Starting PF

[dream_catcher_9]

Our 3rd star is going to be James Harden. Patience everyone, patience.

[slick_watts]

Our 3rd star is going to be James Harden. Patience everyone, patience.

What happens if it isn't?

[dream_catcher_9]

Our 3rd star is going to be James Harden. Patience everyone, patience.

What happens if it isn't?

It will. The odds are in his favor to develop into a 3rd scorer. He has the work ethic, character, the talent, and the organization in place to help him. The only thing that will derail him is a career threatening injury, and frankly that could happen to anyone.

[wiff]

Serge is only 20. I think he has just a good of a chance to slip into that 3rd scorer as Harden does.

Between the two of them one will be able to get 18 a night.

[slick_watts]

It will. The odds are in his favor to develop into a 3rd scorer. He has the work ethic, character, the talent, and the organization in place to help him. The only thing that will derail him is a career threatening injury, and frankly that could happen to anyone.

3rd scorer? Then who's our 2nd scorer? Westbrook? Too inefficient... but maybe he improves too?

Seems awfully risky to put the fate of the organization for the next several years into the development of a couple rookies, no? I like James Harden and think he'll develop into a nice player but it's no certainty, and I'm not sure the odds favor him becoming what we'd need from him (think Ginobili, or Parker).

[slick_watts]

A common trap is trusting that progress and development are linear.. there are steps, plateaus, etc. Serge Ibaka and James Harden both have great upsides and potential. We acknowledge that potential and project it out, sometimes without the thought that there is also the possibility that they do not grow and improve.

We know for a fact we have a super duper star and a budding star. Everything else is just possibility. Much of the resistance toward acquiring another piece in free agency or trade is the fact that we have those possibilities. Those possibilities don't go away, though, if we acquire another piece. Having lots of good players is a good thing...

[dream_catcher_9]

slick you have no concept of chemistry, or player development. All you think about are stats stats stats.

James Harden is going to succeed because of the traits I just listed. the people that fall into the trap are guys with little to no work ethic, have a self inflated worth of themselves, lack proper guidance, or were struck with horrible injury luck. The only one Harden could fall under is injury.

Facts are this, Westbrook and Harden will improve a lot from here on out. Why? Because they have great work ethics, are humble, and love playing basketball.

One of these days you will understand the importance of chemistry, togetherness, and character.

[slick_watts]

slick you have no concept of chemistry, or player development. All you think about are stats stats stats.

One of these days you will understand the importance of chemistry, togetherness, and character.

Talent matters more than all that stuff. There is more to basketball than stats and poor chemistry can bring a team down, but you're not going anywhere without the talent. Lakers and Celtics - two teams that found success only after making big trades for talent. Spurs tanked one year and drafted talent (Tim Duncan) then got lucky and drafted more. The Pistons traded for talent. The Lakers before that traded for Shaq, and signed more talent.

The Hallmark / fortune cookie stuff sounds nice but it's not going to rebound the ball for you.

As for player development, I know enough about this to realize that more often than not your young guys aren't going to end up the way you project them. And that it's not a linear process with any certainties.

Facts are this, Westbrook and Harden will improve a lot from here on out. Why? Because they have great work ethics, are humble, and love playing basketball.

This is true of many players in the NBA who do not succeed. Most players who make it to the NBA have great work ethic or they would not be there. Most love playing basketball, or they would not have ended up doing it for a living. It takes a big commitment to get the the NBA level.

And besides, how does acquiring another player alter anything about what you're talking about?

[dream_catcher_9]

Talent matters more than all that stuff. There is more to basketball than stats and poor chemistry can bring a team down, but you're not going anywhere without the talent.

I agree with the 2nd part

Lakers and Celtics - two teams that found success only after making big trades for talent. Spurs tanked one year and drafted talent (Tim Duncan) then got lucky and drafted more. The Pistons traded for talent. The Lakers before that traded for Shaq, and signed more talent.

I agree

The Hallmark / fortune cookie stuff sounds nice but it's not going to rebound the ball for you.

