with Paul on the situation or to provide him a bit of a soft landing. Like, I wonder if this is probably the best combination of a winning situation where you're still a key part of what you're doing. And so I don't know. I think this makes sense in a lot of ways.

Okay, Justin. So if you're Chris Paul, would you try to Philly or Phoenix if you had the choose? It's tough. Well, is Philly on the table? I mean, is Daryl. Are you really going to run that back? I mean, he loves Chris.

Like, he is a huge fan of Chris Paul's game. I'll go back to what John was saying. I think you're absolutely right, John, that this is the trial balloon floated by OKC of, hey, we've got an offer out there. This could really happen. Get your offers better because I think the deal, if I'm the sons, my first offer is, yeah, it's Chris Paul. But he stayed healthy last year. We don't know if he's going to stay healthy. He's got two more years left at over 40 million.

Crazy as it is to say for someone who made all NBA this last year, he is actually a potentially negative contract. The value that OKC is going to get coming back in terms of future assets, it's really more about, okay, we'll take on your bad contracts in exchange for Chris Paul that are even worse, like a Philly deal involving Horford or Harris or something like that. My offer, if I'm Phoenix, is just Ricky Rubio and Kelly Upray and tied Jerome, and that's it, and say, hey, if you got better out there, you know, maybe we'd consider throwing in a real future asset. Ubre is an expiring contract. Rubio maybe could get flip, but, you know, he's not some of premium asset for a rebuilding team. So I think that's where we're at right now is Phoenix is making that offer. And OKC is like, all right, we really don't want to do this. who want to get something for them, the rest of you guys beat the sun's offer and either force the sons to throw more in or go in that direction instead.

I mean, I love the dominoes of this long-term Russell Westbrook play that the Thunder have made. I would love to fast forward five years into the future and see, you know, they're trading Paul for, you know, potentially Rubio and Ubre and whatever, or another deal where they get other picks. They're going to eventually flip those players down the line. Like the total net gain of the Russell Westbrook trade could be pretty enormous. miss once we get to the bottom of it.

So if you are okay, C, and let's just assume that it comes down to a Philly offer versus a Phoenix offer, is the Philly offer just so bad, are the contract so toxic that like that's just a non-starter? Like, I kind of want to have a Tobias, a Harris conversation because it seems like we've gotten to the point here where we were with Paul last year, where he's just unsalvageable, like his contract is too much. If I'm looking at what I can get from Philly versus what I can get from Phoenix, I almost wonder if taking a bet on Tobias might be better than, you know, the Vrubio slash Ubrey deal, except Charks, you think Ubre is a superstar.

So perhaps that's- There's no, no Ubrae slander on this spot, Justin. Yeah. So I don't know. Like, I kind of feel like Tobias is the guy if he just falls into the right situation, which would take a lot. but he could reestablish his value, perhaps not up to where his contract is, but just as a good player yet again. I mean, both he and Horford are better players for other teams than they are for the Sixers,

which is part of what presents the problem and especially with their salary. So I buy that other teams might be interested in Tobias Harris at that price tag, maybe not, whether the team like the Thunder wants to be a way station for him or not. I mean, by all accounts, a great guy to have around your organization. It wouldn't be any kind of problem from that perspective, but it's a costly bet you're making that other teams really like Tobias Harris and what he could be for their organization at that money. It's really, if it is OKC acquiring Harris or Horford,

it's about what else you're throwing in for that to me. I mean, just straight up trading Chris Paul for Harris and Horford. Those are two worst contracts. And OKC is not trying to win. They're trying to rebuild. They don't want to win a lot of games this year. They are zagging while everyone else is zinging in the Western Conference this year. They want to be at the top of that 2021 draft and maybe draft Kate Cunningham out of Oklahoma or Oklahoma State, I should say.

So to me, all right, if Philly is going to throw in two future first-round picks, all right, now we're talking. You know, if you're not going to that level or, you know, maybe A-first and Matisse Sible, I might start thinking about it. But they want future assets. The reason you're getting Tobias Harris is just because he is a bad contract. And yeah, maybe you could flip him again at a later point if he rehabs his value. He is going to score there, you would think, playing with him and Shea Gilges Alexander. Maybe they could be okay. But that's why you're doing that.

You want to get more assets from the Sixers. And, I mean, I think you're not getting off of both of those guys for Chris Ball unless you're putting in, I think, at least two first-round picks or a first-round are in Thibel. And speaking of other things, Josh Richardson and Sheikh Milton, both from Oklahoma. And that's a guy you could flip again as Richardson. You get him now. At the deadline, it's a very small contract, a three and D guy. That's a lot easier to flip for more assets down the road. Yeah, you know, I've been thinking about that too. You've seen a lot of smoke about Richardson, but like Philly needs, if you're trading for Chris Powell, you need actual good players. Still, right? Like Richardson disappointed a little bit last year, but for $12 million, I'm not sure how

you're necessarily doing better than him. I think he was overstretched last year as having to do more out of the pick and roll just because they didn't have anyone else. So now if you have Chris Paul, he can fit more into that role that he had in his early years, Miami focused on defense a little bit more. You know, I wouldn't be trying to trade him if you're trying to win right now. You kind of, those type of 3-D guys don't just grow on trees.

