Hi Danny. Big fan of the podcasts. Listen to every episode of both of them.

I'm want to know how you (and possibly Nate if you know) guard against parroting yourselves and having your conversations stagnate. You both have things you like, and things you dislike. But I feel like you both try to give correct information more than just give your opinions.
For example when talking about Utah you are way more likely to make excuses for why the blew a 10 point lead than if another equally inexperienced team made the same mistakes. That's how I feel anyways. It was a late season where they lost to... Dallas, I think? Most of the talk of that game was just excuses and explanations of why it kind of didn't work out while you are often really harsh with other teams.

And if, let's say, Monta Ellis shoots 2/10 but 4 of those shots were simply bailout shots with him getting the ball with 2 seconds on the shot clock because Paul George Hill aren't able to get anywhere. I feel like you are less likely to mention that those possessions aren't on him because you don't like his game than if it was most other players. (That one is just a theoretical. Or the numbers are, but I do think both of you don't mention Montas, and some others, role as the go to bailer-outer enough when discussing their effectiveness, or lack thereof)

But things like that. Do you think that those examples are fair (or maybe you know other examples which are fair), and if so, is it something you (and possible Nate if you know) worry about?
Basically "circlejerking" since we're on reddit.

Anyways. Other than reddit, podcasts are really my only exposure to the NBA outside of next day watching of the games since I'm in the north of Sweden, where the NBA isn't really a thing.
I watch the games during the day and listen to podcasts after that, mostly during long evening walks with my dog. And I just want to thank you (and Nate) for delivering the most dependable pod out there with Dunc'd On.