Are you sure about that? The more time the same players play together, the more they know what the other player is going to do, the more they trust their teammates. If all 5 guys on the court know where each other are and trust one another, then not being out of position and getting rebounds is easier(talent being equal). Togetherness means something slick.

As for player development, I know enough about this to realize that more often than not your young guys aren't going to end up the way you project them. And that it's not a linear process with any certainties.

There are levels to everything. Johan Petro might be a hard worker, but compared to a guy like Ibaka he fails in comparison. I project Westbrook to be a top 5 PG in the league who is a leader, and has mental toughness. Someone who can control the tempo, and take over when needed. Id bet a good amount of money that he reaches that. I project Harden to be a versatile scorer, who can find the open man, rebound the ball, play good defense, and be a team player. I'd bet good money he reaches that.

This is true of many players in the NBA who do not succeed. Most players who make it to the NBA have great work ethic or they would not be there. Most love playing basketball, or they would not have ended up doing it for a living. It takes a big commitment to get the the NBA level.

read above

And besides, how does acquiring another player alter anything about what you're talking about?

Less playing time for our young players = less time being developed. Also getting a star right now, might imbalance the chemistry we have right now.

[wiff]

Talent matters more than all that stuff.

Yes but no. Obviously you need ton of talent to be in the league. Even if you manage to land a 10 day contract.

But look at Beasley the kid has all the talent in the world but is a total knucklehead. When a guy like Reggie Evans can carve out a career in the league and Beasley is possibly going to be traded for a salary dump obviously you need more than just talent.

Now as far as the third scorer goes let's look at this a little closer.

1995/96 Sonics NBA Finals
Kemp 19.6ppg
Payton 19.3ppg
Detlef 17.1ppg
Hawkins 15.5ppg
-----------------------
71.5ppg

2008/09 Lakers NBA Champs
Kobe 26.8ppg
Gasol 18.9ppg
Bynum 14.3ppg
Odom 11.3ppg
------------------------
71.3ppg

2007/08 Celtics NBA Champs
Pierce 19.6ppg
KG 18.8ppg
Allen 17.4ppg
Rondo 10.6ppg
-----------------------
66.4ppg

2009/10 Thunder
Durantula 30.1ppg
Westbrook 16.1ppg

So that's 46 pts a game if those two simply plateau for the rest of their careers (highly unlikely). So if Ibaka and Harden can manage 25 pts between the two efficently of course they should be in good shape.

Harden already had 10 pts a game this season in 23 minutes. Is 14 pts that big of a stretch next season? Ibaka had 6.3pts in 18minuets if he gets 30 minutes is 10 pts that big of a stretch?

Looking at the rest of these teams considering the kind of "D" the Thunder play, I think they will be just fine hanging on to Harden and Ibaka. So yeah there is the third and fourth option on the team. That doesn't even bring into account Jeff Green's production which I think will dip some next season because of Serge. But he should still be a solid contributor.

[slick_watts]

I know the point you're trying to make, wiff, but I think we need the third piece not the third scorer. Scoring is just part of the equation, and not all scoring is useful. It's how you score the points. It's about ball movement and spacing on offense. We don't have a lot of that.

The Lakers just ignored all our options offensively aside from Durant and sometimes Westbrook (you can usually ignore him outside of 15 feet). We need a player that's going to prevent that from happening. Ginobili / Parker served that function for the Spurs, as do Odom / Bynum on the Lakers, and Schrempf / Hawkins on the Sonics. All those guys can create points for themselves and shot high percentages. We only really have one guy on our team who consistently does that (Durant).

I dunno. This offseason seems like a great opportunity to ensure we acquire that 2nd option / 3rd star for our team and not have to make guesses or take chances. This seems to be unwanted because it would affect the chemistry and prevent our young guys from getting minutes. Someone like David Lee wouldn't keep Ibaka or Harden off the court, and he isn't a cancer. I just don't get the total resistance toward adding proven players who would make the team better.