I think he's still important for what they're going to try and do. Philly should know that more than any other team Well since we're talking about okay see here Let's pivot quickly They have a new coach His name is Wait can I try it? Can I try it? I've only seen it Digno

Close Is that how you pronounce it? Rob What do you think? There's a little more At least from what I understand of the LT at the end So it's a little more of a Dagnalt kind of situation Mark Dagnalt Is the way I've heard it pronounce Again Mark forgive us if we're wrong

Anunciation expert on this podcast. So whatever he says, we just go with. Everyone's got to have a lane, you know? Yeah. So this is the first who he coached for, I think, of this offseason. Because I got to say, I don't think I've ever heard of this guy. Even though he is a graduate from the prestigious university of Connecticut, and probably was there at the same time I was because he is 35 years old, which so,

this is your moment of the offseason where you feel incredibly old. He was a OKC Blue head coach. That's their G-League team for five years. He was an assistant for just one season. So this is a pretty rapid rise. When you see his face, do you see someone you played foosball against or like through a frisbee with on the quad?

Like, is there a sense memory there for you at Yukon, is what I'm saying. No, I only, I don't see the competition, you know? I just play with it myself and worry about my game. I do think this is pretty remarkable in that I'm pretty sure we've never seen a franchise's G-League head coach come up through the system and become that team's actual head coach. So this, you know, the Thunder are a long-term development franchise. They have prioritized that for a while.

Now, the Blue itself was not exactly a funnel for NBA level talent. There are a couple guys, you know, Alex Caruso came through there. A lot of the Thunders, you know, rostered young guys have gone, you know, bounce back and forth. But I'm very curious to see what he does just because, you know, this is an unconventional move going from G-League head coach to NBA head coach within the same organization. There's clearly a lot of institutional faith there. track record of guys who came up and were head coaches in the G league, not bad. Yeah, especially these days. So Indiana hired one.

I mean, Nick Nurse is doing well. Tarks, do you have any feel for this move? I mean, young coach, young team, it makes sense, right? Like, you're just going to long-term build. You don't want some veteran coach who wants to do it his way. I mean, it fits. He's also probably pretty cheap for OKC right now. It's probably helpful as well.

I think it signals if you had any hope of the thunder holding on to like a Galinari or even maybe a shrewder long-term. Chris Paul for longer into this season. You think he was consulted on this hire? Is Chris older than him? Chris is 35, right? I think he's 35, so I think they're at the same age. They're peers, really.

Right, and aren't we all just peers working together to create something? Who was the Thunder draft pick that they got from Stanford? They drafted in the first round specifically to send him to the G League. Josh Houston. Yeah. Fred Katz could tell you that's Josh Hewis. this. I mean,

that's true. I can tell you all about the fringe OKC players. So they didn't get that to work, but they did manage to get a head coach

out of the G League. So I guess that's something. All right, let's take a quick break here. And when we come back, we have even more news, but at the very least, it's related to our second segment.

So we're going to talk about that and some stuff to prep for next week's draft. All right. So we have some, I don't know if it's breaking news, but we have some breaking scuttle, but as we recorded, Mark Stein of the New York Times reported that the Hawks have emerged

as a potential trade destination for New Orleans as Drew Holiday in multi-team trade scenarios that would involve Atlanta's number six pick and next week's draft sources say. I'm kind of interested. I mean, I don't know what else would be going back to New Orleans in that situation, but I've been wondering about the Hawks this entire offseason. It's clear that at the very least, they want to do something in order to make improvements. It's clear that Trey Young and potentially ownership want to do something. And it doesn't seem like there are many ceiling razor moves out there, just considering the way the free agent market is going and they have all this cash

and I don't know who they're going to spend it on. Before I was advocating for just signing a bunch of floor razor type of guys, but Drew is someone who could potentially move the needle there, shore up a defense that was, God, just absolutely ghastly. I'm talking myself into it. I'd love to know what else is involved here, but Nate, just based on the nuggets that we have here,

what's your take? Oh, man. My take is what the hell are the Hawks doing? And are they about, and are they about to get fleeced by David Griffin again? Remember, it was the Hawks who paid an absolute King's ransom to move up for the number four pick

to select DeAndre Hunter last year with David Griffin. And so, I mean, yes, in terms of this year, sure, I'd love to see the Hawks be better. I think Trey Young is an underrated player. Getting Drew Holiday would make them better defensively along with Capella. They would actually have someone who can defend a little bit on the wing. Then maybe they could sign a three in free agency. And Trey Young, Drew Holiday, whoever they sign in free agency, John Collins, Clint Capella, like, that's a real team you might be making in the East.

but I think they're really just short-circuiting the process at this point. I think that Travis Schlank came in. His vision was to rebuild. Now they're under pressure from Trey Young, who, I mean, has played two years in the NBA. He's under team control for a minimum of eight more years, six more years, eight total. And I think Tony Ressler is putting pressure on Schenck. and I don't know that Travis has done the most amazing job either, but this is just like you're going to give up the number six pick.

Maybe your last chance at getting someone who, you know, Tarks can talk about this. I mean, this isn't a great draft, but getting someone with some upside to really be a second star next to Trey Young, because I don't think that that is John Collins. And you're giving that up to get Drew Holiday, who's under contract for one more year, and then if you re-sign him,

you get $25, $30 million a year for a guy who is aged 31 to 34 seasons, that doesn't make a ton of sense. Or you just lose him and you gave up the number six pick for one year of the guy when you're just trying to make the playoffs. I don't understand this for where the Hawks are at as a franchise. They have a lot of young players. I think they need to just be more patient than this. Yes, sign your guys in free agency. But use that as your way to get better this year. and keep the powder dry would be my advice to them.

