May 13, 2026 • 46 mins
Dan Barreiro opens the show rethinking his stance on the Wemby non-suspension and wondering if the Wolves were too nice in their own reaction to the incident? More Wolves and Wild discussion make up the first hour of the show.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Tens estates be happy. Hey ty ick here ick here man, this.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Is your maybe nice guys really do finish last or
at least get knocked out in the Western Conference semi Finals.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Leader fan Fan Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Network and k fa N dot Com. Two minutes and
twelve seconds past the hour three o'clock Central daylight time,
Welcome back. It is a midweek edition of the Bumper
to Bumper program.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
My name is Dan Barrero.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
I occasionally host the program, guards he produces it, and
we will be here.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Are we going the distance again? To nine till six thirty? Yes?
What is game time for Game five Minnesota? While isn't it?
Speaker 2 (00:54):
I thought it was, but I lose track. There's so
many games to keep track off, as you know, and
so I just kind of go to flow.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
But I think it's a seven o'clock puck drop. I'm
pretty sure seven pm. So pregame six thirty, I would imagine,
so should be. Yeah, we'll just start it right there, surely, hope.
So I'm going to double check the tip time. I
probably should know. But taking a look at it seven o'clock,
our gut was right.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
Powerpack guest lineup today, That much is established. We'll give
you some details on that. Uh, in just a minute,
we'll get the bratch on Brian caffe In text line
rip roaring going, and a matter of minutes as well,
that of course is six four six eighty six. What
was the the tenor on Wolve's wine line, also called
(01:43):
Holland with the Homies? Was it all savagery on must
say John Randall, Julius Randall all of the time, or
was it a little bit more nuanced than that.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Oh, we got to Julius. But yeah, we spread it around.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
I mean in terms of text that you got Julius.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
A lot of rudy texts, a lot of finchy texts
on have we never seen a double team before? Yes,
why can't we figure out how to beat this defense?
But a lot of it's centered around, yes, Julius Randall,
the fact they don't have really a point guard at
this point because of who they have and who they
don't have available to them. But yes, a lot of it,
(02:22):
as you can imagine, centered around big Julius.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
I will obviously review what took place in game number
five in San Antonio.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Davey, we will preview a game.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Number five Minnesota Wild Russo Radio will help us do that.
By the way, he's going to file a live report
from a mile high at five oh two Russo Radio
five oh two Kessler Always High will join in studio.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
I'm assuming at.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
Five thirty at least a mile and yeah, it could
be yeah, it could be two miles actually, and Sam
Mitchell is expected to join us at four thirty.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Now.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
He agreed to do that yesterday with a interesting phone
call he made to me as the wolves were getting
destroyed last night.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Oh yeah, I wondered it was an odd time to
get the confirmation that was coming on.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
He. I think Sam may have had a belt or
two and he he, he was quite vocal, think about
this do the good and the bad involving the Minnesota Timberwolves.
I don't know how much of that he'll go into today,
but it was a it was a very earthy conversation
I like those with Sam Mitchell.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
And that's when he agreed.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
So I I say, I think we have him at
four thirty, advisedly because he might have forgotten about it. Now.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
I reminded him, okay, but he hasn't responded to the reminder.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
That's all you can do. So we'll see how it goes.
I'm hoping for him. Sam Mitchell today at at four thirty.
So that's the uglydeck dot com guest lineup for today,
including I mentioned Kessler at at five point thirty. I was,
I'm going to begin in a weird place, maybe a
(04:07):
place that you don't you didn't perhaps expect, and I
I'm not sure I expected to go this route because
it's unlike me to go down the road.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
I'm about to go down in that I am.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
It will be perceived as me reacting after the fact
on the basis of the loss. I'm going to probably
be viewed. I'll be accused of homersm on this one,
I think, although in a way it's a criticism of
the hometown team. And if I look back now on
(04:44):
the basis of and I admit I'm I'm partly traumatized
by what I saw Wemby do in the first quarter. Yeah,
actually like the first wasn't it like the first six.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Minutes of the first did he have like nineteen points
in six minutes? I think it was eighteen? Felt like more?
Felt like more?
Speaker 2 (05:04):
So?
Speaker 1 (05:06):
What is it?
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Are you likely to hear even more from fans? Shouldn't
even been playing in that game, and that's usually an emotion.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
I rip and that I resist.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
But I think I'm going there a little bit now because.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
The more I think.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
About it, it's undeniable that the Wolves did not deserve
to win the game on the basis of who played.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
We're going to get to.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
These ine indescribable stretches of what's considered a low IQ.
You know, I don't look, yeah, look what's considered like
a H I've never had to worry about, like what
the ranges I've never you know, I've never been, you know,
not very smart, but also not whatever the whatever number
(05:57):
we can associate with it, it's the number that that
the Wolves deserve on the basis of the way they
were playing, treating offense the offensive end of the court
for significant sections of the game. As quite frankly Reggie
Miller among others on the broadcast.
Speaker 3 (06:14):
Noticed below, seventy or seventy five are typically classified according
to AI, which is smarter than us as low average
IQ is about one hundred.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
All right, Well, then I'll go with fifty two. They
played at a fifty two basketball IQ through significant sections
that gave and by the way, that's where the ripping
is going to come in here. What are we hearing today?
We know the plan we're hearing well.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
You saw it.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
They're better. They're just better than us. They're healthier, and
they're better. You can, you know, mash your teeth all
you want. This town's really good from immediate perspective of
inevitably getting to that place where what.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Are these fans complaining about? They're just better.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
I'm here to tell you that's for me on the
basis of last night's game only half the story. In
other words, I believe two things can be true at
the same time. One, the Spurs are better and they
are healthy, healthier, and two, the Wolves made it far
easier than even with that disparity than they needed to
(07:26):
through significant sections of Game five in San Antonio, Davy.
I'm not gonna let them off the hook on just
the first one.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
I'm not.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
But here's the questions. We have to go back to
game number four, and I again, I hesitate to go
down this road because it'll be considered kind.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
Of a Homer take.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
But I went along too easily with the ration folks.
I think, looking back on it now, who said he
got kicked out of the game? Wemby did deserved it.
Not even a borderline call should have been fined. But
no further suspension, No further punishment in terms of taking
(08:17):
away taking him off the court was merited or needed
given his track record, which he had. He had none, right,
there was no. I don't think he'd been called into
the principal's office even once. Right, I think I was
too compliant with that viewpoint. I look back on it
(08:39):
now and I say, forget precedent. The hit itself, the
act itself should have been worthy. Even if he got
knocked out when he did, or got thrown out when
he did, which was second quarter of a second game,
(09:01):
there should have been another suspension there and beyond that.
Let me try this theory on it. This has been advanced.
I heard this advanced again today by Antonio Daniels, among others,
and it's sneaky and again flies in the face of
part of what we talked about yesterday, which was don't win,
(09:23):
worry about winning the battle, to lose the war. Composure
in the end will serve your purpose. You have to
be smart. But if you look back on the moment
the incident took place, can you argue that at that moment,
the Minnesota Timberwolves were too nice.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
That they needed a player.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
Preferably one off the bench who doesn't matter like Ingalls,
to come out there and ask escalate, escalate the situation.
Because the Daniels theory, and it's not a bad one,
is if that.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
That because it stopped fast.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
Right, because Jaden McDaniels showed a cool.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Head and nas he may have popped back up, but
it wasn't like then he was trying to throw punches.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
He wasn't charging the mound exactly it yep.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
But if you look at it now, can you make
the argument that that a was too much composure and
from a strategic standpoint, actually worked against the Wolves. That
if a Timberwolve player had escalated it, in other words,
starts charging the mound, not just pushing back on Wemby,
(10:47):
but grabbing him around the neck or trying to bring
him to the ground or whatever, that there would actually
have been a greater chance that the league would have
felt compelled who suspend. Now you say, well, yeah, but
what if we lose a player? Well, again, the trade off?
Take the trade off? Even it will? You definitely take
(11:08):
the trade off if it's Julius Randall that much we know,
oh my god. But it's an interesting theory that in
the end it almost looked like the wolves were so
shocked by what Wenby did that they didn't know or
they had been conditioned to think, let's let's not turn
into hockey players here, let's keep our composure. Then we're
(11:29):
not gonna get anybody thrown out of this game at least,
and he's gonna get thrown out, He's gonna get tossed,
and we got the advantage at that point. But if
you're playing chess rather than checkers, do you have to
say get greedy and go well, no, if we turn
it into a melee, there's actually a better chance that
then the league says, well, no, we have to do more.
(11:51):
We are suspending let's just say, for the sake of argument, Jaden,
but we're also suspending beyond the game he gets kicked out,
we are suspending.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Wemby for another game.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
That's the I don't think it's a crazy It's sad man,
it has to come to.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
This, but I'm not sure it's a crazy.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
Theory was that were the wolves too composed and too nice?
And even last night, I think we were too nice, now.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
I know we did. You know, for me, I'm not
all that aroused by I mean, Io got his ear,
Yeah that was Edward's got his ear a little bit.
And there. Look they've shoved back and forth a little bit.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Hell Na has got a technical that I don't even
think you should have got a technical. Very stupid shove
was not worth a technical foul and all that. But
maybe were too nice. Maybe we're too composed for our
own good. It's a lot to chew on there.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
Yeah, So I'm just gonna try to sew it up
so we can hit.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
The first straddle. And so I just want to make
sure I have all of this right.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
So the team that has guys that have been suspended
by their own team for punching a teammate have lost
players because they punched the wall who have not been
known historically for composure, now are all of a sudden
too composed at the moment of truth. When they needed
to return to their uncomposed too nice at least too nice,
(13:12):
too composed when they needed to revert back to who
they historically have done, they filed to meet the moment and.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
Showed too much maturity.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
That's It sounds insane, It sounds like what are we
talking about here? But I'm I'm just throwing it out.
