How will History look back on the OKC Thunder

[Greenstrings]

So much of what they achieved was unprecedented. A team that young making the finals was anomalous. It was new ground and while you can understand why they played safe it is overly charitable to act as if that was the only path available.

Had they gone back to the finals and won there's no way Harden leaves no matter how much he craves the spotlight.

OKC's front office were too afraid to roll the dice on keeping them together to see if they could get over the hump.

Given their youth and scope for improvement, the relative agedness of the competition and the difficulty small markets have had retaining their stars it's entirely fair if people want to think they made the wrong decision.

The fact is we don't know whether or not they make it out the west with Russ/Ibaka healthy but we know without doubt they did it with Harden.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Given their youth and scope for improvement, the relative agedness of the competition and the difficulty small markets have had retaining their stars it's entirely fair if people want to think they made the wrong decision.

It's not fair at all.

Harden's production/impact was NEVER going to warrant max money on a team where 70% and upwards of their total possessions/touches were through two perimeter-based players. Harden's role on that team can be replaced with a fraction of the cost.

 

[FTBS]

And this is the biggest problem that dudes can't understand. You don't give THREE perimeter players max money.



He wanted more money than OKC were willing to give him. There was already friction between him and the FO, talks broke down between them and what each party wanted, they would have gone into the following offseason with Harden potentially signing an offer sheet of a $80m/5-year deal, which OKC weren't going to come close to (they offered $54m over four years) and he'd be gone. Yeah they could have done a S&T, but you don't run the risk of possibly losing him for nothing if he took the Chandler Parsons route.

Can you imagine how much shyt OKC"s front office would have got if they ended up losing him for nothing?

He wanted MORE money and he wanted MORE of a role, he wanted to be the star.

I get that and I agree but at the same time those 3 perimeter players did get you to the Finals and they had options and time. It's not like they filled his spot with a big. They filled it with another perimeter guy that wasn't as good and ended up leaving and now they are about to go over the tax line for Dion fukking Waiters. Many a team and player has had friction but there isn't much friction that winning and money can't cure. OKC got caught up trying to be the smartest guy in the room and being cheap.

They basically did lose him for nothing and if they end up losing Russ and KD as a direct or indirect result the word doesn't exist for what they will get.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

I get that and I agree but at the same time those 3 perimeter players did get you to the Finals and they had options and time.

They don't need Harden to go to the Finals again, they've got enough wing production. That's the whole point. Why overpay for something you already have an abundance of; any max-wing excess would be a waste of money.

It's not like they filled his spot with a big. They filled it with another perimeter guy that wasn't as good and ended up leaving and now they are about to go over the tax line for Dion fukking Waiters..

We need to drop this notion that his spot wasn't filled - it was - their record, offensive and defensive rating were evidence of this. We can't possibly say whether or not they wold have gone to the Finals again, they were a better team than the previous season but so were the Spurs. It's a null talking point. They can still get back under the tax line if they deal either Jackson or Lamb. It's really not a big deal either way.

They've been trying to pursue a big, so it's not like they can't still fill that void of not having a starting 5.

Many a team and player has had friction but there isn't much friction that winning and money can't cure. OKC got caught up trying to be the smartest guy in the room and being cheap.

If everything played out as it did with Harden still on the team, OKC would have crashed out in the second round in 2013 and Harden would have gone in the summer. Plus if there was the remote chance they did go to the Finals that season (Westbrook healthy), they would've lost to Miami and Harden would be dealt anyway.

They basically did lose him for nothing and if they end up losing Russ and KD as a direct or indirect result the word doesn't exist for what they will get.

You're working on mendacious reasoning and something we can't possibly measure until everything comes to an end.

 

[FTBS]

They don't need Harden to go to the Finals again, they've got enough wing production. That's the whole point. Why overpay for something you already have an abundance of; any max-wing excess would be a waste of money.

We need to drop this notion that his spot wasn't filled - it was - their record, offensive and defensive rating were evidence of this. We can't possibly say whether or not they wold have gone to the Finals again, they were a better team than the previous season but so were the Spurs. It's a null talking point. They can still get back under the tax line if they deal either Jackson or Lamb. It's really not a big deal either way.

They've been trying to pursue a big, so it's not like they can't still fill that void of not having a starting 5.


If everything played out as it did with Harden still on the team, OKC would have crashed out in the second round in 2013 and Harden would have gone in the summer. Plus if there was the remote chance they did go to the Finals that season (Westbrook healthy), they would've lost to Miami and Harden would be dealt anyway.

You're working on mendacious reasoning and something we can't possibly measure until everything comes to an end.

Until they get to the finals again you can't say they don't need him. Better to have an overabundance in one spot, that has proven to work than to just have enough and still have a glaring need. How do you know they would have crashed? How do you know KD with Harden and Ibaka isn't enough to get them through? It's funny how you stress the injuries AND the overabundance of perimeter talent piece at the same time. Oochie Wally or One Mic breh?