And maybe this is all just smoke and New Orleans trying to drum up a market. But I really, trading the number six pick for the Hawks makes very little sense to me. Well, I think it's like what Nate was saying with Tony Wrestler. This feels like an ownership move. KOC even reported a few weeks ago just its playoffs are bust. I mean, ownership never really buys into these long-term rebuilding plans. You might sell them on it for one point. Well, hold on, though.

like should they buy into this rebuilding plan? Because I look around and what the Hawks have and I don't know if they have a star. And I don't know if any of these draft picks that they've tanked really, really hard for are really going to do much. Like, I mean, we talked about this. I think it was last week. Like, is Cam Reddish good? Is DeAndre Hunter good? Is John Collins good enough to like warrant the extension?

He's probably going to ask for. Like, whirder is like, sure, herder. I always screw that up. But like, it just doesn't seem like they've been very specific. about trading assets to get the specific guys they want in the draft, and it just doesn't seem like those guys could really build out the type of team that they need. I mean, what is different about what the Hawks have done versus what Sam Hinky did? And I would say what Sam Hinky did is he actually got superstars in the building.

Now, he looked into the number one pick with Ben Simmons, which he didn't pick. But, like, I think there's an appreciable difference between what Schlank has done and what, like, some other, like, a Hinky has done for them. It's just, it's not going well, I'll say that. Well, Sam Hinky won on an asset for asset basis, pretty much every trade that he participated in. And Travis Schlank has not. Yeah, I know. I mean, I can't believe I'm boxing of this corner on a podcast, but are we just glossing over the fact that Tray Young is really good?

And he kind of changes everything about how you conduct business as a franchise. Like, they don't have a second star yet, but they have a star. Like, they have a clear guy that they're going to be angling around and building. around. I get, you know, now, as Nate alluded to, why you're acquiescing to that, Stars want to compete in year three of ultimately what's supposed to be a long-term relationship, I don't quite understand. But why they would think they are looking for the next guy to pair with Trey Young, that makes sense to me. I would say too, right? Like, if you have Trey Young, right, you're going to have to get long athletic wings. Those guys take time to develop.

You can't draft Karen Medici and DeAndi Hunter in year one, be like, they weren't very good, this thing sucks, fire the GM. That was always going to be a long-term plan. I think for Atlanta, too, if you're going from 6 to 13, this is a draft for the 6 to 13 gap, there is no gap. The same player of talent, level of talent is probably there at 13. So if you're trading back seven spots and picking up Drew, that would make sense to me if you're still getting a lottery pick out of the trade.

Well, to triangulate, who is it that wants the sixth pick? Like, who could this third team be in a potential Drew deal? Well, so KOC also had a report this morning that the six picks seems to be in play for a bunch of teams. The Timberwolves, he reported, are considering moving up in a deal that could potentially involve Jared Culver in number 17. He mentioned the Pelicans as well earlier in the Celtics. He said Patrick Williams, Sharks' guy. And Tyree's Hilberton, Sharks' other guy, are the two guys that teams are looking after. I mean, I think a lot of the analysis of this comes down to who you can get at the six pick

and whether or not that guy is any good. So, Charks, this goes to you. Like, what do you think about whoever's drafting there at six? To me, the other guy that makes sense is a Congu because he's kind of a guy you could trade for as a offensive five who could probably play right away for a contender. So that makes a lot of sense to me. There's also like the Celtics, right? They have three first round picks.

I think a lot of teams with multiple first round picks want to consolidate. they don't want to bring in two or three rookies from a weaker draft. So I think that all kind of fits together. So the six is definitely in play. And there's a lot of different ways you go with it, I would say. Yeah, the other part of this Stein report that I didn't realize, there's actually a thread here. So he is reporting that Holiday is expected to decline his $27 million player option for next season,

which seems pointed considering that the Hawks of the team looking for him. I mean, I would imagine Drew would want to hit the open market, and he's probably, why, he's going to be 31 next season. So I imagine he can get some money out there on the open market. So that's a lot of risks if you're the Hawks. But if it's just a trade down, if we're assuming that it's just six to 13, I don't know. I kind of like it.

So this is something that we've talked a ton about Drew Holiday scenarios. And Zach Lowe reported last week that the three teams that everyone expected to be interested in Drew were the Warriors, the Nuggets, and the Nets. And the analog that I had for Holiday's value was Mike Conley, that trade that Holiday maybe is a little more value than him, but that trade of Mike Conley. Two future first-round picks from a good team, you know, probably in the 20s, another middling-ish prospecting Grayson Allen and a couple of serviceable rotation guys that were mostly used for salary. Jay Crowder and Calcorp, that was the Conley trade last off season. And who among those teams was going to really throw in a premium asset with the Warriors, it's maybe the Wolves pick or the number two pick, Denver, it's Michael Porter, Brooklyn, maybe that's Caris Lavert, depending on what you think of him.