It's not original with me. Let me say, like I said,
it was an Antonio Daniels thing that I I picked
up on. Although I think in general we I don't
(13:42):
know what I wanted last night. I don't know what
I'm asking for because they were going to protect him obviously,
but I I thought he.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
Was too free and easy.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Man. Here's what I will say in the in the
in let's say the time when Charles Oakley was playing Uh,
when we want did he play?
Speaker 1 (14:01):
The eighties? Eighties and nineties?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
Eighties and nineties, Charles Barkley is playing whenever did that?
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Karl Malone's playing the Davis Brothers from Indy.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
I think Webby's going down, Yeah, probably right, And I
don't mean again like in a dirty play, but a
hard a very hard play.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Now.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
I don't know if it would have made any difference,
but it's interesting, Like I said, I don't know kind
of looking back on it that in the end, did
our uh, did our composure take away our best chance?
Speaker 1 (14:33):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (14:33):
To actually this series when they you know clearly the
spurs are better, and we're you know, we're not healthy,
and we're not wet.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
We are resilient, we.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Are tenacious, we are determined, and that's why they've been
to the conference finals two straight years and why they
shocked the world against Denver. But it's also why they're
probably not gonna go any further beyond the injury.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
I don't think it's just the injury.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
I think there is still a significant issue that if
you want a great on a really tough curve, that's
gonna have to be examined in this offseason, don't you
totally totally. I just think it becomes inescapable just there.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
This is not a team now.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
They might say, well, we weren't fully loaded, and if
we had Dante and Bant was hurt, then we wouldn't
need Julius Randall to be everything that he is not
right now, we wouldn't need Rudy, who did not play
well last night on either end.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Right.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
But but by the way, again to the national audience,
that doesn't mean what took place in the Denver series
didn't take place. This is the world we live in.
It's like, oh, he's terrible.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
We knew it all along.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
He was great the last series. He's not playing well
in this series. Again, both things can be true and.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Some of that.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
Let's face it, this guy moves in other world fashion
at seven to five.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Every If everybody believes the notion, what do they say,
We've never seen anything.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
I've heard people again say today there is no question
in their mind that he will go down is the
greatest basketball player ever. So if that's the premise, then
a lot of people are gonna look foolish, even a
four time Defensive Player of the Year who's clearly not
used to guarding guards all the time out on the perimeter.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, there's gonna be some collateral damage with Wendy. Now
that doesn't explain.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
We should find the quote by who's the Lakers coach,
JJ Reddick, The Reddick quote about his center he used
to play with Phoenix DeAndre Ay. You saw the quote.
I think we talked about it. There was a game
late in the regular season. He's struggling and the quote
from and the head coach has asked about him, and
he goes, he has trouble catching the ball. Yeah, Rudy
(16:53):
has trouble. He does catching the ball, and it's maddening
when it happens, but I'm on the teammates too often
threw it to him in places where even Bill Walton
could not have done all that much with it. And
he has some of the greatest center hands in the
history of basketball.
Speaker 1 (17:10):
Let alone Rudy go back. Can we go back to
twenty seven? We can.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
I was just gonna say we can go to twenty seven.
I think I'm kind of with you. I was, I
thought in a very serene and accepting place about the
lack of suspension for Rudy.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
I get it. I understand it.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
Maybe it's because we also lived through Jamal Murray not
being suspended when he probably should have been for throwing
something on the court that Karl Anthony Towns. I don't
remember if he slipped on it or almost slipped on it,
But I think.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
Part of the problem.
Speaker 3 (17:40):
I'm now having post game five with the Victor wembit
Yama stuff, and I don't know if you picked up
on this or not, or if it bothered you as well.
The broadcast really the whole conversation about him before the game,
which we talked about, yes, and then during the game
last night, they basically acted like he was on some
(18:02):
kind of United Nations mission trip and came back or
was like a prisoner of.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
War vict We talked about that yesterday.
Speaker 3 (18:11):
But they even took it a step further, and you know,
talk like when Tariko is like, you know, you got
a young team kind of going through some stuff on
the way, It's like, well, that's it's not really a
young team taking their lumps that they're going through. It's
their best player lost his mind. They got kicked out
of a game. That is that's not a normal playoff adversity.
So I think that's bothering me a little bit more.
(18:33):
The Wemby thing, Like then it's making me reexamine how
I thought about it too. Yes, because he wasn't on
a mission trip. He he didn't have anything happened to him.
It was all self inflicted and he got off scott free,
and you knew he was gonna play well because he
usually plays well. He's Victor Wembin Yama. And so yeah,
that so that's bothering me. The further away we get
(18:55):
from it that like they're they're acting like he's this
martyr that is, you know, fighting for.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
The like something happened to him, nothing created this particular challenge.
So that's one hundred. That's bothering. Yeah, and I think
that's fair. And again I'm not going to let the
team off the hook for what some of the other
stuff we've talked about, We're going to get to all
of it. We'll talk about it with Sam Mitchell. The
basketball IQ stuff, I get it. In this series, you're
(19:22):
gonna have to hit threes. Yeah, you have to, but
taking them is rushed and early in the shot clock,
as they did too many times. First half ridiculous. There
were stretches where the second quarter possessions were a joke.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
I mean, they just were embarrassing.
Speaker 2 (19:42):
Where you go, how how does a team rise up
to where it is only to.
Speaker 1 (19:49):
Be put itself in this position, seemingly.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Taking away any opportunity it might have to maybe get
something going later. Now they did eventually, but obviously it
didn't get sustained right because san Antonio's offense is so
much smoother, And that too makes no sense.
Speaker 1 (20:09):
I know, they shot so easily. We have a lot
more experience. At this point. They're the team that's supposed
to go.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
We're gonna go at san Antonio offense looks kind of
willy nearly for about seven minutes here. What are they running?
What are they they missed that's the Spurs what they're running.
How often do we have to ask what are you running?
What exactly is going on here? Let alone the double
team issue which keeps coming up again and again and again.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (20:38):
I think what's frustrating about it is despite everything that
we just talked about the other thing that the Wolves
were down twelve at half. They could have been down
and Parker said it on the post game, but they're playing
Oklahoma City. They're probably down fifty points. That's how ragged
it was. Now they weathered it.
Speaker 2 (20:53):
At the end of the first ten, they actually could
have been down five if they hit a couple more shots.
There's that because San Antonio, as well as they've play it,
and as good as these young players are, and they've
got some absolute dogs, there's no denying that they miss
their last eight shots of the half.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
San Antonio, they they do some stupid stuff too. They
have allowed the Wolves, including in Game two, to hang
around even when they're not really playing that crisply. So
I was thinking, if you come out here with anything
in the third any semblance of organization, you should be
able to get back in this thing. And they tie
it at sixty one and have the ball and Edwards
(21:28):
actually misses a shot that would have given you your
first lead of the game, sixty three to sixty one.
They're outscored by thirty some points after that when you
tied it at sixty one middle of the third, like
that's impossible.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Thirty Yeah, and a lot.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
Of it too, though is I just think defensively, I
know Jayden got in foul trouble, which was a dumb foul,
his fourth foul, frustration Foux, he missed the jumper. They
completely crater. But san Antonio they just play harder than
them on defense too. Part of the reason why the
Wolves are disjointed is because they allow san Antonio to
do whatever they want, and the Wolves were not answering
(22:00):
on the other side of the floor.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
There's going to have to be I think it's becoming
increasingly clear that the president of basketball operations for this team,
the highly coveted, highly decorated, highly accomplished tim and compensated
and compensated, He's going to have to have an intervention
(22:22):
after this season. He's going to have to sit the
head coach down, and he's going to have to say, Coach,
I'm with you as long as I'm here, you can
be here. I respect you as a coach, but I'm
going to have to trade Julius Randall because you have
(22:44):
a blind spot regarding this player that has become inescapable.
And we really can't go forward because I guess what
I'm saying is he's not going to bench him.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
He's not going to sit him right. So the only option.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
He's not gonna call it like he does everybody else
at one time or another. So I'm gonna take it
out of your hands. We're gonna, we're gonna, we're gonna
move them, and we'll see what we can get in return.
And I there's a part of me that understands why
he continues, he being Finchy, continues to play him. My
(23:23):
theory is the deep deep if you gave him is
a sodium pentathal. Not sure if they if you injected
him a sodium like truth serum. Let's keep it simple
that Finchy would say, I know he's been a wreck,
but I have no choices or no choice but to
hope that for one game he catches lightning in a
(23:46):
bottle because he can he has it lately, but he can't.
And my alternative is what who else am I going
to throw out there? I can try different combinations, but
as it is, you know, the center is a mess
right now in this matchup compared to the last series.
So I'm sure deep down he may know it, and
he's saying the odds at this point might be five
(24:09):
percent that he has like a twenty five and twelve game,
But that's our only chance anyway, So I got to
suffer through it. But long term, I think you got
to separate the two and you know, we'll get into
it as we get.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
Further along in this thing in the basketball IQ stuff.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
I really do believe now there's two choices going forward.
One is you do change the coach and say I
want somebody else to take a fresh look at this issue.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Godspeed to Finchy.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
He's been great, but sometimes it's just quote unquote use
the different voice, cliche whatever. Or you've got to change
the players because I think there's something and we're going
to talk to Sam about this. I think there's something
to be said that players. You can't make a low
IQ basketball guy smarter, even if you're a great coach,
(25:01):
and that what the best teams do is they just
try to lower the number of players that are in
that Cats classification, either by how they draft or the
trades they make or whatever. You're going to have to
change the players, I think, or the coach, don't you
in that sense?
