Overview of A Crazy NBA Month With Zach Lowe, Plus Taylor Sheridan on Building a TV Empire and the Problems With Hollywood
This episode is split between two big conversations: first, Bill Simmons and Zach Lowe dive deep into the most chaotic NBA offseason storylines—especially the complicated futures of Jalen Brown, LaMelo Ball, and LeBron James; then Bill talks with Taylor Sheridan about how he built a TV empire, why he distrusts modern Hollywood’s development process, and how his new book How Not to Die in Prison came together. The first half is a trade-and-roster-architecture nerd-out, while the second half is a revealing look at Sheridan’s creative philosophy, his ranch-based production machine, and why he thinks strong storytelling comes from a single voice.
NBA Fallout, Trade Rumors, and the Jalen Brown Situation
Jalen Brown and the Celtics
- Simmons and Lowe spend a long stretch on Boston’s handling of Jalen Brown after the team’s Giannis-related trade exploration.
- Their core debate: once Brown’s name was pulled into serious trade talks, Boston likely damaged the market and may have worsened Brown’s mood and trade value.
- Lowe argues the Celtics either should have:
- made the Brown-for-Giannis framework real immediately, or
- never involved Brown at all.
- They agree Brown is still a top-tier player:
- durable,
- two-way,
- postseason-proven,
- and coming off what Simmons sees as an underrated season.
- The problem is the contract: Brown’s max deal makes trades difficult because Boston won’t get a “fair” star-for-star return.
- Simmons thinks Brown feels disrespected and may want his own team.
Possible Brown trade frameworks
They float several speculative trade ideas:
- Portland: a package centered around Jrue Holiday, Toumani Camara, and picks.
- Denver: Jamal Murray plus Cam Johnson for Brown and Sam Hauser.
- New Orleans: Trey Murphy/Jordan Poole-type salary frameworks, though both doubt the Pelicans would do it.
- Their conclusion: Boston may ultimately have to choose between:
- taking a lesser-than-expected return,
- or trying to repair the relationship and keep Brown.
The LaMelo Ball trade conversation
Simmons then explains why he hated Minnesota’s LaMelo Ball trade.
- He sees LaMelo as incredibly talented but historically unreliable in terms of health and availability.
- His main objection: Minnesota is trying to win three or four playoff rounds in the West, and LaMelo has almost no proof he can survive that kind of physical postseason.
- He thinks the trade is a regular-season excitement play, not a true title-odds upgrade.
- Lowe pushes back a bit more on the value side, but agrees the durability concerns are real.
- Both see Charlotte as the big winner in terms of asset management:
- they sold high,
- added depth,
- and rebuilt flexibility.
- Simmons also likes Charlotte’s broader direction under the new regime.
The Timberwolves’ bigger dilemma
- The Wolves are chasing the effects of the Rudy Gobert trade, which forced their later roster moves.
- Simmons argues the team may have overextended itself financially and strategically, and that the LaMelo move reflects a kind of panic response to:
- playoff injuries,
- a narrow title window,
- and a need to improve against OKC and San Antonio.
- He and Lowe both acknowledge the Wolves can be fun and dangerous, but Simmons remains skeptical they’ve truly increased their championship odds.
LeBron James rumors
- They close with a wide-ranging LeBron discussion.
- Simmons is most intrigued by a Golden State or San Antonio move.
- Lowe thinks Golden State would be the most fun basketball fit, but San Antonio might make the most sense structurally and professionally.
- The Spurs case:
- dignified franchise,
- clear role,
- could pay him,
- and would not read as a cheap ring chase given LeBron’s age and career stage.
- They both think if LeBron leaves the Lakers, it would likely be for a situation that gives him either:
- real title hope,
- or a compelling late-career basketball adventure.
Taylor Sheridan on Writing, Control, and Building a TV Machine
How the book came together
- Sheridan explains that How Not to Die in Prison began with a real-life friend:
- an ex-con who became a personal trainer,
- had a difficult past,
- and later hit a rough patch as a single father.
- Sheridan wanted to help, but not by giving him money.
- Instead, he saw an idea for a book:
- a prison survival guide,
- written from lived experience,
- aimed at everyday people who want to understand prison before they ever get near it.
- The result became a collaboration:
- the friend supplied firsthand knowledge,
- Sheridan shaped the structure and prose,
- and Simon & Schuster picked it up.
Sheridan’s creative philosophy
Sheridan is blunt about how he works:
- He believes stories should be driven by one primary vision, not committee notes.
- He hates development-by-consensus and thinks executives often try to justify their jobs by giving useless feedback.
- His rules of storytelling:
- show, don’t tell,
- use dialogue to reveal emotion rather than dump exposition,
- make every supporting character matter to the protagonist’s journey.
- He says he writes from a quiet place:
- on his ranch,
- away from phone noise,
- walking and thinking before he writes.
- He also says he works in a highly repeatable system that lets him make a huge amount of television without feeling overextended.
Why his productions move fast
- Sheridan has built an in-house pipeline:
- he promotes crew from within,
- keeps the same cinematographers, editors, assistants, and department heads,
- and standardizes the creative workflow.
- That means:
- less debate,
- quicker setup,
- and a common visual language across projects.
- He credits that system with enabling his huge output.
Writing for actors and building characters
Sheridan says he writes roles for actors he believes in:
- He recounts writing for:
- Billy Bob Thornton,
- Harrison Ford,
- Helen Mirren,
- Michelle Pfeiffer,
- Cole Hauser,
- Ben Foster.
- He often has a specific actor in mind before the script is finished.
- He believes great casting comes from matching a role to a performer’s essence, not just their fame.
His view of TV structure
- Sheridan likes limited runs and planned endings.
- He says every show should know its thematic destination.
- He’s wary of endlessly stretching a series just because it’s successful.
- He uses the Yellowstone universe as an example of a story that could have been cleaner had it ended when originally envisioned.
Landman, Sicario, and his Western worldview
- Sheridan describes Landman as emerging from a real conversation about the chaos of the Texas oil patch.
- He says he likes tonal contrasts:
- serious drama mixed with something almost absurd or vaudevillian.
- On Sicario, he explains that he intentionally used a nontraditional structure to unsettle the audience and delay the usual “we know what movie this is” feeling.
- He says he never takes out a script unless he believes it can be a hit.
- He also says he doesn’t watch other shows much because he’s too immersed in making his own.
Main Takeaways
- Boston’s Jalen Brown dilemma is about both leverage and respect: once Brown was involved in Giannis talks, the Celtics may have made the relationship harder to repair.
- LaMelo Ball remains polarizing: elite talent, huge upside, but major durability concerns make him a risky centerpiece for a contender.
- LeBron’s next move remains the most fun late-summer NBA mystery, with Golden State and San Antonio the most intriguing hypothetical fits.
- Taylor Sheridan sees Hollywood as too committee-driven and has built a rare system around:
- clear authorship,
- strong casting,
- repeatable production,
- and stories rooted in place, land, and character.
- His success, in his view, comes from knowing exactly what the story is before he starts, and refusing to let the process dilute it.