Nate, when you predict that a team or player will fall off (to the dismay of their fans), and then they DO fall off - how do you feel? Is it joy? A little satisfaction? Or it a sort of sadness mixed with happiness?
- Good morning/afternoon everyone! Glad to have you here for today's chat, and thanks again for being a Total Access subscriber. I would say I do feel satisfied for getting something right, but that's the case whether it's someone falling off or improving. Trying to get better and improve as much as I can with predictions and analysis is a huge part of why I like this job, so it's good to see that I'm doing a decent job. In theory, that's part of why people subscribe to this, right?
If you were offered a free lakefront house along Sheridan Rd. Between the Baha’i temple and lake cook road, would you move back to the north shore?
- Haha, this is along the Chicago suburbs lakefront, one of the ritzier areas you can find, in towns like Wilmette, Kenilworth, and Winnetka. I definitely wouldn't move back for timezone reasons--I'd be up until 3am every night during the playoffs. Also, Chicago isn't close to outdoor activities. It'd be awesome to be close to family. Finally, no way I want my kid(s) going to school where it's 95% white. A huge part of why we live in Berkeley is the diversity while still having solid public schools. If the house were offered in Evanston I'd think about it more seriously, but in the end I really have to be in either Pacific or Mountain time zone.
Who do you have coming out of the east right now?
- Very tentatively Miami, but I wouldn't give any team better than a 30% chance right now. I'm fluctuating between Milwaukee and Miami, I actually thought last night's game was probably more concerning for Miami than Milwaukee, as Jimmy Butler looks totally lost against them right now. But I kind of like Miami better in some of the matchups that aren't those 2 teams.
Nate, what meal do you remember eating that gave you the most joy?
- Oh man, this should probably be a segment on Arguing About Food soon--I had it on our list of topics. I'll just give a couple of teasers: Mian in Las Vegas, the Szechuan cold noodles. A tonkatsu place in the train station in Kyoto (there were a ton from Japan). The prime rib my sister just made in Montana. The first time I ever had sushi in Vancouver in 2000. I can think of a LOT of these. A more comprehensive list will be coming!
Hey Nate, I was curious to hear a little bit more about your EOTY rankings and having Bob Myers 1st. I think AK, Kleimann and Pat Riley all had clearly better offseasons and I struggle to see the case for Myers over any of the 3.
In my mind the Warriors only added two players that will be in their playoff rotation: GPII and OPJ.
I give them a lot of credit for the GPII signing but I am not sure Myers deserves any credit for OPJ signing considering I think every team in the league would've happily offered him a min and he supposedly turned down more money elsewhere.
Then the Warriors two biggest moves besides that were drafting Moody and Kuminga - both of whom have looked good and I'd say maintained value from their draft slot but neither who looks like a home run clear best pick at the slot, I think you could even argue the Warriors would have been better off with Wagner over Kuminga.
Kleimann on the other hand traded Jonas for Adams - which made the team better in the immediate, gave them the ability to draft Ziare, who still has question marks but has much higher upside than anyone I think they could have gotten at 17, and got them another pick that has a chance to be in the 11-15 range.
AK added Lonzo, Caruso, DDR all on deals they are outperforming, got a homerun of a pick in Ayo at #37 (surprised this wasn't mentioned at all in awards pod) and was able to get a 1st for Lauri so they ended the offseason net neutral on 1st round picks.
Riley did just as well if not better with his minimum signings than Myers did with Vincent, Strus etc and also added two players who will likely be in the best version of the Heat's closing 5 in Lowry and Tucker.
I think Myers did very well with the limited resources he had but I just really struggle to see him in the same tier as these 3 GMs in terms of the impact their offseason moves had for the immediate and the long term.
