2015-16 OKC Thunder

[Teo9969]

Yep.... I find it amusing that the Waiters elbow to Ginobli is mentioned time and time again but no one bothers to mention that if the referees call the technical on Ginobli for stepping over the line. The Waiters elbow probably never happens because the Thunder would have been shooting a free throw instead of in-bounding the ball.

But that happens all the time, and they don't call it.

But wait, now they want them to call a travel, when traveling is missed like every other play.

[AP]

FiveThirtyEight now has Thunder as the highest prob to win.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-nba-picks/

[SOONER8693]

They, Warriors and fans and media, can moan and piss about the no call on Westbrooks travel all they want. Curry clearly walked before his last shot of the first half. He shuffled his feet, then took a step to the left and launched. Clearly walking. Let's trade those two no calls. Theirs takes 3 points off the board. Same game outcome.

[Pete]

They virtually never call traveling in the NBA.

In the series with the Spurs, there were 3 different times their players dove to the floor and slid while controlling the ball and there exactly zero violations called.

[dankrutka]

We didn't even play particularly well last night and still beat the best team in the history of the NBA on their home floor.

I agree with pretty much everything everyone has posted, but I think it's more accurate to say OKC didn't play particularly well offensively. I thought OKC played really, really well defensively. So, OKC will need to improve offensively while not dropping off defensively.

I can't say how impressed I am with the team right now. Particularly, Donovan, Adams, Waiters, and Foye have really exceeeded my expectations in the playoffs. And obviously our other core guys have been great too. It's been amazing, but it's also important to keep in my mind that it was just one game. Let's do it again though...

[dankrutka]

I don't agree that traveling is never called and we should just write off that bad call against Russ. Russ blatantly travelled with the ball at the end of the game and it should have been called. Sure, we can point to other calls in the game, but we would all be complaining if it went the other way. A missed call like that will be part of the storyline, but people need to recognize that even with that no-call OKC was in a good position.

[Teo9969]

I agree with pretty much everything everyone has posted, but I think it's more accurate to say OKC didn't play particularly well offensively. I thought OKC played really, really well defensively. So, OKC will need to improve offensively while not dropping off defensively.

I can't say how impressed I am with the team right now. Particularly, Donovan, Adams, Waiters, and Foye have really exceeeded my expectations in the playoffs. And obviously our other core guys have been great too. It's been amazing, but it's also important to keep in my mind that it was just one game. Let's do it again though...

I almost feel like mentioning Adams in the same breath as those guys is insulting...he's been THAT good. If he becomes the kind of guy who can call out a defense the way Perkins did, OKC is in great shape moving forward if they can resign everyone. Might need to address minor issues at PF and SG, but a core with Westbrook, Durant, and Adams is STOUT.

Warning: Everything in the below quote is my opinion on Adams RE: Harden-trade...if you don't want to go back over that, feel free to skip...tl;dr Adams puts an end to questions about Harden trade

Given where Adams is at right now, not to mention how young he is and how much improvement he sees year in year out (with plenty more in front of him), you'd be a fool take Harden over Adams straight up on a team that already has Russ and KD. (To say nothing of the reality that we probably wouldn't have Kanter, we'd have paid a crap ton of taxes already, We'd not have McGary (who hopefully will be with the team this upcoming season) nor the rights to Abrines, who is probably ready to come play in the NBA. And we wouldn't have had a year with KMart (a year in which we had a great shot at a title had Westbrook not gone down to injury).

Furthermore, the only year in which Harden would have made a big difference is 2014 when Ibaka was a bit shaken up in the SAS series. w/ Harden we probably overcome that series, but who knows in the finals. 2013 wouldn't have mattered because of Westbrook and 2015 wouldn't have mattered because of KD injury.

[dankrutka]

I almost feel like mentioning Adams in the same breath as those guys is insulting...he's been THAT good. If he becomes the kind of guy who can call out a defense the way Perkins did, OKC is in great shape moving forward if they can resign everyone. Might need to address minor issues at PF and SG, but a core with Westbrook, Durant, and Adams is STOUT.

Warning: Everything in the below quote is my opinion on Adams RE: Harden-trade...if you don't want to go back over that, feel free to skip...tl;dr Adams puts an end to questions about Harden trade

Adams has been good all year, but he's stepped it up a level in the playoffs, which is why I included him. He's been amazing. Having said that, given a choice straight up, I take Harden and I don't think it's close right now. We'll see how Adams develops, but Harden is a top 1-2 shooting guard (with Klay Thompson). It's easy to forget how good Harden is because of Houston's recent failure and culture problems. And I value Adams immensely. I just think we're dismissing a guy who deservedly finished top 2 in MVP voting last year, and can absolutely put a team on his back. Again, having said that, I absolutely love Adams and his future. He could legitimately become a top 5 center.

[Teo9969]

Adams has been good all year, but he's stepped it up a level in the playoffs, which is why I included him. He's been amazing. Having said that, given a choice straight up, I take Harden and I don't think it's close right now. We'll see how Adams develops, but Harden is a top 1-2 shooting guard (with Klay Thompson). It's easy to forget how good Harden is because of Houston's recent failure and culture problems. And I value Adams immensely. I just think we're dismissing a guy who deservedly finished top 2 in MVP voting last year, and can absolutely put a team on his back. Again, having said that, I absolutely love Adams and his future. He could legitimately become a top 5 center.