I don't care what their ratings were Harden, even not fully able to be himself, is better than Martin and Martin was gone after a year so what exactly do they have to show for trading Harden right now? Adams and Lamb? What else is there? What we waitin on?

When did I say they should have kept him forever? I been saying they could've traded him later.

 

[FlyRy]

They won't, only teams who win championships are looked back in history.

Players yea, teams no

they will be remembered along with the barkley suns, 90s jazz, 00 blazers, 02 kings, nash era suns as one of the best teams to never win it

 

[LV Koopa]

It's on OKC management. Months before the trade even went down there was talk in bettor circles about Harden being an MVP level player. Some even had him as the 2nd best player on the team over Russ. Idiot fans and sports writers bought the small market logic and didn't understand how undervalued Harden was, and how OKC was printing money off the player contracts.

The real killer was they traded for AND extended Perkins: 1.) before he played for them and 2.) knew Russ's contract was coming up. Really, they could have kept Harden by not bytching about the tax they brought on themselves or simply not signing a player coming off a devastating knee injury.

Presti and Clay Bennett can both eat a bag of dikks

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Until they get to the finals again you can't say they don't need him. Better to have an overabundance in one spot, that has proven to work than to just have enough and still have a glaring need..

Better to be working on that glaring need than have no salary cap at all to fix their weaknesses, and have teams expose it season in, season out.

How do you know they would have crashed? How do you know KD with Harden and Ibaka isn't enough to get them through?

Because the effectiveness of 2012/2013 Harden would be quelled in the playoffs. It wouldn't be enough to get them through a defensive team like Memphis.

It's funny how you stress the injuries AND the overabundance of perimeter talent piece at the same time. Oochie Wally or One Mic breh?.

No contradictions on my part. What is it you seem to have an issue with?

I don't care what their ratings were Harden, even not fully able to be himself, is better than Martin

You should because they were a better team than the previous season, all they would have needed K-Mart to do is knock down open shots, which he was fully capable of doing. Only reason they don't go on and beat SA, is if the Spurs had more luck on their side and their improvement from the previous season was greater than OKC's.

Martin was gone after a year so what exactly do they have to show for trading Harden right now? Adams and Lamb? What else is there? What we waitin on?.

See now this is disingenuous.

They traded for a 20 ppg scorer, a lottery-pick player, two first-round picks and a second-round pick. The potential of that package was enough for Harden, what they turned out to be doesn't come into it. What does Martin being a rental have to do with things? If we abide by that law, then so was Harden. They only had both of them for ONE season. Plus that TE from the initial trade could have turned into Gasol. They more than got enough in return for Harden, unfortunately for them (at this stage) luck of drafting the right player and coaching (utilizing these players) didn't go their way with what assets they attained from the trade.

When did I say they should have kept him forever? I been saying they could've traded him later.

It wasn't worth the risk of getting a lesser amount or LITERALLY losing him for nothing. We can go in circles about this point all day, but the point is they took the safest option.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

How is their FO incompetent? What more do they need? Not a damn thing. The ONLY thing they need to do is acknowledge that Westbrook is the alpha male, instead of insisting that it's Durant.

There's no way the Houston Harden works with Durant/Westbrook. Kevin Martin was a better fit for their dynamic scoring, and now they have Jackson & Waiters to do the role that Harden assumed.

Exactly, there's enough wing/backcourt talent there to fill the void that Harden left. There always has been. It isn't hard, it's half the reason why they didn't lose a step when K-Mart replaced Harden as 6th man. K-Mart provided the scoring of Harden. Jackson provided the playmaking of Harden and Westbrook/Durant took on extra playmaking duties which helped them grow as players.

 

[dem bath salts]

Scott Brooks

 

[Eternal Tecate]

Biggest waste of talent ever

 

[CarltonJunior]

The combination of Brooks/Presti ruined the potential for this team, but their title window has NOT closed and it won't ever close as long as KD/Sabo is on the floor.

 

[duckbutta]

says the dude that doesn't even know the lineups of his own team. I noticed how you never replied to me after all those lies you were spewing about Ginobili.

Let's take a look at their bullshyt you said -

They were more or less doing that already (Harden wouldn't average 35 mpg). However, it wouldn't warrant paying them all max/near-max money, when their production/impact wouldn't equal out to the percentage of salary each player took up. Harden would only have the output of a 6th man, providing little-to-no defense.


That's what they were more or less doing anyway.




That's not even remotely practicle since that's predicated on Westbrook/Durant having less time together than a Harden/Durant or Harden/Westbrook combination. Harden was ALWAYS going to be the third perimeter option.

Josh Brooks?

Of course it could have happened, @L&HH's point was Harden wouldn't be the type of player he is today if he stayed in OKC, meaning the level that all three are currently playing at - you wouldn't see if they were all still together. It was wasn't an issue of them playing together, it was fitting them all within the salary cap.