Speaker 1 (25:18):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (25:19):
Now, Yeah, the stretch where they tied it at sixty one,
that was probably Randall's best stretch of the game, where
he had a good pass to Jaden. I think he
got some rebounds. I think he might have even gone
to stop in there defensively. Yeah, but then there's still
too to me, it's never even in the offense with Julius,
as clunky as it is. It's there was a play
in the first half last night where it was so
obviously his guy to rotate to in the corner that
(25:42):
the spur was so open that even though he didn't
do it right away, Yeah, he still had time to
get two steps outside the lane. Like it was so
bad and so lazy. Like that's actually what bothers me
more because that's just general inactivity and inattentiveness, and you
just lack of effort. Lack of effort. You can't have
it where I want to go. You gave me, you
gave me.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
The This is one of those analytics. Yeah, the Wolves
are getting.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
Zero point eighty five points per direct touch from Randal
The's playoffs. And that's a number that in of itself
I don't think means anything to anybody, but in context,
according to this analytic the All NBA podcast, that's the
second worst mark in the tracking era for a player
with three hundred or more direct touches in a single
(26:31):
playoff round.
Speaker 1 (26:33):
Playoff run, I should say, playoff run yep.
Speaker 2 (26:35):
That would include two rounds, and the eye test would say, yeah,
I can believe for sure.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
Yeah, like I told you, it feels worse. Yes.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
But to answer your question about the changes, I think
the fact that the Wolves were heavily I think Conley's
already showed his hand because they were heavily involved in
the Durant stuff. They were heavily involved in the giannesty. Yes,
I think. And that's of what's given me long term
peace and calm is that Conley knows all of this.
(27:05):
Conley is a smart guy, and he has tried to
switch things out the last couple of years and go
get a true number two option. Or maybe because it's
not going to be a one but another big knocker,
another superstar. I think this conversation is not news to
Tim Conley. I thinkocked moves that he's tried to be
involved in the last couple of years because he also
(27:26):
sees what's going on with Oklahoma City and San Antonio.
Speaker 1 (27:28):
Well they're not going anywhere. No, not the last dance.
Well that's what we got to get to the east.
But let's we're very late.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
Let's get our first pause in Bonus Bucks time better
late than ever.
Speaker 3 (27:37):
Fanabig deck dot com, I'm gonna give you a shot
to win Bonus Bucks. It is our national cash contest
and the first keyword on this Wednesday is rich.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Go to kfen dot COmON enter the keyword rich. Bumper
to bumper with Dan Burrero on the six two.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
Guy, wasn't it just a week ago you called out Filino.
If we're doing the same thing, you have me fairly confused.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
Right now.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
I would say six point two guy, you're talking checkers
and I'm talking chess. What Felino did put the wild
in that game at a disadvantage for four minutes immediately
in the short term, at a numbers disadvantage, and quite frankly, Felino,
(28:25):
as popular as he is, has a history of composure
issues that transcend any single game or frankly any season,
any single series. What I'm proposing, inspired by Antonio Daniels, is,
at the moment of truth in game, what was that
game for?
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Yeah, that.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
It's impossible to calculate this out as it's happening, probably,
But what he is musing out loud is I think
makes some sense to me that if part.
Speaker 1 (28:58):
Of what made it probably too.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Easy for the league to say he got booted as
he should missed the entire second half.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Of the game, that's good. What made that easy was it? Did?
Speaker 2 (29:11):
It?
Speaker 1 (29:11):
Never really turned into a melee?
Speaker 2 (29:15):
So if if the strategy is about advantage disadvantage, I'll
ask six to one to two guys, do the Wolves
not have the advantage if Wemby gets tossed for a
second game?
Speaker 1 (29:29):
Well, I mean suspended for the second game.
Speaker 2 (29:33):
And would it had been harder for the league to
leave it as enough he got kicked out if it
had turned into a full fledged melee? Now I know
the fine print is dangerous because well what if the player,
the Wolves player? Yeah, the second day he gets but
what if he gets kicked out of that game and
(29:53):
suspended for the next game too. And you know what
my answer is, did you watch Wemby last night? Yeah,
you're gonna take that right off every time. I'm not
saying it's a way to build a championship, you know, blueprint.
But I look back on it, and I'm mad at
myself because I think more generally, I went along too
(30:14):
easily with the notion that no track record, there's.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
No need to suspend them.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
I go back and look at that play again. That's suspendable,
flat out, period, end of story.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
I think all time NBA, New time NBA.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
Especially that if you're in the commissioner's office, I know
you got people whispering. You're saying, he's the future man,
and he's our ratings this year, and you really want
to do it and maybe knock the Spurs out because
the Wolves will probably get swept by Oki City in
four that'd be the thinking at least, right, I get
all of that, but there's got to be a voice
on the other side whispering. A commissioner, you do need
(30:57):
to deliver a powerful message here that that's the kind
of calculated blow that cannot be tolerated in your league.
This isn't the National Hockey League, this is the NBA, right,
and so on that basis sorry, because it will be
easier for teams and players of other teams to say, okay,
(31:21):
if my player and I agree with this totally. This
was part of what Draymond said and other people picked
up on it. If nas red, if the roles are
reversed and naz Reid throws that same elbow the same way,
he is suspended, you know it and I know it,
and that to me is where the message and I
(31:43):
wouldn't even argue with it, but the message from the
league on that should be we can't have other teams going,
all right, we kind of got free reign to take
some free shots, and that I think was part of
Draymond's point. I obviously don't agree with everything Draymond says,
the way he goes about doing it, that's the funny
parton if Draymond notices it as a guy who's been suspended,
(32:06):
who doesn't like being suspended.
Speaker 3 (32:08):
He's talked about the fine system in the NBA, and
its said, right, you know, kind of ridiculous things about
the fine system, but you know how he has. He
has the background there. We probably all should have had
our intennas up more. When you hear what Draymond had
to say about it, that it shocked even him that
they didn't do anything, or that he was bothered that
(32:28):
they didn't.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
Do anything more than they actually did.
Speaker 2 (32:30):
U six one two guy, Such a dumb take because
a dude got objected and we won the game because
of it. You wanted an all out brawl, dumb, I'm saying,
I don't know that I wanted an all out brawl.
I'm playing this out in real time, in a real
world sense. This isn't a laboratory. And what I'm saying
is that he should have been I now firmly in
(32:53):
the camp and there are people nationally who have said
this from the beginning, to their credit, I'm now firmly
in the camp that says he should have been suspended
for an additional game one hundred percent. And what I'm
saying is, I think part of what made it easy
for the league to this is clean. It's done nothing,
It didn't devolve into anything bigger. He didn't do anything
(33:16):
else nobody else did. So you know, we're good, We're good.
There would have been a better chance that the league
might have had a harder time from a pr standpoint
doing it. That's not me even necessarily taking a position
on that so much as saying, it's an interesting theory
that I think has some legs to it in a
real world sense.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
One hundred percent? Do you agree with this?
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Even the NHL would have suspended Wenby for one game
after such a blatant elbow, I don't know.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
They didn't really do anything to got pads in the
NHL as it was a Jamie benn right.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
Everybody was telling us that he was supposed to be
suspended for something, or he was supposed to be fined
more for Dallas. He's got a huge track record and
he wasn't suspended. So I don't know if I buy that.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
Who And this is a good question, do we know
who was worst on points per touch?
Speaker 1 (34:07):
Worse?
Speaker 2 (34:07):
The one player worse than Julius on points per touch?
Speaker 3 (34:12):
I didn't look at the graphic. I should like it up.
I couldn't find it on the graphic. Okay, I just
took the Julius line and said, and this makes sense
that this aligns with what I feel like I've been
watching for the better part of the season, but certainly
in the playoffs, but I didn't see.
Speaker 2 (34:26):
Who who was worse Ryan in Minnetaka. Thank you for
touching on Randal and Finch. I think you have to
move on from both. I don't. I'm saying I think
if you're really going to tackle, if you believe the
premise and I do about the basketball IQ issue, I'm
not sure you can coach that into players. I think
(34:47):
that's on the front end of the collection of players
you put together. So to me, you have two choices,
a significant roster shift without being stupid and irrational, where
you bring in more of that and you you know,
admit that you're getting rid of some good talent, but
in the mix you think it'll work in your favor
(35:08):
or you say you.
Speaker 1 (35:10):
Know, I.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Think some of this can be coaching in people. I'm
gonna give somebody somebody else a shot. I don't think
I wouldn't, but I wouldn't do both. I don't think
he has I don't think you should do both, to
tell you the truth, but I think I think it's
it sort of has to be for me at this point,
one or the other.
Speaker 1 (35:26):
Now the comeback to all that will be Dante. You
could argue in this kind of series.
Speaker 2 (35:35):
Actually is more valuable than a Julius Randall at his
best right, because there are so many great wing players
for San Antonio Daviy. Some we've never the half the
league has never heard of until this season, but they're
good at this. He is a wing. He's a streak shooter,
but he can hit jump shots.
Speaker 1 (35:53):
For sure.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
You need jump shots hitting this series. He's active, he
doesn't back off. I think he plays reasonable d defense
at least, and he's he's he's willing defensively, so that
can be the comeback to my comeback, which is no
we and Anthony wasn't healthy.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
So because other times.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
You know, it's also fair to say Conley says, uh no,
We're going to stay the course here. I make changes
when I think we need to, but sometimes I think
stability is the most important thing, and I'm going to
continue to put it together. I'm going to find a
way to re sign to Sumu. I don't even know
if that's likely. I've seen enough of Dissumer that I
want him back. I do, don't you.
Speaker 1 (36:32):
I want him back like him, I think who do
we have.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
On yesterday on this subject, Trent Probaly Trent, I mildly
disagree with Trent. I think to Sumu, well, again, depending
on what your options are, I think he has a
chance to be your starting point guard.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
I do, yeah, he could be.
Speaker 2 (36:48):
I think he's going to get better than the other
options that you have right now. I've seen enough of
them to think that he the way we run offense anyway,
and and you handing the ball decent amount. If you
can take away that responsibility to just, let's say even
twenty five percent, I think to assume who can do that.
Speaker 1 (37:08):
We've seen his.
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Activity and he hasn't even been healthy. Obviously, he is
going to cost big money. All right, let's get caught up.
I want to get to some hockey conversation, some texts
on your confidence level tonight on your Minnesota wild I
have a new theory I want to advance there that
has nothing to do with goon behavior.