You'd rather have a lineup like this:

Westbrook - Harden - Durant - Ibaka - Perkins

than

Westbrook - Waiters - Durant - Ibaka - Adams

To be sure: Harden is unequivocally better than Adams as an overall player. But he's redundant and limiting to a team that already has KD and Westbrook.

[dankrutka]

Yes, that's the team that went to the Finals in 2012, and all of them have, and would have, improved. There is some redunancy, but Harden's ability to shoot and penetrate offsets that. He spaces the floor better than any player currently on the team. I'd take my chance that a team with those players could also attract a different center. There are better options than Perk available.

Anyway, I don't want to detract from what's happening now. Adams is a pure joy to watch and his rugged style is really translating well to the playoffs. He's been an absolute difference maker.

[OkiePoke]

I believe Donovan was calling a TO as Westbrook was crossing half court.

[dankrutka]

I believe Donovan was calling a TO as Westbrook was crossing half court.

Royce Young tweeted that, but I haven't seen anyone say that was the case. The NBA didn't mention it in their report either. Interestingly, they did report that Curry travelled on his shot with 7 seconds left.

[OSUMom]

Royce Young tweeted that, but I haven't seen anyone say that was the case. The NBA didn't mention it in their report either. Interestingly, they did report that Curry travelled on his shot with 7 seconds left.

But no one seems to think that is worthy of mention, only Westbrooks travel.

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^
I was going to mention that. The way people obsess over individual no-calls is silly. Missed calls suck, but they happen throughout the game - every game - both ways.

Also, I want to quibble a bit with Pete's pronouncement upthread that GSW is "the best team in history." And of course he's not the only one calling them that over their phenomenal regular season record.

But - besides the fact that I personally disagree - they won't even deserve consideration in that regard until they win this season's finals. A more accurate description at this point would include "winningest" rather than "best."

[Jersey Boss]

^^^^^^^^^
What criteria would you use in determining "best team in history" if not using "winningest" as a measuring stick? What team would you consider the best team in the history of pro basketball and why?

[jerrywall]

What criteria would you use in determining "best team in history" if not using "winningest" as a measuring stick?

Championships. The Boston Celtics and the Lakers would rate pretty highly by that criteria.

[Pete]

Whether they are best or winningest, they are still a great team and probably one of the greatest ever.

The irony is that if we beat them then most will argue they weren't the greatest, so the accomplishment will be somewhat watered-down and I don't know if that is fair.

The Warriors posted their best-ever record in the same division as the Spurs and Thunder, who are two of the better teams in recent NBA history.

[Jersey Boss]

Championships.

The reason I would not make that a criteria is what team has won multiple championships with the same roster in those championships. I look at best team as a snap shot of a particular team with the same roster that accomplishes that goal. So is the best team the one with the most championships? That would mandate a team having longevity. Would having only one common player to those championships give credence to that criteria?

[jerrywall]

The reason I would not make that a criteria is what team has won multiple championships with the same roster in those championships. I look at best team as a snap shot of a particular team with the same roster that accomplishes that goal. So is the best team the one with the most championships? That would mandate a team having longevity. Would having only one common player to those championships give credence to that criteria?

That gets tricky. I think it's easy in a given year to say a team is the "best" and I think Golden State certainly qualifies as one of, if not, the "best" team in the league, at this time. The best team in history? Well, the game changes over time. Could the "best" of 1985 beat the "best" team of 2016? Probably not, because the style and the tempo of the game today is so different. So I'm not sure of another criteria besides championships to determine the best of all time.

Of course, I personally know the best basketball team of all time was the 1992 Men's Olympic basketball team.

[Jersey Boss]

That gets tricky. I think it's easy in a given year to say a team is the "best" and I think Golden State certainly qualifies as one of, if not, the "best" team in the league, at this time. The best team in history? Well, the game changes over time. Could the "best" of 1985 beat the "best" team of 2016? Probably not, because the style and the tempo of the game today is so different. So I'm not sure of another criteria besides championships to determine the best of all time.

Of course, I personally know the best basketball team of all time was the 1992 Men's Olympic basketball team.

I would give them the best of all time based on the record they earned playing against teams in the same era. As you pointed out the game in '85 is different than the game of '16. As far as comparing those teams I think the best of 1985 playing against the best of 2016 would be won by the team that was playing under the rules of the era they were best in. I think the best of 2016 would have had a fit playing the physical game of the Pistons before the Bulls climbed into the throne.

[Bellaboo]

Whether they are best or winningest, they are still a great team and probably one of the greatest ever.

The irony is that if we beat them then most will argue they weren't the greatest, so the accomplishment will be somewhat watered-down and I don't know if that is fair.

The Warriors posted their best-ever record in the same division as the Spurs and Thunder, who are two of the better teams in recent NBA
history.

Same conference but the 3 are in separate divisions. That's why we only played them 3 times this year, next year it will more than likely be 4. Thunder is Northwest, Spurs are Southwest and GSW is West division.

[Pete]

Yes, sorry, meant conference.

[Urbanized]

I'm not even sure why it needs to be argued that a team can't be crowned "best ever" before they even make it out of their conference finals. Should they do that AND win the NBA championship they of course belong in the conversation, and their best regular season record makes an argument for them even more compelling.

[Pete]

To be fair, they did win the NBA championship last season and have virtually the same team back.

[Urbanized]

It doesn't work that way, of course.