What's going to get holidays market above that kind of Mike Conley level? And so now, if you're talking about the Hawks and the number six pick, you know, that's more of a premium asset, the number six pick than what you saw for Mike Conley. Maybe that's enough to get one of these teams to say, okay, we are going to make that deal. Or if you're Miami, Tyler Hero, for example, if you wanted Drew Holiday. I'm not saying any of these teams should do this, but what's going to get the return on Drew Halliday above that kind of, you know, sub All-Star in the last year of his contract level? that we've typically seen. And maybe this report, that these negotiations are out there

as part of that. You mentioned that. What about something like Lavert to Atlanta, Drew to Brooklyn, picks to New Orleans? That seemed to check a lot of boxes for everyone, right? Would you rather if you're Atlanta, Lavert, than Holiday, I guess?

I think so. The report so far is Holiday to Atlanta, right? Right, right. But it says multi-team trade, though. And then it says, like, Drew doesn't want to go there. It's not saying Drew doesn't want to go there. It's just saying that the league expects him to decline his option for next season,

which I think that's going to happen regardless. Yeah. So it's interesting. I mean, yeah, it does feel like it's a tough fit with Drew to find the value you're probably looking for because New Orleans, well, they definitely message that they value him very highly. And if you hire a coach in Stan Van Gundy, you would assume that they want to be competitive, at least next season and not wait as long as they did during the Anthony Davis era

to be in the mix there, in the West. I don't know. It's an interesting one. I just think it's interesting to compare New Orleans and Atlanta their philosophies. New Orleans has Drew Holiday right now. Atlanta, probably a worse team right now than New Orleans, is trying to trade for the exact same player with the exact same contractual situation that New Orleans is thinking about moving.

I think that says a lot about these two franchises. Yeah, but do you know what Drew thinks about lemon pepper wings? I mean, he's pro. Lemon pepper has 100% approval rate. I do think generally, like what Nate was saying, if you're going to give your GM a playoff or bust scenario, like that's just a really risky thing to do in general. At that point, maybe just move on from your GM

because if you're telling him your job is in the line right now, he's going to make sure that it moves is common sense. Well, I thought your Philly comparison early in this conversation

was apt just because patience, as it turns out, not exactly the strong suit of the NBA's governing class. I mean, if this is a playoff or a bus situation,

perhaps this is more like New Orleans previous to David Griffin than it is this current regime. All right, let's move along here. So we have a couple other draft-related topics

that are burbling. I believe this is going to be our last podcast before next Wednesday's draft here. Lamello Ball seems to be the curio of this year's class. I feel like I hear something different about him every week. One week he is the best player. And a future all start of the next week, he is garbage.

And he can't handle an interview. He doesn't work out well and whatever. Charks, you're our draft expert here. Where do you fall on the ball discussion? Well, first off, Justin, as Charles would say, only God's an expert. So just for the record. And then I think so, Lamello, I think he's at a very high upside. But of all these guys in the top of the draft,

Lamello's the guy where you have to give him the keys to your offense. It's more of you draft him, the team now becomes about Lamello, whereas these other guys can kind of fit into roles. So that's my concern. That's why I don't really see him as like, this idea is the clicker number one player. I must not seeing that. Where are you on him, Nate?

Because you've looked at a couple of these draft prospects. Yeah, I mean, I don't go as deep as Charks does, but I usually do some pretty big workups on the top 10 or so projected picks. And to me, in a vacuum, Lamello ball is my number one pick in a tier above everyone else. And now that certainly, I think it's maybe even more likely than not that Lamello ends up being a disappointment. He is an extremely volatile prospect, but his passing and ball handling at 6-7, those two skills to me are more impressive than anything that any other player in this class is doing. And particularly, we've just seen how important it is to have not only pick and roll ball handlers, but tall pick-and-roll ball handlers. He's just got that magic as an operator with the ball.

And yes, his jump shot is a major concern. strength is a major concern. Finishing around the rim is a concern. Defensive intensity is a concern, although I think that's something that is going to be less of a problem maybe than some anticipate because he does have good instincts there and he just, I think, needs to be coached more in that area. All those are concerns, but you can see the outline of a potential top 20 player with lamello ball, and I cannot see that right now.

I mean, the odds are it will happen, but I cannot see that right now with anyone else in this class. And that's why I would take lamella ball, even if I were the wolves, even if I had DeAngelo Russell. I think a four-in-tee leave reading business, the whole stuff about Lamello's probably going to go one. That just feels like Minnesota saying you've got to trade for him. Like this pick is being moved. You've got to come up for him if you want them. Yeah, we're definitely in this time of the year. And it does feel like both they and the Warriors are open for business.

I mean, I guess my question is, is Lamello so much better than Edwards, Wiseman, or anybody else you want to throw in that conversation that you take him despite some of the fit issues you might have? Because I look at Lamello and I've only just watched a couple of YouTube clips, but it's based on what smart people like Charks say, like Lamello, Russell, Towns. Like, I don't know how you ever have anything other than just like a clown car defense. and I also wonder if you trade for Russell, presumably in part, to appease towns, like, are they going to wait around in order for someone like Lamello to really be able to run that offense?

So, I don't know, like, Charks, what do you think? Do you think Lamello fits with those two guys? He could. I guess definitely possible. It's a matter of even the buy into playing off the ball, right? He's saying if we're bringing Lamello in, you're saying the cat and D'Angelo, like, he's going to be the point guard, but he's going to be the point guard. and get you guys the ball a lot.

So you'll get a lot of touches. You'll get your shots. You're going to play faster. So it makes sense. It's just really about getting those guys to buy in. That's what is with anything. When you already have stars in place, it's all about the buy-in to their role.