Speaker 1 (37:27):
We'll discuss that.
Speaker 2 (37:28):
Don't forget coming up at if I should say, at
four thirty, it's Sam Mitchell.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
So we'll get back to the NBA and the Wolves.
Speaker 2 (37:36):
Russo Radio at five OHO two and Kessler at five
thirty for whatever it's worth. Mitchell, despite his frustration with
what he saw last night, fully expects the Wolves to
win Game six.
Speaker 1 (37:49):
So do I.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
And I don't know if I bet on it, but
I lean that yeah, yeah, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
That still doesn't, you know, cure all of their ills.
That's the problem, because fantas earn. Game seven has to
be in San Antonio, Davy, you're listening to Barrero on
the fan, the Wild must win in Denver. In the
history of the NBA playoffs, in the history of the
(38:14):
Stanley Cup Playoffs, in the history of the NFL and
Major League Baseball postseason, can you answer one question regarding
the history of those sports? Has it ever been documented
that an inferior team won the series? Has it ever happened?
(38:37):
I thought you were gonna ask me.
Speaker 3 (38:38):
Has it ever been documented where a team's five best
players were six so they moved the game a day later?
Because that's happened now and the Frost Oh really.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Oh yeah, I mean he let he let the league
or well, I can't really say Montreal because it's all
the league is. They run all the teams. He let
the league completely off the hook. Oh he'll be on Friday,
we went belly up. Wait because it's ironic. I was
he bought off because the day before he's hmmm, huh.
(39:10):
I never realized that, you know, a team could, a
series could be postponed because of fear. And I'm thinking, oh, okay,
Leavell being tough guy, bye bye the game time and
he's he's he's writing a column off the game. No
excuses for the frost, no excuses whatsoever. So something somebody
got to him. Wow, somebody in that league. Maybe it
(39:32):
was Stan Caston, could have been got to him. Maybe
it's mister fun.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (39:36):
I was gonna say, Joe Anderson to answer your question, Yes,
I believe an inferior team has upset a better team.
You know how we know it because we've been the
better team that's lost. Yes, a lot.
Speaker 2 (39:50):
We were the better team against Atlanta in what year
was that? Nineteen eighty nineteen my sophomore year high school?
Speaker 1 (39:57):
Yeah, the fifteen. In one year.
Speaker 3 (39:58):
I was listening to Dave Ryan's do the We're going
to Miami song? Right were we were? You could argue
the better team in New Orleans. There's no arguing that
I mean, I don't mean because we outgained him in
that game. I'm just saying in general, you could say
we were just a better team.
Speaker 2 (40:15):
I bring it up because, as I said, be ready
for it, boys and girls. If if, if Colorado finishes
a job tonight and San Antonio Davey finishes a job
either on Friday or it would be Sunday, would be
Game seven. All you're gonna read is calm down. You
can be mad as hell, but we lost to better teams.
(40:37):
And I won't necessarily disagree with that. But I'm what
I'm here to tell you is I've I've covered and
watched sports for decades. It happens more than you think
that an inferior team, for whatever reason, just ris us
up inexplicably unreasonably and says we're gonna win somehow, we're
gonna win.
Speaker 1 (40:56):
Our hockey teams have done that a couple of times.
That's wild. The North Stars did it.
Speaker 2 (41:00):
You know why We're always have to be on the
other end of that. So that's why I'm officially bored
with the explains there better explains everything.
Speaker 1 (41:11):
It doesn't explain everything.
Speaker 2 (41:13):
It certainly doesn't explain the approach that the Wolves took
at key moments in game number five, not even close
to explaining that. How about my new theory on your
Wild Club. We go to detw're in Denver, we win tonight,
series comes back here and we lose in six.
Speaker 1 (41:36):
It's very possitive.
Speaker 2 (41:36):
I think that's very and that's where you're back to
down three to one. Everything has to go your way,
Everything has to go your way, right, And that's the
danger of playing this series the way we did, especially
in game four. You could say we've squatted opportunities early
in the series. There's still people who think, don't know
(41:58):
if I agree. There are people who think that with
better goaltending in Game two, yeah, we would have won
that game. I'm still not sure I buy that. I
think that's mainly from people who are bitter that the
goaltending change was made, and you and I both disagreed
with the change. I didn't come out of that game
convinced that that was the difference in the game. Of course,
(42:18):
we will never know. But you know, it's not outlandish
to think that the Wild could could win tonight. No, definitely,
but it's for me now fairly outlandish to think even
though we've done it before. Well, the last time we
were down three to one was Vegas and we got
it to seven, right, and then we lost in game seven.
We were down three to one, tied at three to three,
(42:40):
and then couldn't finish the job.
Speaker 1 (42:42):
Correct. I think that was Russo will have that history. Yeah,
that sounds right. I'm pretty sure that's right. That sounds right.
Speaker 3 (42:47):
And the way Volstad's been playing, yes, it's possible. He
played well the other night. He did and you get
a couple of deflections. Yes, hockey's a funny game. But
you know what they have to do intentionally play the
right way or what did we say yesterday? They have
to be conscious or intentional about playing the right.
Speaker 2 (43:04):
Well, that's the fun in the conscious choice, that's the
funny thing.
Speaker 1 (43:08):
I mean, you could argue that Anthony Edwards maybe he's.
Speaker 2 (43:12):
Following the quotes from Heinsey, because what did Edward say
after the game?
Speaker 1 (43:15):
We know the plan, we know the plan and we
didn't follow it. Again.
Speaker 2 (43:17):
Yeah, he basically said, we intentionally didn't follow the game
play totally.
Speaker 1 (43:22):
So we got two.
Speaker 2 (43:23):
Weird teams here or a weird dynamic going on in town.
I'm not sure which lea Mondella.
Speaker 1 (43:27):
Guys checked in.
Speaker 2 (43:29):
I don't know for sure the basketball IQ level of
the Wolves, but I do know none of them were
able to answer the lion, a giraffe, a bear, and
a shark question.
Speaker 3 (43:39):
Boy, let's wait for Kessler at five point thirty before
we start this.
Speaker 1 (43:45):
Eighty seven twins. That's true.
Speaker 2 (43:48):
They were inferior to Detroit and to Saint Louis. That's
one hundred percent accurate. Ninety one not so much. That
was a better team. So we have, We've been on
the better end of it.
Speaker 1 (43:57):
Sure. Thirty five also proof that it can happen.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Is it harder in basketball when the other team has
the dominant player?
Speaker 1 (44:04):
Yes, it always is, but still not impossible?
Speaker 3 (44:08):
Right?
Speaker 2 (44:09):
No?
Speaker 3 (44:09):
And I, like I said, I'm with you, I'm with
Sam Mitchell. The Wolves are so weird. I feel like
they're gonna play well on Friday. I fully expect them to.
And let's see what happens in Game seven. I think
they're going to play really well. But I could also
see here's the thing. I could also see them just
completely saying we're done.
Speaker 1 (44:29):
It's over.
Speaker 3 (44:30):
Rudy's terrible, Julius wants to go home, and he's building
a new Rams.
Speaker 1 (44:33):
Out of Texas.
Speaker 3 (44:34):
Johnny's calling for a lineup change. But okay, I'm glad
you brought that up, and I know we got a
break again, What does that mean? Who are we benching?
Speaker 1 (44:42):
That's the problem?
Speaker 2 (44:44):
Starting lineup ses he's saying. I don't think he means,
for example, you don't play Rudy at all. But you go, okay,
we're starting, nots, We're going to go with a completely different.
Speaker 1 (44:53):
I just don't see that happening.
Speaker 2 (44:55):
Or you say we're starting, we're benching Julius, and I
don't see that. And again, to me, as much as
I understand the instinct, and Julius deserves all the criticism
he's getting, he doesn't seem to be acknowledging anything. By
the way, I'd like to see a little bit more
self awareness. Oh, he's following his head coaches lead. Yeah,
that's uses to say.
Speaker 1 (45:15):
That's true. It's well, we have a lot of good passes.
Defense is fine. His box scores utterly misleading to three quarters.
Speaker 2 (45:20):
He was awful. The fourth quarter was garbage time. He
got some numbers. He padded the stats in the fourth quarter,
big deal. But I'm sure again with with with what
I would say to Johnny is the same thing we're
talking about earlier. That Finchy might agree, But he'd say,
in the case of Randall especially, I got no one
else who's gonna, you know, have a chance to get
(45:42):
twenty five and ten, even though it's unlikely on the
prince of what we've seen I with these wing with
the guys they have guarding him. But what if that's
what if he's sitting on that one game and that
one game.
Speaker 1 (45:54):
Gets us back to seven. Now that's we got to
win two. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (45:57):
Nevertheless, that's what that is. The thing read of hope
that FINCHI is obviously banking on. He's hoping that if
I hang with my guy, he's going to pay it
off for us. I don't have a lot of faith
in it, but that's what Finchy's going on, all right.
Top of the hour break don't forget Sam Mitchell in
about thirty minutes, Russo in about one hour. Keep the
(46:17):
texts coming six four six eighty six Bradshaw and Bryant
kfa N text line Bumper to
Speaker 1 (46:25):
Bumper with Dan Burrero
Tens estates be happy. Hey ty ick here ick here man, this.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
Is your maybe nice guys really do finish last or
at least get knocked out in the Western Conference semi Finals.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Leader fan Fan Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
Network and k fa N dot Com. Two minutes and
twelve seconds past the hour three o'clock Central daylight time,
Welcome back. It is a midweek edition of the Bumper
to Bumper program.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
My name is Dan Barrero.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
I occasionally host the program, guards he produces it, and
we will be here.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Are we going the distance again? To nine till six thirty? Yes?
What is game time for Game five Minnesota? While isn't it?
Speaker 2 (00:54):
I thought it was, but I lose track. There's so
many games to keep track off, as you know, and
so I just kind of go to flow.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
But I think it's a seven o'clock puck drop. I'm
pretty sure seven pm. So pregame six thirty, I would imagine,
so should be. Yeah, we'll just start it right there, surely, hope.