- You make some good points and I wouldn't argue with either. I think it's important to remember that the Warriors are I think 29-6 when Steph and Draymond both played (and Klay doesn't), and are still my championship favorite if healthy. They missed the playoffs last year. They also made some huge additions to the coaching staff and player development that seem to have really helped. And I still would take Kuminga over Wagner by a hair in the long term, and Moody over some of the other guys picked in that range. So it's the combo of pushing this team from out of playoffs to championship favorite and really improving in the long term that I'm rating here. However it'll be really hard to finally judge this one for years, or even until after the playoffs. Let's see where Chicago and Miami end up. I think I just put more of a premium on going from out of playoffs to championship favorite.
I’ve always wondered why the NBA has their free agency after the Draft unlike football. Is there any particular reason why and do you think having the draft after free agency would make more sense for teams?
- I'd say that football arguably should do it the other way around, as in that draft you're more often getting immediate contributors or a QB and don't need to fortify later, e.g. the Bears signing Mike Glennon a few years ago. In basketball, the draft and free agency and trades all KIND OF happen at the same time, e.g. trades that are agreed to during draft but aren't executed until after free agency. It's also the case in the NBA that you have teams at more concrete different stages of development. So teams that are going to be drafting guys they see as a huge part of their future usually won't be in free agency, or if they are the draft is more important and they won't sign a guy at the same position they just drafted a possible franchise cornerstone. So if you have free agency first, you have the possibility of getting redundant signings. And the draft is more important for the bad teams and will really impact their free agency decisions, whereas the good teams the draft probably doesn't impact their free agent decisions at all if they take the guy, or they can use the draft to make a trade that will affect free agency. So I think it makes more sense to have it where it is--teams kind of have more choice in free agency so put that last, because in the draft you kind of have to just take best player available or trade your pick to get a player who will help now.
I think the disagreement(for most of us here) is the warriors championship equity seems more invested in Dray and curry rather than any additions that were made
- perhaps so, but they had those 2 guys all of last year and missed the playoffs. Curry has actually been worse this year. So you'd think a reasonable conclusion is the changes around them are what has bumped them up. If you compare their minimum signings to basically every other team that was working in the minimum market other than Miami (which had those guys in their system already) they easily did the best. But again, no arguments against the other guys--it's a totally subjective award.
In all seriousness, has Jason Kidd moved from your previous rating as worst coach in the NBA? I've been really impressed with the Mavs defence this year despite not having Porzingis for a majority of the season
- Oh absolutely. We'll get him to next week on Hollinger, but no he's nowhere near the bottom at this point. As we mentioned yesterday, the coaching profession is probably in the best place it's ever been--compare it to 10 years ago and it's night and day.
hi Nate, do you still have the Wizards over the Suns in your organization rankings? If so, why? If not, what changed?
- remember what's being measured here--not the coach, and not the players. James Jones has made 3 really good moves: hiring Monty, drafting Cam Johnson and trading for Chris Paul, although that Paul trade was kind of engineered by CP himself. If I could include coaches and Monty Williams were involved, they'd be much higher. He's my #1 coach in the league. However Jones has also had some head-scratchers, like the Smith draft, the Josh Jackson trade, etc. The Suns ORGANIZATION outside of Jones is not good. You may recall a news story or two on that. And they have one of the barest organizations from a scouting standpoint. So if I were just starting with a random team from scratch, I'm not sure I'd want the Suns org over the Wiz. Ted Leonsis is no peach and has some very limited goals, but at least he's not a terrible person, just an owner with limited goals. And I think Tommy Sheppard and the rest of that organization have done pretty well, although I'd move them down since the beginning of the year when they were more competent. Obviously I see the argument the Suns should be higher--but you have to look at the track record of the owner beyond just the last 2 years.
Is there an outcome for this Warriors season that would have you say -in retrospect- Myers should've been more aggressive in trading future for present?
Or is your opinion that there were no worthwhile upgrades available regardless?
- yeah, maybe they should have dumped Bjelica and gotten another more competent big, e.g. trading a second for Robin Lopez or something. I think if they end up in the 3rd or 4th seed, it could have been avoided with a move like that. But I don't think there were playoff caliber rotation guys out there for moving a larger asset.