I think Nate hit on something, too, with the defensive part of this, too, where, and maybe this is just because Ben Simmons broke my brain, but looking at players who just look totally disengaged defensively in college, and then all of a sudden, if Lamello's disposition changes a little bit,

he turns into this six-eight, guard who could defend multiple positions, who has this intuitive feel for the game. Like, the potential is right there. Like, it's just right there defensively for him not to be, certainly, like, on a DeAngelo Russell, Carl Towns level of kind of, what's the word I'm looking for? Sucketude? Yes, that's the one. So, yes, I think you're in a different conversation with him potentially, but maybe that's

me giving him too much credit. So what do you guys think makes sense for, like, if you are treading up for Lamello, who would you want to come get him? Like what team you think he fits best in like the top 10? I mean, any team that needs to lead ball handler, Chicago, New York, those two have been rumored. I mean, even if I were the Cleveland Cavaliers, I would be very interested in him. Like someone who can actually pass the ball on that team would be an absolute revelation. And so, I mean, I think it's important to keep in mind that maybe in this draft more than any other, it's about a range of outcomes, right?

If you're going to say Lamello is better than Anthony Edwards and better than James Wiseman, to me, that's not necessarily the way to think about it. It's about because the draft is about getting stars. That was the philosophy of Sam Hinkie, and you don't know that certain players are going to be stars, and in fact, I think it's more likely than not, that Lamello is not going to be a star.

But if you're just talking about who has the possibility of being a star with his instincts, one of the best handles I've ever seen for a six foot seven guy. I think that's where it's at for me as opposed to Edwards. He may be a dominating score, but I don't know if he's going to do anything else, and you're not even sure if he's going to get to that point. And Wiseman is a center,

it's just really difficult to make a huge impact as a center in today's NBA. So I think to me, that's why I'm into Lamella, even if you want to say, all right, you know, who has as particularly, particularly at the top of the draft, who has the best median outcome? I don't think is the way to think about it. It's who has the best high-end outcome.

If you're really, because you're getting these chances at the top of the draft that you don't normally get, the number one pick, you've got to shoot for the superstar in that situation, in my opinion. The team that just out to me is Chicago, right? Like, they've got a new front office.

They've got a lot of movable young pieces. So if you were, Rob, if you were in Minnesota, who would you want from Chicago to go from one to four? If you're asking for somebody. That's the problem. Maybe a future, maybe a next year's first round pick unprotected. Maybe that gets me there or top one protected or something like that. Well, how do we feel about Carter?

Next to town? It's terrible. Yeah. So maybe that's to be a three-team deal. I don't know. Yeah. So that team makes the most sense. It's one to four.

Chicago makes sense for Lamello. It's finding that third team to get the piece you want. Well, what if it was New Orleans? We just talked about New Orleans. maybe they want an elite ball handler to complete the ball set. You would be fun to watch that, man. Oh, my gosh. Then LeVar Ball becomes an assistant coach,

and Jello becomes the water boy, and then you set up your own little outpost there. Jellos definitely coming if you're getting the other two. You're getting them one way or the other. Charks, who's your top prospect? Are you in on Lamelle? I've got Lamello at two. I have Edwards at one.

one because I feel like Edwards at least you can plug into a system. I don't really, like I think Lemello has Star Upside, but I'm not sure it's going to happen. So I don't want to build my team on a guy. I don't have that. I don't only believe in his upside. So I just think Edwards fits a role better long term than Lamello would.

So I have Edwards one. But I think one through four, five, six, seven is all very close. So do you think that Edwards has star upside ultimately? Yeah, I mean, he's got the body. He's got a good jump, decent enough jumper. And I think with,

Edwards, I've made a video about this, is just keep in mind, this is a guy who skipped the year of high school, played football most of his life to join a really, really bad college team. So he was pretty much set up for failure this year. And yeah, he did not play as well as you all would have hoped. But there was context to say, okay, it didn't go as well as we hope, but there is room for growth and there's potential there. So I do think, and I think with him, when you draft Edwards, you don't have to say, this is your team, hires a ball for 35 minutes, everybody else fits around you, he can fit into a role a little easier. And I think in a draft like this, that does make sometimes think that way.

There's no consensus here. And Edwards could very easily end up being the best player in this class. Like I acknowledge that. But my thought would be, and John, you may disagree with me, Edwards, I don't think of as a particularly high basketball IQ player. Yes, you can work on that a little bit. But the list of players to me, where you see him in college and you're like, this guy does not have a good feel for the game,

it's really hard to come up with lists of guys who really became NBA superstars where you watch them before the NBA and you're like, this guy doesn't have very good feel, right? He's not a good passer. He doesn't understand at all what a decent shot is. I understand Lamelle is part of his problem too, but he can at least pass. You know, he doesn't really understand where to try on defense. He's not an instinctual basketball player.

There are very few guys that you can point to. Maybe Russell Westbrook is the only one that comes to mind for me who didn't exhibit good feel at lower levels and became big stars. That is true, but I'm curious to like with Edwards, I think you see some passion chops, right? He averaged twice. Like Wiggins, for example of guy who really had no passion chops at all in college. But Edwards shows some flashes.

