Do these reporters actually believe the crap they say?http://bleacherreport.com/articles/510189-david-sterns-conflicting-message-about-the-thunder-nbas-finanical-situation

Considering the source of the article and its author all I can say is what a plick.

Definitely has some valid points but overall it comes across whiny

Sour grapes actually.

Definitely has some valid points but overall it comes across whiny

The Thunder actually in 2010 had The #4 top increase in overall franchise value increase and had a profit too,not to mention one of only 4 cities that had a waiting list for season tickets!The Thunder made over 18 million more dollars in season tickets and regular tickets than the last year in Seattle,but of course we all know that the big bucks are made by tv contracts and nationally televised spots which The Thunder are doing better in each year!

Does he cite a source for the Thunder losing money each year?

Does he cite a source for the Thunder losing money each year?

No and I'll try to find links to my claims as well to be fair!

This Forbes rankings list is from 2009 so The numbers would be higher for 2010 but look at The dramatic overall increases in all categories from The last year in Seattle and then in OKC!http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/32/basketball-values-09_Oklahoma-City-Thunder_329710.html also read the bottom of this article!http://nba.fanhouse.com/2009/12/10/forbes-12-nba-teams-lost-money-last-season/

Considering the source of the article and its author all I can say is what a plick.
THIS^^^^^

Bleacher Report is nothing more than a bunch of wannabe "writers" banging out their missives and showing what axes they have to grind. It is nothing close to "journalism" even in this day and age. For every gem on BR there are 10,000 turds.

Considering the source of the article and its author all I can say is what a plick.

If you read the article closely his bias clearly show. Read the section which talks about the clause allowing the "SuperSonics" to leave OKC instead of the Thunder. Enough said.

well, I think that was 'written' before the team was renamed. I think it more or less meant, the franchise more than a 'slam' against the Thunder.

And that said - the team aint going anywhere. ......

Seattle needs to get an arena first (which I WILL NOT VOTE FOR, BTW), and try to steal somebody else's team. Looks as if there is a very reasonable chance the Grizzlies might end up BACK in Vancouver, if the owner of the Canucks choses to buy the Griz. If this happens, (which would work very well in Vancouver), then Seattle can probably kiss the NBA goodbye - in reality, Seattle couldn't support NBA, NFL, and MLB.

He's a shcmoozer, plugging his ears and closing is eyes chanting ("Sonics are still in Seattle, Sonics are still in Seattle). Sonics fans are going to be bitter about this for a long time, but the belittling needs to stop. It just demonstrates a bunch of fifth-grade behavior.

I hardly ever read Bleacher Report because of stuff like this. They are a bunch of freelance writers who make $10 a story writing from their parents' basement. That website does nothing but start rumors and attempt to cause controversy.

The pics make me laugh. They're like hoarders, holding on to something that they can't let go of. The only problem is, hoarders actually have something and Seattle losers have nothing (other than history) to even grasp but those green and yellow Halloween costumes...

The writer, Phil Caldwell, is from Seattle. I've scoured the Internet trying to find anything remotely verifiable to show that the Thunder is losing money, and it's just not out there. In an opinion piece written during last year's All-Star Weekend by the late NBC Sports writer Mike Celezik (sp?), he threw out the line that "sources say" several teams, including the Thunder, were losing money hand over fist. Of course, Forbes had already put out their stuff showing that the Thunder made $12.7 million during their first season in Oklahoma City. My thinking is that if they made that much during a 23-win season, how much more did they make in 2009-2010 winning 50 games and hosting three playoff games.

Caldwell also said Durant signed his extension so quickly because of the expiring collective bargaining agreement, but that he could have held out for more. No, he couldn't have. If he had not signed and became a restricted free agent next summer, Oklahoma City could have matched any offer - but the other teams couldn't have offered nearly as much as OKC.

Sour grapes...

The writer, Phil Caldwell, is from Seattle. I've scoured the Internet trying to find anything remotely verifiable to show that the Thunder is losing money, and it's just not out there. In an opinion piece written during last year's All-Star Weekend by the late NBC Sports writer Mike Celezik (sp?), he threw out the line that "sources say" several teams, including the Thunder, were losing money hand over fist. Of course, Forbes had already put out their stuff showing that the Thunder made $12.7 million during their first season in Oklahoma City. My thinking is that if they made that much during a 23-win season, how much more did they make in 2009-2010 winning 50 games and hosting three playoff games.

Caldwell also said Durant signed his extension so quickly because of the expiring collective bargaining agreement, but that he could have held out for more. No, he couldn't have. If he had not signed and became a restricted free agent next summer, Oklahoma City could have matched any offer - but the other teams couldn't have offered nearly as much as OKC.

Sour grapes...

Hmmmm... while I was debating him on his own article I posted that he was very Biased towards OKC,and he replied that he wasnt and he could also present links on how The Thunder were losing money!I countered with multiple links to say otherwise, and he had two that said infact OKC did lose money last yr....but it didnt say how much!It's very hard to believe The Thunder lost money last yr and if they did it was minor!

Here is another article blasting OKC on Bleacher report!I get the feeling that BR doesnt like The OKC Thunder! http://ripcityreport.com/nba-buzz/heat-check-the-oklahoma-city-thunder-are-the-most-overrated-team-in-the-nba/

Here is another article blasting OKC on Bleacher report!I get the feeling that BR doesnt like The OKC Thunder! http://ripcityreport.com/nba-buzz/heat-check-the-oklahoma-city-thunder-are-the-most-overrated-team-in-the-nba/

Won't debate the particulars on each player but the author does have a point in saying the Thunder haven't won anything yet that marks them as anything more than a team with championship potential.

Here is another article blasting OKC on Bleacher report!I get the feeling that BR doesnt like The OKC Thunder! http://ripcityreport.com/nba-buzz/heat-check-the-oklahoma-city-thunder-are-the-most-overrated-team-in-the-nba/

So incredibly opinionated. I stopped reading after a few sentences

Bleacher Report is nothing but a bunch of wannabe hacks who are doing nothing more than posting their blog opinions, even less credible than forum posters or newspaper comment writers. If you look up Ryan Virgin (http://bleacherreport.com/users/77326-ryan-virgin) he is an engineering major at George Fox University, Oregon's Nationally Recognized Christian University.

That the writer chose to break down the Thunder into its individual members shows that he's missing what's unique about the Thunder. What makes the Thunder special is that they're a team, not just a collection of players. Miami is a collection of players.