As analytics are becoming more & more common (I hear announcers talking about +/- pretty often now) I’m interested in your take on what some of the benchmarks the average fan can keep in mind when analyzing the data.
For example, it’s pretty common knowledge that PER hovers around 15 & 30+ is historic levels.
So for some of the more common stats that you/others use, what are the ranges we should keep in mind for a temp check.
+/-
Offensive/defensive ratings
Points/etc per 36
- For offense and defense, league ranking is usually a better indicator than the raw number. Sometimes you'll get a team that's a huge outlier even at the end of that where the raw number matters. League avg TS is in the 55% range the last few years. League avg ortg is around 111-112 this year. 3s/36 I look at a lot, anything more than 7-8 is a pretty high number. Points/36 will usually be pretty close to the PPG leaderboard, so anybody over 20 is probably a pretty good scorer, 25 is elite. Shooting at the rim, league shoots about 62%, floater and midrange about 40, 3s hovers between 35 and 36 usually.
What do you think Zeke Nnaji could be?
The 3P% and perimeter defense are encouraging, but just from watching the Nuggets it seems to me like he struggles both to finish at the rim and to affect opponent shots there in Help. Do you think he could get to protecting the rim like, say, Maxi Kleber as he develops, or does he seem more like a pure perimeter 3&D guy to you?
- yeah, I think the most disappointing aspect for him has been the lack of explosion, which manifests in the inability to protect the rim or finish. He's been incredibly efficient due to his great shooting which has exceeded expectations. Maybe he becomes more of a JaMychal Green type 4 who can guard with pretty quick feet and shoot 3s, but I hoped he could add some reasonable center-like rim protection and finishing. If he could do that, he'd be a beast, but probably profiles as more of a solid backup as of now I'd guess.
Which is a fairer statement: “Great ownership is the biggest competitive advantage” OR “Bad ownership is the biggest competitive disadvantage”
- I would say the latter, and I've mentioned that a couple times when Danny says it.
What are some of the basketball assumptions floating around that might not be statistically true?
Ex, during draft season we always hear about how teams can draft a lower classmen for upside or junior/seniors for immediate impact.
And then we see time & again these upperclassmen come in & are as hit or miss as the average player drafted.
Looking at the last five drafts, here are the upperclassmen that went in the first round:
2017: Justin Jackson, DJ Wilson, kuzma, Derrick white, josh hart
2018: mikal bridges, Jerome Robinson, Grayson Allen, chandler Hutchison, Aaron holiday, Mo Wagner, Jacob evans
2019: rui hachimura, cam Johnson, matisse thybulle, Brandon Clarke, grant Williams, ty Jerome, dylan windler
2020: Payton Pritchard, udoka azubuike, malachi Flynn, Desmond bane
2021: davion Mitchell, Chris Duarte, Corey kispert, trey murphy iii, quentin grimes
There’s def a couple good rotation players there, but looking at their contributions during their first/second year, even over their rookie contract, I don’t get the feeling that drafting an older player gives you a significantly better chance at being effective right away.
- yeah, this is why I always say just draft who you think is going to have the best career. These upperclassmen turn out to be busts just as often. Maybe the one advantage is that if they're terrible you know quicker and can move on rather than waiting 4 years for them to develop before you can write them off. But generally I'm more for the lower classmen because you also get a chance to develop them, which I think NBA teams do better than college.
The Pacers deadline moves gave them more flexibility with the future direction of the team. If you had to pick today, would you continue tearing down and go for a full rebuild (presumably involves moving Brogdon and Turner in the off-season) or would you go for more of a soft reset, where the goal for next year is to at least not be terrible and potentially get back into the 6-8 seed mix?