He had twice as many assists as Wiggins, playing with really no help around him. So I think there is something there. I don't think he's quiet at that Wiggins level of prospect. Rob, what do you think the wolves need more than anything? If you're just looking at them, they need a lot. But if you're drafting more in terms of trying to complete the puzzle there. I mean, lots and lots of defense, a good amount of depth. And, you know, depending on what happens with Malik Beasley,

you could need a lot of help on the wing potentially. It's tricky for them. And we've gone around their situation a couple of times this offseason just because they are in a team that's in such an interesting position. But they've kind of already made their big bet with DeAngelo Russell. I can't say it's a bet that I would have made personally, not my kind of player just by taste. But this is where they are. This is the team they have chosen to be. And it'll be interesting to see how that carves out him.

And towns could have a really interesting symbiotic offensive relationship. But as you alluded to, I just don't see how all these pieces fit together defensively in a way that's going to make you competent. Where are you going with DeAnd if DeAngelo Russell, we traded for him, he's now such a sacred cow that we almost have, we can't get another ball handler because it would tread on him too much. So you're saying that DeAngelo Russell and Carl Anthony Towns are two best players. Where are you going with that in the Western Conference? I mean, they did play one game together. So we can't say for sure it's not going to work, right? He's got a 23 years old.

I think it's more just that like they could have a good season and be the 14th best team in the West. Like that's kind of, you know, it's such a deep conference. They are at such a state in terms of their roster with so much left to do. I mean, the DeAngelo stuff is tough. And this is maybe like the worst thing that James Hardin has done to the NBA is convince younger guards that they can be James Hardin. That they can be the hub of a highly efficient very playoffs. You know, a team that can get to 50 wins every season. I don't think DeAngelo is that guy,

but luckily you have one of the most, you know, versatile, multi-talented bigs in the NBA. Let's see if they use him to his full extent. Rob, that's a really good point. I might write about this because I feel like there was a whole generation of guards who wanted to be Kobe Bryant in the 2000s, and it didn't really work out.

And there's a lot of, there's some guards in this draft where it's like, if they have the ball the whole game and they do James Hardin impressions, and it's like that's just a tough, that's a very, very tough thing to pull off. And it does feel like there's with me a lot of guys in the next like five or six years who try it.

it doesn't really work out. Yeah, I mean, this was kind of the Evan Turner problem to begin with, right? Not as much of a score, but just like if you are a lead guard who doesn't have James Harden-level passing and scoring and you're going to dominate the ball, there's just not that much of a place for you in a modern NBA setting. Is this a backdoor Killian Hayes conversation? They're all backdoor Killian-Hays conversation. To them do the mismatch on Friday, we're talking about that. So there you go. Okay, good.

I mean, we're talking kind of around teams that might be moving in the draft, looking to trade up or down. We've talked about a few here in New Orleans, Atlanta. Are there any others that we're looking at who could be particularly active on draft night? Like, you're hearing a lot about Detroit as a team that New Regime, maybe they want to move up in the draft, turn in someone like Luke Conard or some of these other guys into more of a guy with a high ceiling. New York is always looking to do something. Nate, what do you think? Is there any team that you're looking at and think they're probably?

going to be a player on draft night? I think there definitely are some teams that would like to move up and there are definitely some teams that would like to move down. I think it's just so hard to calibrate what the price is going to be at this point in time, right? Like if you're the Knicks, for example, we talked

about the Bulls already, like what can they offer to the wolves to move up? What can they offer to the Warriors to move up? It's hard to say really. The Knicks, for me, at least, the only player on that team I'd be interested. in is Mitchell Robinson, but if you already have a center, then you're not that interested

there. And so I think what's going to determine for a lot of these teams that are trying to move up whether they can or not is, are you willing to throw in future picks? 2021 great draft. 2022 or 23, we don't know which likely to be the double draft where high schoolers are available again. So are teams willing to go for the burden of hand right now in not as good of a draft, whereas 2021 is considered better. For example, we've heard that the Warriors in their talks, they have valued that Minnesota pick, which is top three protected next year,

higher than the pick that we know is number two this year. And, I mean, that Minnesota pick could be 10 next year. Who knows? But that's good to me because these teams don't have the juice in terms of players to move up very far unless they're willing to throw in future draft equity here. So my guess is the Spurs at 11 That seems like a team that could try to get a higher up

And the one chart that makes sense to me I'm curious with Rob and Nate think about this one Is De Rosen in 11 for 6? Because that feels like, I feel that's somewhat fair for both sides To Atlanta or in a three one? DeRosen to Atlanta Like that's probably more realistic than Drew I think I think that might be too accelerated for Atlanta

If that makes sense. Like Drew the fit I think is super clean DeRosen you're betting on something that's established in a different way in terms of controlling an offense that, you know,

De Rosen, as he showed at the Spurs in the late stage of last season, can play nice, can fit a role that's a little bit more of a playmaking capacity. But if you want Tray Young

to have the ball, I don't think DeRosen's the guy you're looking for. Because he gives you the backup, right, for Tray Young, when Tray Young's out. All of a sudden, your offense is not just awful.

