Grind City Media’s Lang Whitaker and Kelcey Wright Johnson weigh in on the most pertinent news from around the NBA. What’s lit? What’s lame? Find out each week right here.
From: Lang Whitaker
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 9:07 AM
To: Kelcey Wright Johnson
Subject: Re: IMHO
So we are on to Round Two of the Playoffs, and guess what? Most of the NBA’s usual suspects are no longer around. The Boston Celtics? Gone. The Los Angeles Lakers? Later. The New York Knicks? Dunzo. The Miami Heat? Gone South for the summer. Damian Lillard? Dame Time is over.
Instead, a lot of the NBA’s younger stars are still around, and that includes one dude who will be forever linked with a gone guy. Trae Young and the Atlanta Hawks currently have a 1-0 lead over the Philadelphia 76ers. Meanwhile, the guy Trae was traded for on draft night, Luka Doncic, lost a Game 7 last night to the Los Angeles Clippers.
For a while there, it seemed like everyone agreed that the Mavs had won the trade, that Luka was a generational superstar that the Hawks had inexplicably passed along to Dallas. But now that Trae is in the second round and Mavs are done, I’ve seen a lot of conversation pointing the other direction.
So what do you think? Who won the Trae/Luka deal, the Hawks or the Mavs?
From: Kelcey Wright Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 8:07 PM
To: Lang Whitaker
Subject: Re: IMHO
Here’s the thing, Lang; I could see both arguments and I understand that Trae is leading a team through the second round right now…but (and this is a big but) Luka is an ALL-TIME great. Luka is going to be in the Hall of Fame. Luka is one-of-a-kind. Luka is not just the best player on his team, he is one of the best players in the league.
Luka, in my opinion, is far beyond where Trae is individually right now. And I don’t mean any slander at all towards Trae – because he is a bonafide All-Star. But Luka is a just…MORE.
Luka had four double-doubles in this year’s playoffs, he had three 40 point games (and another with 39 pts). Trae, in the first round, scored in the 20s and 30s with two double-doubles.
It’s safe to say that both teams drafted (and traded for) absolute studs…my mind is, however, made up that Luka’s game is far beyond Trae’s right now despite Atlanta moving further in the playoff run.
This question got me thinking about other massive stars that should have gotten further. Who is a player that you think deserves a ring, that just can’t seem to will a team forward? CP3 is looking good this year? Dame? Jimmy? Beal? Literally anyone on Boston?
From: Lang Whitaker
Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 9:05 AM
To: Kelcey Wright Johnson
Subject: Re: IMHO
Well, Dame comes to mind immediately. Actually, Russell Westbrook came to mind first, but he and Harden actually got to the Finals with KD, they just weren’t able to hold it together long enough to see if it would work long term. But then Dame came to mind, and him sending the Thunder home a few years ago. Dame is an undeniably great offensive player, but the Blazers teams haven’t been good enough to take that next step. I guess we’ll see if whoever takes over for the fired Terry Stotts is able to lift them higher.
Jimmy Butler made a Finals last year, but to me he’s a guy I’d want as part of a core of leaders, not the guy I’m asking to get me a bucket when the title is on the line. Same with Beal, and the Boston guys are still so young, I think we haven’t seen close to their best just yet. CP3, of course, is also in this mix, but the way the Suns are playing right now, maybe this is the year for Chris to get his best shot at a ring.
By the way, every night when I’m watching playoff basketball, I seem to have the same thought. Now, I also have this thought when I’m watching regular season games, but in the postseason, with every play amplified, I come back to this thought more and more: Can we fix the replay challenge rule?
As it stands now, NBA coaches are allowed to challenge one call during a game. I see five or six calls a quarter that could be challenged, but with coaches only having one challenge, they usually are afraid to use them early. During the Jazz/Clippers game last night, Quin Snyder used his challenge in the second quarter on an offensive foul call against Rudy Gobert. Replay showed the call was wrong and it was overturned. Then Gobert picked up a foul like two minutes later anyway, and the Jazz weren’t able to challenge anything else the rest of the way.
Coaches being able to challenge anything might be too much — we don’t want replay stoppages all throughout the games — but maybe we can have more than one challenge per team? Am I asking too much, Kelcey? How would you fix it?
From: Kelcey W. Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 5:54 PM
To: Lang Whitaker
Subject: Re: IMHO
I think I saw someone on Twitter talk about how we can change that rule…You know how the team needs to call a time-out directly following the call in question? I think if the call is overturned, you should get to pocket that time-out. So if that was your last time-out and you were right to challenge, you still get to use that time-out further down the line.
Someone online explained this possible change way more eloquently that I just did but I really, really like this idea. I think it would allow coaches a bit more freedom to use that challenge because sometimes they’re not challenging the call because in a close game, they know they’ll need that time-out in the final seconds to run a play or advance the ball.
And, of course, if you challenge and you’re wrong…well then, you snooze you lose.
Do you think that’s one of the most challenging coaching responsibilities on the bench? I see the two or three guys staring down at the iPad and the pressure is on to say YES or NO to challenge within a few seconds. Eek!! Do you think you could do it? I’m way too indecisive.
From: Lang Whitaker
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2021 3:18 PM
To: Kelcey Wright Johnson
Subject: Re: IMHO
Well, sometimes it’s just obvious. You see a call that isn’t right and you just know: Ok, we gotta do something about this.
But then sometimes you see a call and you think, this was way off, and the team challenges it and…it’s called the other way?
I spoke for a while before a game last season to an NBA Hall of Famer about the challenge, and he said it was almost impossible to know what to call, because there are dozens of calls in a game that refs miss. I think a lot of times they basically have to guess based on what they’ve seen, and that’s not a recipe for success.
My best idea? Every team gets one challenge. If you use the challenge and get it right? You get another challenge. But if you challenge and call and get it wrong? That’s it, you’re out of challenges. Keep getting them right and you can challenge calls forever. Miss one, and it’s over.
Who disagrees with this idea?