So I'm going to double check the tip time. I
probably should know. But taking a look at it seven o'clock,
our gut was right.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
Powerpack guest lineup today, That much is established. We'll give
you some details on that. Uh, in just a minute,
we'll get the bratch on Brian caffe In text line
rip roaring going, and a matter of minutes as well,
that of course is six four six eighty six. What
was the the tenor on Wolve's wine line, also called
(01:43):
Holland with the Homies? Was it all savagery on must
say John Randall, Julius Randall all of the time, or
was it a little bit more nuanced than that.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
Oh, we got to Julius. But yeah, we spread it around.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
I mean in terms of text that you got Julius.
Speaker 3 (02:01):
A lot of rudy texts, a lot of finchy texts
on have we never seen a double team before? Yes,
why can't we figure out how to beat this defense?
But a lot of it's centered around, yes, Julius Randall,
the fact they don't have really a point guard at
this point because of who they have and who they
don't have available to them. But yes, a lot of it,
(02:22):
as you can imagine, centered around big Julius.
Speaker 2 (02:27):
I will obviously review what took place in game number
five in San Antonio.
Speaker 1 (02:33):
Davey, we will preview a game.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Number five Minnesota Wild Russo Radio will help us do that.
By the way, he's going to file a live report
from a mile high at five oh two Russo Radio
five oh two Kessler Always High will join in studio.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
I'm assuming at.
Speaker 2 (02:52):
Five thirty at least a mile and yeah, it could
be yeah, it could be two miles actually, and Sam
Mitchell is expected to join us at four thirty.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Now.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
He agreed to do that yesterday with a interesting phone
call he made to me as the wolves were getting
destroyed last night.
Speaker 3 (03:09):
Oh yeah, I wondered it was an odd time to
get the confirmation that was coming on.
Speaker 2 (03:14):
He. I think Sam may have had a belt or
two and he he, he was quite vocal, think about
this do the good and the bad involving the Minnesota Timberwolves.
I don't know how much of that he'll go into today,
but it was a it was a very earthy conversation
I like those with Sam Mitchell.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
And that's when he agreed.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
So I I say, I think we have him at
four thirty, advisedly because he might have forgotten about it. Now.
Speaker 1 (03:43):
I reminded him, okay, but he hasn't responded to the reminder.
Speaker 2 (03:46):
That's all you can do. So we'll see how it goes.
I'm hoping for him. Sam Mitchell today at at four thirty.
So that's the uglydeck dot com guest lineup for today,
including I mentioned Kessler at at five point thirty. I was,
I'm going to begin in a weird place, maybe a
(04:07):
place that you don't you didn't perhaps expect, and I
I'm not sure I expected to go this route because
it's unlike me to go down the road.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
I'm about to go down in that I am.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
It will be perceived as me reacting after the fact
on the basis of the loss. I'm going to probably
be viewed. I'll be accused of homersm on this one,
I think, although in a way it's a criticism of
the hometown team. And if I look back now on
(04:44):
the basis of and I admit I'm I'm partly traumatized
by what I saw Wemby do in the first quarter. Yeah,
actually like the first wasn't it like the first six.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Minutes of the first did he have like nineteen points
in six minutes? I think it was eighteen? Felt like more?
Felt like more?
Speaker 2 (05:04):
So?
Speaker 1 (05:06):
What is it?
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Are you likely to hear even more from fans? Shouldn't
even been playing in that game, and that's usually an emotion.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
I rip and that I resist.
Speaker 2 (05:18):
But I think I'm going there a little bit now because.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
The more I think.
Speaker 2 (05:26):
About it, it's undeniable that the Wolves did not deserve
to win the game on the basis of who played.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
We're going to get to.
Speaker 2 (05:35):
These ine indescribable stretches of what's considered a low IQ.
You know, I don't look, yeah, look what's considered like
a H I've never had to worry about, like what
the ranges I've never you know, I've never been, you know,
not very smart, but also not whatever the whatever number
(05:57):
we can associate with it, it's the number that that
the Wolves deserve on the basis of the way they
were playing, treating offense the offensive end of the court
for significant sections of the game. As quite frankly Reggie
Miller among others on the broadcast.
Speaker 3 (06:14):
Noticed below, seventy or seventy five are typically classified according
to AI, which is smarter than us as low average
IQ is about one hundred.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
All right, Well, then I'll go with fifty two. They
played at a fifty two basketball IQ through significant sections
that gave and by the way, that's where the ripping
is going to come in here. What are we hearing today?
We know the plan we're hearing well.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
You saw it.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
They're better. They're just better than us. They're healthier, and
they're better. You can, you know, mash your teeth all
you want. This town's really good from immediate perspective of
inevitably getting to that place where what.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
Are these fans complaining about? They're just better.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
I'm here to tell you that's for me on the
basis of last night's game only half the story. In
other words, I believe two things can be true at
the same time. One, the Spurs are better and they
are healthy, healthier, and two, the Wolves made it far
easier than even with that disparity than they needed to
(07:26):
through significant sections of Game five in San Antonio, Davy.
I'm not gonna let them off the hook on just
the first one.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
I'm not.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
But here's the questions. We have to go back to
game number four, and I again, I hesitate to go
down this road because it'll be considered kind.
Speaker 1 (07:52):
Of a Homer take.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
But I went along too easily with the ration folks.
I think, looking back on it now, who said he
got kicked out of the game? Wemby did deserved it.
Not even a borderline call should have been fined. But
no further suspension, No further punishment in terms of taking
(08:17):
away taking him off the court was merited or needed
given his track record, which he had. He had none, right,
there was no. I don't think he'd been called into
the principal's office even once. Right, I think I was
too compliant with that viewpoint. I look back on it
(08:39):
now and I say, forget precedent. The hit itself, the
act itself should have been worthy. Even if he got
knocked out when he did, or got thrown out when
he did, which was second quarter of a second game,
(09:01):
there should have been another suspension there and beyond that.
Let me try this theory on it. This has been advanced.
I heard this advanced again today by Antonio Daniels, among others,
and it's sneaky and again flies in the face of
part of what we talked about yesterday, which was don't win,
(09:23):
worry about winning the battle, to lose the war. Composure
in the end will serve your purpose. You have to
be smart. But if you look back on the moment
the incident took place, can you argue that at that moment,
the Minnesota Timberwolves were too nice.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
That they needed a player.
Speaker 2 (09:50):
Preferably one off the bench who doesn't matter like Ingalls,
to come out there and ask escalate, escalate the situation.
Because the Daniels theory, and it's not a bad one,
is if that.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
That because it stopped fast.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
Right, because Jaden McDaniels showed a cool.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Head and nas he may have popped back up, but
it wasn't like then he was trying to throw punches.
Speaker 1 (10:21):
He wasn't charging the mound exactly it yep.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
But if you look at it now, can you make
the argument that that a was too much composure and
from a strategic standpoint, actually worked against the Wolves. That
if a Timberwolve player had escalated it, in other words,
starts charging the mound, not just pushing back on Wemby,
(10:47):
but grabbing him around the neck or trying to bring
him to the ground or whatever, that there would actually
have been a greater chance that the league would have
felt compelled who suspend. Now you say, well, yeah, but
what if we lose a player? Well, again, the trade off?
Take the trade off? Even it will? You definitely take
(11:08):
the trade off if it's Julius Randall that much we know,
oh my god. But it's an interesting theory that in
the end it almost looked like the wolves were so
shocked by what Wenby did that they didn't know or
they had been conditioned to think, let's let's not turn
into hockey players here, let's keep our composure. Then we're
(11:29):
not gonna get anybody thrown out of this game at least,
and he's gonna get thrown out, He's gonna get tossed,
and we got the advantage at that point. But if
you're playing chess rather than checkers, do you have to
say get greedy and go well, no, if we turn
it into a melee, there's actually a better chance that
then the league says, well, no, we have to do more.
(11:51):
We are suspending let's just say, for the sake of argument, Jaden,
but we're also suspending beyond the game he gets kicked out,
we are suspending.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Wemby for another game.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
That's the I don't think it's a crazy It's sad man,
it has to come to.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
This, but I'm not sure it's a crazy.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
Theory was that were the wolves too composed and too nice?
And even last night, I think we were too nice, now.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
I know we did. You know, for me, I'm not
all that aroused by I mean, Io got his ear,
Yeah that was Edward's got his ear a little bit.
And there. Look they've shoved back and forth a little bit.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
Hell Na has got a technical that I don't even
think you should have got a technical. Very stupid shove
was not worth a technical foul and all that. But
maybe were too nice. Maybe we're too composed for our
own good. It's a lot to chew on there.
Speaker 3 (12:46):
Yeah, So I'm just gonna try to sew it up
so we can hit.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
The first straddle. And so I just want to make
sure I have all of this right.
Speaker 3 (12:52):
So the team that has guys that have been suspended
by their own team for punching a teammate have lost
players because they punched the wall who have not been
known historically for composure, now are all of a sudden
too composed at the moment of truth. When they needed
to return to their uncomposed too nice at least too nice,
(13:12):
too composed when they needed to revert back to who
they historically have done, they filed to meet the moment and.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
Showed too much maturity.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
That's It sounds insane, It sounds like what are we
talking about here? But I'm I'm just throwing it out.
It's not original with me. Let me say, like I said,
it was an Antonio Daniels thing that I I picked
up on. Although I think in general we I don't
(13:42):
know what I wanted last night. I don't know what
I'm asking for because they were going to protect him obviously,
but I I thought he.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
Was too free and easy.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Man. Here's what I will say in the in the
in let's say the time when Charles Oakley was playing Uh,
when we want did he play?
Speaker 1 (14:01):
The eighties? Eighties and nineties?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
Eighties and nineties, Charles Barkley is playing whenever did that?