And if your primary goal is making the playoffs, DeMard de Rosen can get you to the playoffs. That's what I'm thinking. Yeah, I definitely do not particularly like that fit if i mean the whole concept of trey young is giving him the ball and playing spread pick and roll i think it could be a decent situation for derosen but you know if tray young is

unhappy now watching jemar de rosen i so a bunch of times in a row that that is not necessarily going to help his mood i don't think and i i also think that is derosen at 27 million even for one year is that positive value is that something where you should be moving down in the draft to acquire him. I question that. And if it were me, I mean, I'd love that for San Antonio. I think any positive value they could get for DeRosen, they should do it immediately. But I mean, granted, the Hawks have been one of the more mystifying teams for me over the last

couple of years. But I can't see them wanting to get DeRosen in the last year of his contract, age 30. Because I think he might want to stay, right? Whereas Drew's going to go, I think DeRosen would probably stay if they traded form and gave him some money. I'm not saying it's like the best long-term play, but DeRosen helps you somewhat next year, gives you a veteran leader. And then Robbie heard about in the bubble. Like, bubble DeRosen was playing a role. He wasn't holding the ball all the time.

He was moving it pretty well and letting the young guards cook a little bit. I just think it's probably not a good thing if my first thought is when Drew Holiday hits free agency, he's going to get lots of attention and offers. And when DeMarre de Rosen his free agency, I don't know that that's going to be the thing. case. Because that's what I'm saying. If you're the Hawks, you might stay. The good thing is that other teams don't want him in this case. If you're worried about the backup position, I feel like that's where the Hawks advantage with how much cap they have can come into play. You could just like throw a balloon payment at like Gorindraject for instance and just outbid the Miami He and be like, just come come play with us for one year and you roll the cap over. Or like maybe you convince Gordon

Hayward to opt out of his current contract and then try to pay him more long. long-term money. I think there are more options with their cap space and there are maybe it would be a trade. Like Drew to me is an appreciable update upgrade from some of those other guys. The Hayward one, Justin, that's the one I've been pushing for them to do. Yes, you will be overpaying him probably, but he's the second ball handler. He can shoot when he doesn't have the ball as well. Might be a little bit undervalued. Although, you know, to get him to opt out of 34 million, you're going to have to pay. I mean, he is going to be in his early 30s. But that's the one that I like, just because you're not going to get anything great with

your cap space. And they could still, I mean, they could pay Gordon Hayward 25 million a year over four years and still have $20 million left to work with as well. If they wanted to try and grab like Derek Jones Jr. or another wing player, if you're trying to remake your team and be good this year, that's what I'd be looking. I don't know if Hayward wants to go there. I don't wants to opt out, all that stuff. But he would be probably my number one priority if I were the Hawks. I do think, you know, as Nate alluded to, we kind of have a sense of what teams might want to move up or down.

And like those teams make sense within their own individual ecosystems. It's about the pairings. And so I don't like the Hawks Spurs pairing per se, but I do like the Spurs as a team that should probably be looking to move up that needs to be in a position where they're taking swings on, you know, higher end talent. This draft seems like a good chance to do it, not because it's. it's a great draft, but because those opportunities could be available. And what's wild, too, this will already be the Spurs' highest pick since Tim Duncan, right?

So then they go even higher. It's just kind of crazy to think about. I mean, I think we have to get the Celtics in this conversation, too, just because I would be gobsmacked if they have four rookies on their roster next season. So something is going to happen with three first rounders in a pretty early second. Yeah, they have very little space, if any, on their roster. They're already, I think, into the luxury tax based on current. projections are just about there. So, yeah, they definitely seem like a mover.

I mean, Danny Age is trying to move up every single draft. Celtics Pistons, because Pistons are a rebuilding team. They can take flyers on guys. That makes sense. Well, Sharks, you like talking about bad Eastern Conference teams. You want to talk about Detroit real quickly? What do you think going into the draft? They're just grabbing assets, right?

There's nothing really to be worried about with them. Like, find some young guys, take some chances, rent your cap space. I really like Detroit to Boston. I think that makes sense for both. sides. So you think Detroit should trade down in the draft? In this draft, like the guy you get at 14 and the guy you get at 7 might be the same quality of player. So that in that sense it really makes sense to do it. Whereas for Boston, you just want to consolidate your assets because you have too many roster spots or whatever. So that to me just kind of makes sense

conceptually. Where are we, not for Boston necessarily, but where are we on Luke Kinnard? It's a great question. And wasn't there a phantom trade to the suns that was supposed to happen that did not, that just like faded into the night. I believe that was that last trade deadline, yeah. Which I think is the first I've heard of Luke Kinnard since, like, he was drafted. He had a good year. Yeah, I remember being pretty impressed with him

from what I saw last season, but it's just a matter of like, if you're not going to commit big money to him and Christian Wood, and if you are, your roster might get kind of weirdly pricey quickly. I don't know what we're doing here. So, like, he's a guy who, you know, kind of in the, whether it's a Bogdan or Buddy Healed kind of mold of these shooting wings who could potentially be available.

If he's not part of the Pistons future, I think he could interest some teams. My question on him is whether he can defend or not. And once you get into the second round of the playoffs, if you're really trying to win, I don't know that you want to rely on Luke Kennard as a starter. When you get into the second round of the playoffs, conventional pick and roll defense doesn't work anymore, right?

Like look at that Boston-Toronto series. or look at the Philly Boston series in the first round. Kemble Walker, not even close to the best creator in the NBA, just completely carves them up. Jason Tatum carves them up, conventional pick and roll defense. So then Nick Nurse goes to a box in one. He's going zone. He's switching.

That's what the defense is once you get into the second round of the playoffs. And Luke Kennard can't really play those type of styles. And so he's a, I think, can be a good regular. season player. I think he can be a quality offensive shooting guard for a lot of teams, but you're just not going to be able to have him be a part of an elite defense.