- I think so much depends on who they get in the draft. IF they get one of the top-3 and feel like they have a future superstar, maybe it doesn't hurt to try to be decent in the short-term, extend Turner, and feel like that early pick is your upside. However, if they don't get an impact guy in the draft, I think they should continue the rebuild. Also, some of this depends on what the trade offers for Turner/Brogdon are. Certainly I think you listen--if there's a team that blows you away then maybe you move more towards the rebuild. It's not just about picking a path in a vacuum, but also trying to gauge the efficacy of those paths. Same thing if you could make a value free agent signing or two and really get into the mix for a top-6 seed next year in the East--which will be tough. I guess the depth of the East is a good argument for maybe trying to go the opposite direction rather than trying to contend.
Where does Embiid rank in the greatest face-up post players of all time?
- Now this is pretty esoteric. I'm going to limit this to guys who catch the ball inside the 3 point arc and then face up with a live dribble. Hakeem was solid facing up, but he didn't really have that jabstep game, just the drive. I'd say MJ was probably #1 in terms of his faceup triple threat game. KD is great there too, but doesn't quite have the first step. Some of these scoring forwards from the 80s gotta be in there too. But when you talk about faceup guys, you gotta have the lightning quick first step, but also have the great J out of triple threat (i.e., with a live dribble having just caught the ball.) So it's probably MJ because his first step might have been the best in NBA history. Kobe was really good, but he didn't blow by guys as much out of faceup, he'd just hit a really difficult shot. Carmelo would also be in that conversation. Dirk was great too. Amare Stoudemire was underrated in this category, had a great first step but could also hit the J if you laid off--you saw that in his one really good year with the Knicks before the injuries. Joel might be #1 for a center in history, but not the best overall. Who am I missing here?
Also don't think anyone has mentioned it but this past week we did a Franchise Mega Draft (inspired by The Athletic doing the same thing around the MLB) where there's a 5 round snake draft where you are starting a franchise with one Market, Owner, GM, Coach and Player (current contract situation included) to try and maximize success over the next 20 years, here are the results.
Would love your and Danny's takes if you ever have some time to look through
- This would make a great podcast for a rainy day. I'm putting it on the list. if you draft the player, is he on your team until retirement? or you just get him with his current contract situation?
Lebron in Miami was pretty devastating out of the high post facing up, esp when Bosh was more respected as a shooter
- yeah I thought of him, but I think he used his power to back down, his jumper wasn't devastating (although it was good). I think it's that combo of jumper and first step. I don't think of using power as really part of the "face up game". But others' definitions may differ.
The Pistons will be entering the off-season with a fair amount of financial flexibility. The biggest holes on the roster seem to be a backcourt running mate for Cade and a rim protector/finisher (shown to be lots of fun when he had Mobley to work with during All-Star weekend, also envisioning Stew's best role as an Montrezl Harrell style 6th man). If you were GM, would you swing at RFA like Miles Bridges and DeAndre Ayton, UFA like Jaylen Brunson and Mitchell Robinson, or value additions like Gary Harris and Isiah Hartenstein?
- Well, first I need to know who they draft. But in general, their biggest holes are PG and shooting. I'd probably be ok building my team with a PG who isn't a great PnR player but can shoot and defend next to Cade. And obviously a real 2 and 4 that can shoot. I'm ok with Stewart as the starting center for now--I wouldn't want to invest a bunch of resources in center at this stage of the process unless obviously it's Holmgren. Signing Brunson seems like a total waste at this point. They'd have to overpay and you don't get much ceiling out of it. I'm still focuses on the highest-ceiling moves at this point in the process for them, rather than Pels type "build best team around 2nd year player" type moves.
Do you think the Nets hands are tied on Kyrie's future with the team and do you expect anyone else to realistically chase him in free agency if the Nets insist on a more team friendly contract and he balks?
- I'm guessing the NYC vaccine mandate will not be an issue after this season--if that's the case then Kyrie is probably back you'd think, but who can predict anything with him? I think Brooklyn is where he wants to be. I'm not sure it's too much about the money with him. Maybe he signs something like a 3-year deal if he opts out?
If you could pluck any non-star (use whatever criteria you wish here) off one team and onto another to maximize a teams title odds for this season who would you move and where?
- Russell Westbrook from the Lakers to any other team.