Speaker 1 (14:08):
Karl Malone's playing the Davis Brothers from Indy.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
I think Webby's going down, Yeah, probably right, And I
don't mean again like in a dirty play, but a
hard a very hard play.
Speaker 1 (14:19):
Now.
Speaker 2 (14:20):
I don't know if it would have made any difference,
but it's interesting, Like I said, I don't know kind
of looking back on it that in the end, did
our uh, did our composure take away our best chance?
Speaker 1 (14:33):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (14:33):
To actually this series when they you know clearly the
spurs are better, and we're you know, we're not healthy,
and we're not wet.
Speaker 1 (14:44):
We are resilient, we.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Are tenacious, we are determined, and that's why they've been
to the conference finals two straight years and why they
shocked the world against Denver. But it's also why they're
probably not gonna go any further beyond the injury.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
I don't think it's just the injury.
Speaker 2 (15:03):
I think there is still a significant issue that if
you want a great on a really tough curve, that's
gonna have to be examined in this offseason, don't you
totally totally. I just think it becomes inescapable just there.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
This is not a team now.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
They might say, well, we weren't fully loaded, and if
we had Dante and Bant was hurt, then we wouldn't
need Julius Randall to be everything that he is not
right now, we wouldn't need Rudy, who did not play
well last night on either end.
Speaker 1 (15:34):
Right.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
But but by the way, again to the national audience,
that doesn't mean what took place in the Denver series
didn't take place. This is the world we live in.
It's like, oh, he's terrible.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
We knew it all along.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
He was great the last series. He's not playing well
in this series. Again, both things can be true and.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Some of that.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
Let's face it, this guy moves in other world fashion
at seven to five.
Speaker 1 (16:02):
Every If everybody believes the notion, what do they say,
We've never seen anything.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
I've heard people again say today there is no question
in their mind that he will go down is the
greatest basketball player ever. So if that's the premise, then
a lot of people are gonna look foolish, even a
four time Defensive Player of the Year who's clearly not
used to guarding guards all the time out on the perimeter.
Speaker 1 (16:25):
Yeah, there's gonna be some collateral damage with Wendy. Now
that doesn't explain.
Speaker 2 (16:29):
We should find the quote by who's the Lakers coach,
JJ Reddick, The Reddick quote about his center he used
to play with Phoenix DeAndre Ay. You saw the quote.
I think we talked about it. There was a game
late in the regular season. He's struggling and the quote
from and the head coach has asked about him, and
he goes, he has trouble catching the ball. Yeah, Rudy
(16:53):
has trouble. He does catching the ball, and it's maddening
when it happens, but I'm on the teammates too often
threw it to him in places where even Bill Walton
could not have done all that much with it. And
he has some of the greatest center hands in the
history of basketball.
Speaker 1 (17:10):
Let alone Rudy go back. Can we go back to
twenty seven? We can.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
I was just gonna say we can go to twenty seven.
I think I'm kind of with you. I was, I
thought in a very serene and accepting place about the
lack of suspension for Rudy.
Speaker 1 (17:25):
I get it. I understand it.
Speaker 3 (17:26):
Maybe it's because we also lived through Jamal Murray not
being suspended when he probably should have been for throwing
something on the court that Karl Anthony Towns. I don't
remember if he slipped on it or almost slipped on it,
But I think.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
Part of the problem.
Speaker 3 (17:40):
I'm now having post game five with the Victor wembit
Yama stuff, and I don't know if you picked up
on this or not, or if it bothered you as well.
The broadcast really the whole conversation about him before the game,
which we talked about, yes, and then during the game
last night, they basically acted like he was on some
(18:02):
kind of United Nations mission trip and came back or
was like a prisoner of.
Speaker 1 (18:08):
War vict We talked about that yesterday.
Speaker 3 (18:11):
But they even took it a step further, and you know,
talk like when Tariko is like, you know, you got
a young team kind of going through some stuff on
the way, It's like, well, that's it's not really a
young team taking their lumps that they're going through. It's
their best player lost his mind. They got kicked out
of a game. That is that's not a normal playoff adversity.
So I think that's bothering me a little bit more.
(18:33):
The Wemby thing, Like then it's making me reexamine how
I thought about it too. Yes, because he wasn't on
a mission trip. He he didn't have anything happened to him.
It was all self inflicted and he got off scott free,
and you knew he was gonna play well because he
usually plays well. He's Victor Wembin Yama. And so yeah,
that so that's bothering me. The further away we get
(18:55):
from it that like they're they're acting like he's this
martyr that is, you know, fighting for.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
The like something happened to him, nothing created this particular challenge.
So that's one hundred. That's bothering. Yeah, and I think
that's fair. And again I'm not going to let the
team off the hook for what some of the other
stuff we've talked about, We're going to get to all
of it. We'll talk about it with Sam Mitchell. The
basketball IQ stuff, I get it. In this series, you're
(19:22):
gonna have to hit threes. Yeah, you have to, but
taking them is rushed and early in the shot clock,
as they did too many times. First half ridiculous. There
were stretches where the second quarter possessions were a joke.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
I mean, they just were embarrassing.
Speaker 2 (19:42):
Where you go, how how does a team rise up
to where it is only to.
Speaker 1 (19:49):
Be put itself in this position, seemingly.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Taking away any opportunity it might have to maybe get
something going later. Now they did eventually, but obviously it
didn't get sustained right because san Antonio's offense is so
much smoother, And that too makes no sense.
Speaker 1 (20:09):
I know, they shot so easily. We have a lot
more experience. At this point. They're the team that's supposed
to go.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
We're gonna go at san Antonio offense looks kind of
willy nearly for about seven minutes here. What are they running?
What are they they missed that's the Spurs what they're running.
How often do we have to ask what are you running?
What exactly is going on here? Let alone the double
team issue which keeps coming up again and again and again.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (20:38):
I think what's frustrating about it is despite everything that
we just talked about the other thing that the Wolves
were down twelve at half. They could have been down
and Parker said it on the post game, but they're playing
Oklahoma City. They're probably down fifty points. That's how ragged
it was. Now they weathered it.
Speaker 2 (20:53):
At the end of the first ten, they actually could
have been down five if they hit a couple more shots.
There's that because San Antonio, as well as they've play it,
and as good as these young players are, and they've
got some absolute dogs, there's no denying that they miss
their last eight shots of the half.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
San Antonio, they they do some stupid stuff too. They
have allowed the Wolves, including in Game two, to hang
around even when they're not really playing that crisply. So
I was thinking, if you come out here with anything
in the third any semblance of organization, you should be
able to get back in this thing. And they tie
it at sixty one and have the ball and Edwards
(21:28):
actually misses a shot that would have given you your
first lead of the game, sixty three to sixty one.
They're outscored by thirty some points after that when you
tied it at sixty one middle of the third, like
that's impossible.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
Thirty Yeah, and a lot.
Speaker 3 (21:40):
Of it too, though is I just think defensively, I
know Jayden got in foul trouble, which was a dumb foul,
his fourth foul, frustration Foux, he missed the jumper. They
completely crater. But san Antonio they just play harder than
them on defense too. Part of the reason why the
Wolves are disjointed is because they allow san Antonio to
do whatever they want, and the Wolves were not answering
(22:00):
on the other side of the floor.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
There's going to have to be I think it's becoming
increasingly clear that the president of basketball operations for this team,
the highly coveted, highly decorated, highly accomplished tim and compensated
and compensated, He's going to have to have an intervention
(22:22):
after this season. He's going to have to sit the
head coach down, and he's going to have to say, Coach,
I'm with you as long as I'm here, you can
be here. I respect you as a coach, but I'm
going to have to trade Julius Randall because you have
(22:44):
a blind spot regarding this player that has become inescapable.
And we really can't go forward because I guess what
I'm saying is he's not going to bench him.
Speaker 1 (22:57):
He's not going to sit him right. So the only option.
Speaker 2 (23:03):
He's not gonna call it like he does everybody else
at one time or another. So I'm gonna take it
out of your hands. We're gonna, we're gonna, we're gonna
move them, and we'll see what we can get in return.
And I there's a part of me that understands why
he continues, he being Finchy, continues to play him. My
(23:23):
theory is the deep deep if you gave him is
a sodium pentathal. Not sure if they if you injected
him a sodium like truth serum. Let's keep it simple
that Finchy would say, I know he's been a wreck,
but I have no choices or no choice but to
hope that for one game he catches lightning in a
(23:46):
bottle because he can he has it lately, but he can't.
And my alternative is what who else am I going
to throw out there? I can try different combinations, but
as it is, you know, the center is a mess
right now in this matchup compared to the last series.
So I'm sure deep down he may know it, and
he's saying the odds at this point might be five
(24:09):
percent that he has like a twenty five and twelve game,
But that's our only chance anyway, So I got to
suffer through it. But long term, I think you got
to separate the two and you know, we'll get into
it as we get.
Speaker 1 (24:23):
Further along in this thing in the basketball IQ stuff.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
I really do believe now there's two choices going forward.
One is you do change the coach and say I
want somebody else to take a fresh look at this issue.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
Godspeed to Finchy.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
He's been great, but sometimes it's just quote unquote use
the different voice, cliche whatever. Or you've got to change
the players because I think there's something and we're going
to talk to Sam about this. I think there's something
to be said that players. You can't make a low
IQ basketball guy smarter, even if you're a great coach,
(25:01):
and that what the best teams do is they just
try to lower the number of players that are in
that Cats classification, either by how they draft or the
trades they make or whatever. You're going to have to
change the players, I think, or the coach, don't you
in that sense?
Speaker 1 (25:18):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (25:19):
Now, Yeah, the stretch where they tied it at sixty one,
that was probably Randall's best stretch of the game, where
he had a good pass to Jaden. I think he
got some rebounds. I think he might have even gone
to stop in there defensively. Yeah, but then there's still
too to me, it's never even in the offense with Julius,
as clunky as it is. It's there was a play
in the first half last night where it was so
obviously his guy to rotate to in the corner that
(25:42):
the spur was so open that even though he didn't
do it right away, Yeah, he still had time to
get two steps outside the lane. Like it was so
bad and so lazy. Like that's actually what bothers me
more because that's just general inactivity and inattentiveness, and you
just lack of effort. Lack of effort. You can't have
it where I want to go. You gave me, you
gave me.