Unless he has Tyler Hero level of competitiveness and he's a little small, too, short arms. It's just, it's tough to find a fit for him. He's definitely an NBA player. I think he can help a team win in the regular season, but if you're

really a team that has aspirations, Luke Kinnard and there are many other players like him as well, it just makes it a little bit more difficult if you're going to commit significant starter level money to someone like that if you have a team with championship aspirations. So in the mode of Draymond Green and 16 game players, you're saying Luke Kinnard is like a four to six game player, essentially. Well, yeah, maybe a four to five games in the first round type of player. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, you always have to look out for new GMs who didn't draft some of these young players so that they're not beholden to their development.

That's why New York is interesting to me. And like Daryl Morey, I can't imagine he comes out of this draft and doesn't trade someone or someone's in order to potentially like get some shooters into that situation. Jack, before we go here, do you have any last draft thoughts that draft wisdom? I should say that you want to pass along. Are there any sleepers we need to be looking out for? Are there any like special Charks draftees that you've marked? here? I'll give a shout

out to a guy from Texas Tech, James Ramsey. He's growing on me. He's a Dallas kid. There's a sleeper for you. I don't know. He's a big two guard with size. Good shot. I want to clarify one thing before the draft. We mentioned a couple guys in this conversation that were Charks as guys. How many guys are we allowing Charks

in this draft to be in his stable? You've got to give me Hall Burden and Williams because I profiled both of them. So those are any fair? Totally fair. I just want to make sure the numbers aren't getting out of control here. No, Charks' success rate on just like the guy that we're going to all be talking about on a small market team one year later is kind of like incredible because Brandon Clark was your guy last year, right? Yeah, but that was a lot. To be fair, that was the draft nerd guy.

Like, Clark was like the, that was not just me. That was the whole draft community was pushing him. Nate, what are you looking at at this draft? Is there anything maybe how the new schedule of the offseason and, and. the early start date to next season. That's going to come into play. Any sleepers? Well, it's funny that this has been the most scrutinized, perhaps,

draft in NBA history just with all this time and how we had four months of just absolutely nothing to talk about. But I expect this to be, at least in their first years, maybe the least productive draft class in NBA history. Number one, it's just not considered a great draft. You have a lot of guys who are really raw players. Then you throw in that there's no summer league, truncated training camp. These guys haven't really had the traditional draft workout circuit where you're getting into unbelievable shape.

They haven't played in forever. It's been 10 months by the time they step on the floor since they'll have played basically. All of those factors add up to just rookies looking very, very disappointing. this year. There'll be some bright spots to be sure. But if as an overall class, we're going to be talking about these guys like, man, wow, they were really bad. And maybe unfairly to them just because of a lot of the circumstances. But in addition, obviously, to the fact that we don't have that true Zion-esque, Luca-esque superstar in this class. So just as much as we're talking about this draft, I think the expectations need to be very low for this group in the aggregate this season.

Well, I mean, we were talking about this before we came on, too. Like, I wonder how much like the COVID absences are going to play into this too. Like, I wonder if a lot of rookies who shouldn't be playing are going to be playing a lot of minutes. And we should mention that the Knicks actually have a positive test in their facility right now. And they had to shut down according to, I believe it was a Shams report yesterday. So we could be in for a wild ride here. Yeah, what seemed like an inevitability in terms of team staff and players testing positive this season is now an actuality. Like, this is what teams have to prepare for.

It's going to be a really interesting developmental season for that reason, like very controlled, strange practice time relative to what the players might be used to. I'm very interested to see who actually gets better over the course of this year, given the circumstances. Well, and I think just as a nation we've had, I think in a lot of people's minds, bigger news fish to fry over the last month or so. And that, to me, has obscured the situation with COVID. If you compare, you know, there was a lot of about in the news about a surge in the summer, we're at double the number of daily cases now as we had in the summer. Part of that is more testing, but a lot of it is just that it's more pervasive.

And I mean, the trend lines basically everywhere are accelerating and really worrying fashion. And so when MLB, when football were starting and doing it in their home markets, they had a much better COVID situation to deal with than we do not. It's just so pervasive in our society. It's going to be, and remember, it's not just players and their families. It's also staff, for example. And how much staff is going to be allowed in the building now? It's not going to be limited to 35 people anymore. Everyone's going to be around again.

It's, I mean, just stay tuned for a lot of these night-to-night concerns about who's going to be available, whether games are going to be played. I think we're in for a rough ride here, particularly early in the season. I wonder if the greatest market and efficiency in the NBA this upcoming season is having a city that takes this shit seriously. And, you know, like San Francisco at the top of that list, perhaps among NBA markets, but there's a couple of them I'm really worried about. And a couple of them, I feel like you can trust a bit more from that perspective.

Yeah, I think the community college prospect that Charks was scouting before we came on could like potentially be starting for the New York Knicks by like February. Jayden Scrabb. You heard it here first. His name is literally scrub. Yes. Oh, my God. That's perfect. Well, we'll keep track of that. But I agree with the way you guys are saying. I think the optimism for basketball being back and all these transactions and draft stuff is definitely going to give way to a pretty sober reality about like how this is going to.

actually work out in practice. I mean, just take a look at what's happening in the NFL these days. I have no idea who's playing on my fantasy team every week.

But until then, we have transactions and we have the draft next week. Nate, thank you so much for joining us today. Thanks for coming on, man. All right. For the rest of us,

for Sasha on production, we will see you next time.