IT'S WASN'T AN ISSUE OF THEM NOT BEING ABLE TO PLAY TOGETHER. IT WORKED. Money was the issue. Stop saying this dumb shyt. And three of the top 15 scorers who are all perimeter players on one team wouldn't all reach their full potential if they were on the same team.

The Spurs wouldn't pay three perimeter players max money.


How does this comparison have any relevance when that's only TWO players.

Dude you are like the grandmaster of straw man arguments...

You bring up the spurs "not paying 3 perimeter players max money"...but the spurs don't pay anybody outside of Tim Duncan max money...and they paid him the max what...once? If you are going to bring up teams not paying 3 players...bring up GS who might have to pay 3 players max or near max (curry next contract, klay, draymond)...Bring up the wizards paying 3 players the max or near max (Beal, Wall, KD...Beal, Wall, Gortat/Nene...Wall, KD, Goratat/Nene)...Bring up the cavs paying 3 guys the max or close to it (James, Kyrie, Love)...but instead you bring up the one team that only plays transcendent once in a generation players the max...why?

You say "Harden is going to always be the third option? Really? So when KD and Harden are on the floor together and Westbrook is on the bench, Harden is the 3rd option? When Westbrook and Harden are on the floor and KD is on the becnh Harden is the third option? When both are on the bench Harden is the 3rd option? How about when Westbrook got hurt Harden would be the 3rd option? When KD got hurt Harden would be the 3rd option? Or are you telling me that Harden can only play when KD and Durant are in the game?

You say "they won't reach their full potential". Uh...so fukking what? Miami didn't "reach it's full potential"with Bosh rebounding and PIP numbers dipping year to year...but they still got 4 finals appearances and 2 rings out of it? And what is their "potential" anyway? It seems like the closes they came to "reaching their potential" is when they last played together in the finals...cause none have been back since...Harden hasn't even been out of the 1st round yet

How is Carlisle comparison relevant? Do you not watch the Mavericks play...of course not you to busy in here telling me obvious stuff like San Antonio wouldn't pay 3 perimeter players the max. The point is that Carlisle has come up with an offense system that allows him to have 2 guys in that are only effective with the ball in their hands...so how on earth could OKC not do it and just have one guy come off the bench...oh wait right this is where you tell me "Harden wouldn't come off the bench" and "Harden wanted his own team."

You say money was the issue. An issue for who? OKC? How? They sell out damn near every home game. They turn a profit EVERY fukkING YEAR. The owner bought the team for around 350 million...and how much are the Thunder worth now? Not wanting to go over the tax isn't a money issue, it's a cheapness issue. If you are the Pacers or Bobcats who routinely lose money every year, then the cap matters...but a team who's franchise worth has at least doubled in the last 7 years and turns a profit every year on top of that? And they won't pay the tax for 1 more year? Even funnier, with the way the salary cap rose, they could have just done a few things differently with their roster (Perkins) and maybe kept all 3 without paying the tax at all. And if money is an issue how are they functioning now with Waiters pushing them at the cap? And weren't they kicking tires on trading for Brook Lopez...And if you are telling me "they had no idea the cap would be higher"...uh how could they not, with the league making more money than it ever had year after year after year...how could they NOT know the salary cap would rise?

I didn't reply to your thread about manu because after sifting through all the trash you typed the first go round I had better things to do than sift through it again. I am sure this thread is going to go the exact same way.

 

[LV Koopa]

OKC knew the cap was going to rise. Since 2010 people were talking about the next TV deal guaranteed to be a whopper. That's why the lockout in 2011 was such a big deal because the owners wanted to reduce player share and get a bigger piece of the BRI.

 

[Regular_P]

It's on OKC management. Months before the trade even went down there was talk in bettor circles about Harden being an MVP level player. Some even had him as the 2nd best player on the team over Russ. Idiot fans and sports writers bought the small market logic and didn't understand how undervalued Harden was, and how OKC was printing money off the player contracts.

The real killer was they traded for AND extended Perkins: 1.) before he played for them and 2.) knew Russ's contract was coming up. Really, they could have kept Harden by not bytching about the tax they brought on themselves or simply not signing a player coming off a devastating knee injury.

Presti and Clay Bennett can both eat a bag of dikks

I'd give Bennett all the blame. Trading Harden a few days after he rejected their extension offer was clearly all Bennett. Presti was simply doing what he was told.

Not amnestying Perkins is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen a contender not do. To give Harden away because they didn't want to swallow Perk's contract was ludicrous. The funny thing is they're way over the cap this year, but wouldn't do it for a team fresh off the Finals.

I would kill to have Presti be the Lakers' GM. What he did in consecutive drafts might be unprecedented. Look what he did starting with Durant in 2007:

'07 Draft:
Durant
Carl Landry
Glen Davis

'08 Draft:
Westbrook
Ibaka

'09 Draft:
Harden

'10 Draft:
Eric Bledsoe
Quincy Pondexter

'11 Draft:
Reggie Jackson

Who has ever had a run like that?