Speaker 1 (26:01):
The This is one of those analytics. Yeah, the Wolves
are getting.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
Zero point eighty five points per direct touch from Randal
The's playoffs. And that's a number that in of itself
I don't think means anything to anybody, but in context,
according to this analytic the All NBA podcast, that's the
second worst mark in the tracking era for a player
with three hundred or more direct touches in a single
(26:31):
playoff round.
Speaker 1 (26:33):
Playoff run, I should say, playoff run yep.
Speaker 2 (26:35):
That would include two rounds, and the eye test would say, yeah,
I can believe for sure.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
Yeah, like I told you, it feels worse. Yes.
Speaker 3 (26:44):
But to answer your question about the changes, I think
the fact that the Wolves were heavily I think Conley's
already showed his hand because they were heavily involved in
the Durant stuff. They were heavily involved in the giannesty. Yes,
I think. And that's of what's given me long term
peace and calm is that Conley knows all of this.
(27:05):
Conley is a smart guy, and he has tried to
switch things out the last couple of years and go
get a true number two option. Or maybe because it's
not going to be a one but another big knocker,
another superstar. I think this conversation is not news to
Tim Conley. I thinkocked moves that he's tried to be
involved in the last couple of years because he also
(27:26):
sees what's going on with Oklahoma City and San Antonio.
Speaker 1 (27:28):
Well they're not going anywhere. No, not the last dance.
Well that's what we got to get to the east.
But let's we're very late.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
Let's get our first pause in Bonus Bucks time better
late than ever.
Speaker 3 (27:37):
Fanabig deck dot com, I'm gonna give you a shot
to win Bonus Bucks. It is our national cash contest
and the first keyword on this Wednesday is rich.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Go to kfen dot COmON enter the keyword rich. Bumper
to bumper with Dan Burrero on the six two.
Speaker 2 (27:56):
Guy, wasn't it just a week ago you called out Filino.
If we're doing the same thing, you have me fairly confused.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
Right now.
Speaker 2 (28:03):
I would say six point two guy, you're talking checkers
and I'm talking chess. What Felino did put the wild
in that game at a disadvantage for four minutes immediately
in the short term, at a numbers disadvantage, and quite frankly, Felino,
(28:25):
as popular as he is, has a history of composure
issues that transcend any single game or frankly any season,
any single series. What I'm proposing, inspired by Antonio Daniels, is,
at the moment of truth in game, what was that
game for?
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Yeah, that.
Speaker 2 (28:48):
It's impossible to calculate this out as it's happening, probably,
But what he is musing out loud is I think
makes some sense to me that if part.
Speaker 1 (28:58):
Of what made it probably too.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Easy for the league to say he got booted as
he should missed the entire second half.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
Of the game, that's good. What made that easy was it? Did?
Speaker 2 (29:11):
It?
Speaker 1 (29:11):
Never really turned into a melee?
Speaker 2 (29:15):
So if if the strategy is about advantage disadvantage, I'll
ask six to one to two guys, do the Wolves
not have the advantage if Wemby gets tossed for a
second game?
Speaker 1 (29:29):
Well, I mean suspended for the second game.
Speaker 2 (29:33):
And would it had been harder for the league to
leave it as enough he got kicked out if it
had turned into a full fledged melee? Now I know
the fine print is dangerous because well what if the player,
the Wolves player? Yeah, the second day he gets but
what if he gets kicked out of that game and
(29:53):
suspended for the next game too. And you know what
my answer is, did you watch Wemby last night? Yeah,
you're gonna take that right off every time. I'm not
saying it's a way to build a championship, you know, blueprint.
But I look back on it, and I'm mad at
myself because I think more generally, I went along too
(30:14):
easily with the notion that no track record, there's.
Speaker 1 (30:19):
No need to suspend them.
Speaker 2 (30:21):
I go back and look at that play again. That's suspendable,
flat out, period, end of story.
Speaker 1 (30:30):
I think all time NBA, New time NBA.
Speaker 2 (30:34):
Especially that if you're in the commissioner's office, I know
you got people whispering. You're saying, he's the future man,
and he's our ratings this year, and you really want
to do it and maybe knock the Spurs out because
the Wolves will probably get swept by Oki City in
four that'd be the thinking at least, right, I get
all of that, but there's got to be a voice
on the other side whispering. A commissioner, you do need
(30:57):
to deliver a powerful message here that that's the kind
of calculated blow that cannot be tolerated in your league.
This isn't the National Hockey League, this is the NBA, right,
and so on that basis sorry, because it will be
easier for teams and players of other teams to say, okay,
(31:21):
if my player and I agree with this totally. This
was part of what Draymond said and other people picked
up on it. If nas red, if the roles are
reversed and naz Reid throws that same elbow the same way,
he is suspended, you know it and I know it,
and that to me is where the message and I
(31:43):
wouldn't even argue with it, but the message from the
league on that should be we can't have other teams going,
all right, we kind of got free reign to take
some free shots, and that I think was part of
Draymond's point. I obviously don't agree with everything Draymond says,
the way he goes about doing it, that's the funny
parton if Draymond notices it as a guy who's been suspended,
(32:06):
who doesn't like being suspended.
Speaker 3 (32:08):
He's talked about the fine system in the NBA, and
its said, right, you know, kind of ridiculous things about
the fine system, but you know how he has. He
has the background there. We probably all should have had
our intennas up more. When you hear what Draymond had
to say about it, that it shocked even him that
they didn't do anything, or that he was bothered that
(32:28):
they didn't.
Speaker 1 (32:29):
Do anything more than they actually did.
Speaker 2 (32:30):
U six one two guy, Such a dumb take because
a dude got objected and we won the game because
of it. You wanted an all out brawl, dumb, I'm saying,
I don't know that I wanted an all out brawl.
I'm playing this out in real time, in a real
world sense. This isn't a laboratory. And what I'm saying
is that he should have been I now firmly in
(32:53):
the camp and there are people nationally who have said
this from the beginning, to their credit, I'm now firmly
in the camp that says he should have been suspended
for an additional game one hundred percent. And what I'm
saying is, I think part of what made it easy
for the league to this is clean. It's done nothing,
It didn't devolve into anything bigger. He didn't do anything
(33:16):
else nobody else did. So you know, we're good, We're good.
There would have been a better chance that the league
might have had a harder time from a pr standpoint
doing it. That's not me even necessarily taking a position
on that so much as saying, it's an interesting theory
that I think has some legs to it in a
real world sense.
Speaker 1 (33:35):
One hundred percent? Do you agree with this?
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Even the NHL would have suspended Wenby for one game
after such a blatant elbow, I don't know.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
They didn't really do anything to got pads in the
NHL as it was a Jamie benn right.
Speaker 3 (33:50):
Everybody was telling us that he was supposed to be
suspended for something, or he was supposed to be fined
more for Dallas. He's got a huge track record and
he wasn't suspended. So I don't know if I buy that.
Speaker 2 (34:03):
Who And this is a good question, do we know
who was worst on points per touch?
Speaker 1 (34:07):
Worse?
Speaker 2 (34:07):
The one player worse than Julius on points per touch?
Speaker 3 (34:12):
I didn't look at the graphic. I should like it up.
I couldn't find it on the graphic. Okay, I just
took the Julius line and said, and this makes sense
that this aligns with what I feel like I've been
watching for the better part of the season, but certainly
in the playoffs, but I didn't see.
Speaker 2 (34:26):
Who who was worse Ryan in Minnetaka. Thank you for
touching on Randal and Finch. I think you have to
move on from both. I don't. I'm saying I think
if you're really going to tackle, if you believe the
premise and I do about the basketball IQ issue, I'm
not sure you can coach that into players. I think
(34:47):
that's on the front end of the collection of players
you put together. So to me, you have two choices,
a significant roster shift without being stupid and irrational, where
you bring in more of that and you you know,
admit that you're getting rid of some good talent, but
in the mix you think it'll work in your favor
(35:08):
or you say you.
Speaker 1 (35:10):
Know, I.
Speaker 2 (35:11):
Think some of this can be coaching in people. I'm
gonna give somebody somebody else a shot. I don't think
I wouldn't, but I wouldn't do both. I don't think
he has I don't think you should do both, to
tell you the truth, but I think I think it's
it sort of has to be for me at this point,
one or the other.
Speaker 1 (35:26):
Now the comeback to all that will be Dante. You
could argue in this kind of series.
Speaker 2 (35:35):
Actually is more valuable than a Julius Randall at his
best right, because there are so many great wing players
for San Antonio Daviy. Some we've never the half the
league has never heard of until this season, but they're
good at this. He is a wing. He's a streak shooter,
but he can hit jump shots.
Speaker 1 (35:53):
For sure.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
You need jump shots hitting this series. He's active, he
doesn't back off. I think he plays reasonable d defense
at least, and he's he's he's willing defensively, so that
can be the comeback to my comeback, which is no
we and Anthony wasn't healthy.
Speaker 1 (36:09):
So because other times.
Speaker 2 (36:12):
You know, it's also fair to say Conley says, uh no,
We're going to stay the course here. I make changes
when I think we need to, but sometimes I think
stability is the most important thing, and I'm going to
continue to put it together. I'm going to find a
way to re sign to Sumu. I don't even know
if that's likely. I've seen enough of Dissumer that I
want him back. I do, don't you.
Speaker 1 (36:32):
I want him back like him, I think who do
we have.
Speaker 2 (36:35):
On yesterday on this subject, Trent Probaly Trent, I mildly
disagree with Trent. I think to Sumu, well, again, depending
on what your options are, I think he has a
chance to be your starting point guard.
Speaker 1 (36:47):
I do, yeah, he could be.
Speaker 2 (36:48):
I think he's going to get better than the other
options that you have right now. I've seen enough of
them to think that he the way we run offense anyway,
and and you handing the ball decent amount. If you
can take away that responsibility to just, let's say even
twenty five percent, I think to assume who can do that.
Speaker 1 (37:08):
We've seen his.
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Activity and he hasn't even been healthy. Obviously, he is
going to cost big money. All right, let's get caught up.
I want to get to some hockey conversation, some texts
on your confidence level tonight on your Minnesota wild I
have a new theory I want to advance there that
has nothing to do with goon behavior.
Speaker 1 (37:27):
We'll discuss that.
Speaker 2 (37:28):
Don't forget coming up at if I should say, at
four thirty, it's Sam Mitchell.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
So we'll get back to the NBA and the Wolves.
Speaker 2 (37:36):
Russo Radio at five OHO two and Kessler at five
thirty for whatever it's worth. Mitchell, despite his frustration with
what he saw last night, fully expects the Wolves to
win Game six.
Speaker 1 (37:49):
So do I.
Speaker 2 (37:50):
And I don't know if I bet on it, but
I lean that yeah, yeah, I wouldn't be at all surprised.
That still doesn't, you know, cure all of their ills.
That's the problem, because fantas earn. Game seven has to
be in San Antonio, Davy, you're listening to Barrero on
the fan, the Wild must win in Denver. In the
history of the NBA playoffs, in the history of the
(38:14):
Stanley Cup Playoffs, in the history of the NFL and
Major League Baseball postseason, can you answer one question regarding
the history of those sports? Has it ever been documented
that an inferior team won the series? Has it ever happened?
(38:37):
I thought you were gonna ask me.
Speaker 3 (38:38):
Has it ever been documented where a team's five best
players were six so they moved the game a day later?
Because that's happened now and the Frost Oh really.
Speaker 2 (38:48):
Oh yeah, I mean he let he let the league
or well, I can't really say Montreal because it's all
the league is. They run all the teams. He let
the league completely off the hook. Oh he'll be on Friday,
we went belly up. Wait because it's ironic. I was
he bought off because the day before he's hmmm, huh.
(39:10):
I never realized that, you know, a team could, a
series could be postponed because of fear. And I'm thinking, oh, okay,
Leavell being tough guy, bye bye the game time and
he's he's he's writing a column off the game. No
excuses for the frost, no excuses whatsoever. So something somebody
got to him. Wow, somebody in that league. Maybe it
(39:32):
was Stan Caston, could have been got to him. Maybe
it's mister fun.
Speaker 1 (39:35):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (39:36):
I was gonna say, Joe Anderson to answer your question, Yes,
I believe an inferior team has upset a better team.
You know how we know it because we've been the
better team that's lost. Yes, a lot.
Speaker 2 (39:50):
We were the better team against Atlanta in what year
was that? Nineteen eighty nineteen my sophomore year high school?
Speaker 1 (39:57):
Yeah, the fifteen. In one year.
Speaker 3 (39:58):
I was listening to Dave Ryan's do the We're going
to Miami song? Right were we were? You could argue
the better team in New Orleans. There's no arguing that
I mean, I don't mean because we outgained him in
that game. I'm just saying in general, you could say
we were just a better team.
Speaker 2 (40:15):
I bring it up because, as I said, be ready
for it, boys and girls. If if, if Colorado finishes
a job tonight and San Antonio Davey finishes a job
either on Friday or it would be Sunday, would be
Game seven. All you're gonna read is calm down. You
can be mad as hell, but we lost to better teams.
(40:37):
And I won't necessarily disagree with that. But I'm what
I'm here to tell you is I've I've covered and
watched sports for decades. It happens more than you think
that an inferior team, for whatever reason, just ris us
up inexplicably unreasonably and says we're gonna win somehow, we're
gonna win.
Speaker 1 (40:56):
Our hockey teams have done that a couple of times.
That's wild. The North Stars did it.
Speaker 2 (41:00):
You know why We're always have to be on the
other end of that. So that's why I'm officially bored
with the explains there better explains everything.
Speaker 1 (41:11):
It doesn't explain everything.
Speaker 2 (41:13):
It certainly doesn't explain the approach that the Wolves took
at key moments in game number five, not even close
to explaining that. How about my new theory on your
Wild Club. We go to detw're in Denver, we win tonight,
series comes back here and we lose in six.
Speaker 1 (41:36):
It's very possitive.
Speaker 2 (41:36):
I think that's very and that's where you're back to
down three to one. Everything has to go your way,
Everything has to go your way, right, And that's the
danger of playing this series the way we did, especially
in game four. You could say we've squatted opportunities early
in the series. There's still people who think, don't know
(41:58):
if I agree. There are people who think that with
better goaltending in Game two, yeah, we would have won
that game. I'm still not sure I buy that. I
think that's mainly from people who are bitter that the
goaltending change was made, and you and I both disagreed
with the change. I didn't come out of that game
convinced that that was the difference in the game. Of course,
(42:18):
we will never know. But you know, it's not outlandish
to think that the Wild could could win tonight. No, definitely,
but it's for me now fairly outlandish to think even
though we've done it before. Well, the last time we
were down three to one was Vegas and we got
it to seven, right, and then we lost in game seven.
We were down three to one, tied at three to three,
(42:40):
and then couldn't finish the job.
Speaker 1 (42:42):
Correct. I think that was Russo will have that history. Yeah,
that sounds right. I'm pretty sure that's right. That sounds right.
Speaker 3 (42:47):
And the way Volstad's been playing, yes, it's possible. He
played well the other night. He did and you get
a couple of deflections. Yes, hockey's a funny game. But
you know what they have to do intentionally play the
right way or what did we say yesterday? They have
to be conscious or intentional about playing the right.
Speaker 2 (43:04):
Well, that's the fun in the conscious choice, that's the
funny thing.
Speaker 1 (43:08):
I mean, you could argue that Anthony Edwards maybe he's.
Speaker 2 (43:12):
Following the quotes from Heinsey, because what did Edward say
after the game?
Speaker 1 (43:15):
We know the plan, we know the plan and we
didn't follow it. Again.
Speaker 2 (43:17):
Yeah, he basically said, we intentionally didn't follow the game
play totally.
Speaker 1 (43:22):
So we got two.
Speaker 2 (43:23):
Weird teams here or a weird dynamic going on in town.
I'm not sure which lea Mondella.
Speaker 1 (43:27):
Guys checked in.
Speaker 2 (43:29):
I don't know for sure the basketball IQ level of
the Wolves, but I do know none of them were
able to answer the lion, a giraffe, a bear, and
a shark question.
Speaker 3 (43:39):
Boy, let's wait for Kessler at five point thirty before
we start this.
Speaker 1 (43:45):
Eighty seven twins. That's true.
Speaker 2 (43:48):
They were inferior to Detroit and to Saint Louis. That's
one hundred percent accurate. Ninety one not so much. That
was a better team. So we have, We've been on
the better end of it.
Speaker 1 (43:57):
Sure. Thirty five also proof that it can happen.
Speaker 2 (44:01):
Is it harder in basketball when the other team has
the dominant player?
Speaker 1 (44:04):
Yes, it always is, but still not impossible?
Speaker 3 (44:08):
Right?
Speaker 2 (44:09):
No?
Speaker 3 (44:09):
And I, like I said, I'm with you, I'm with
Sam Mitchell. The Wolves are so weird. I feel like
they're gonna play well on Friday. I fully expect them to.
And let's see what happens in Game seven. I think
they're going to play really well. But I could also
see here's the thing. I could also see them just
completely saying we're done.
Speaker 1 (44:29):
It's over.
Speaker 3 (44:30):
Rudy's terrible, Julius wants to go home, and he's building
a new Rams.
Speaker 1 (44:33):
Out of Texas.
Speaker 3 (44:34):
Johnny's calling for a lineup change. But okay, I'm glad
you brought that up, and I know we got a
break again, What does that mean? Who are we benching?
Speaker 1 (44:42):
That's the problem?
Speaker 2 (44:44):
Starting lineup ses he's saying. I don't think he means,
for example, you don't play Rudy at all. But you go, okay,
we're starting, nots, We're going to go with a completely different.
Speaker 1 (44:53):
I just don't see that happening.
Speaker 2 (44:55):
Or you say we're starting, we're benching Julius, and I
don't see that. And again, to me, as much as
I understand the instinct, and Julius deserves all the criticism
he's getting, he doesn't seem to be acknowledging anything. By
the way, I'd like to see a little bit more
self awareness. Oh, he's following his head coaches lead. Yeah,
that's uses to say.
Speaker 1 (45:15):
That's true. It's well, we have a lot of good passes.
Defense is fine. His box scores utterly misleading to three quarters.
Speaker 2 (45:20):
He was awful. The fourth quarter was garbage time. He
got some numbers. He padded the stats in the fourth quarter,
big deal. But I'm sure again with with with what
I would say to Johnny is the same thing we're
talking about earlier. That Finchy might agree, But he'd say,
in the case of Randall especially, I got no one
else who's gonna, you know, have a chance to get
(45:42):
twenty five and ten, even though it's unlikely on the
prince of what we've seen I with these wing with
the guys they have guarding him. But what if that's
what if he's sitting on that one game and that
one game.
Speaker 1 (45:54):
Gets us back to seven. Now that's we got to
win two. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (45:57):
Nevertheless, that's what that is. The thing read of hope
that FINCHI is obviously banking on. He's hoping that if
I hang with my guy, he's going to pay it
off for us. I don't have a lot of faith
in it, but that's what Finchy's going on, all right.
Top of the hour break don't forget Sam Mitchell in
about thirty minutes, Russo in about one hour. Keep the
(46:17):
texts coming six four six eighty six Bradshaw and Bryant
kfa N text line Bumper to
Speaker 1 (46:25):
Bumper with Dan Burrero
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.