[DizzyDai]

A third scorer would be nice, but I feel Green, Ibaka, and Harden could contribute in that arena. I'd be more interested in a rebounder that dominates the board. Watching game two last night, I was a bit saddened the think we drafted Davis. Big Baby was fighting tooth and nail for rebounds. We need someone who can do that every night.

I'm not big on the ideal of trading Green, but if we could redo the 2007 draft again I would take Noah #5 in a heartbeat.

[MrToad]

One of these days you will understand the importance of chemistry, togetherness, and character.

I think you're kind of confusing the concept of team chemistry with professionalism. Players don't have to be all koombyah with each other as long as everyone acts professionally. It's a job, and the players that succeed are the ones that treat it like one. Sports history is full of teams where star players didn't like each other all that much on a personal level, but can work together effectively to win championships. On the other hand, the undertalented teams with big, big hearts generally only have that kind of success in disney films.
The players don't have to all be best pals. In fact, that's probably worse, because then you run the risk of letting emotions dictate who is on the floor. What you want is the most talented guys available that show up, work hard, and play a team game, but that don't drink and drive, pull guns in card games, get busted for drugs, punch fans, etc.

[dream_catcher_9]

What you want is the most talented guys available that show up, work hard, and play a team game, but that don't drink and drive, pull guns in card games, get busted for drugs, punch fans, etc.

that's character. Chemistry and togetherness is very important if you want to maximize your teams talent. If everyone on the team has good character, then it's easier to form that bond/chemistry that will make your team tough to crack and maximize your talents.

[slick_watts]

What you want is the most talented guys available that show up, work hard, and play a team game, but that don't drink and drive, pull guns in card games, get busted for drugs, punch fans, etc.

that's character. Chemistry and togetherness is very important if you want to maximize your teams talent. If everyone on the team has good character, then it's easier to form that bond/chemistry that will make your team tough to crack and maximize your talents.

You need the talent first, though. Talent can win independent of great chemistry, and even continuity. But great chemistry and continuity can't win without the talent.

We can have the best chemistry in the league and keep the team together for ten years - without the talent to win a title it won't happen. And again, adding someone like David Lee does nothing to even compromise anything you're mentioning. He wouldn't really have an effect on most of your young guy's minutes and he's no cancer. The same could be said for almost any front court upgrade we might seek during the offseason.

[Balkman32]

The Thunder should add Bosh, Amare, Lee, or Boozer, to this team next season. They should not break the bank to get every single one of them but, I think Sam can get one of these guys at a good value to both the team and player.

[wiff]

The Thunder should add Bosh, Amare, Lee, or Boozer, to this team next season. They should not break the bank to get every single one of them but, I think Sam can get one of these guys at a good value to both the team and player.

Seriously man do you understand how the cap works? Are you aware of something called the luxury tax? OKC is not a big market.

I can't wait until this damn off season is over. I'm so f'ing tired of Bosh to OKC.

I dunno. This offseason seems like a great opportunity to ensure we acquire that 2nd option / 3rd star for our team and not have to make guesses or take chances. This seems to be unwanted because it would affect the chemistry and prevent our young guys from getting minutes. Someone like David Lee wouldn't keep Ibaka or Harden off the court, and he isn't a cancer. I just don't get the total resistance toward adding proven players who would make the team better.

Slick I'm all for Presti using the cap on an established player. I want it to be a center. One who rebounds, blocks shots, runs the floor, but that CAN PLAY "D".

You might need a "D" to spell David Lee's name but you won't find "D" in his game.

I'd rather go after The Vanilla Gorilla. Considering Portland re-signed Marcus Camby to 8.4mil, and of course Oden is going to be healthy this year ( tee-hee), Joel looks to be the odd man out. He has a player option of 7.4mil, a team like OKC could make him quite possibly opt out, if the deal is sweet enough.

I was a bit saddened the think we drafted Davis. Big Baby was fighting tooth and nail for rebounds. We need someone who can do that every night.

Boston essentially drafted Davis. Much like Seattle essentially drafted Green. Both players were drafted for the other team to make the trade work for each side.

Seattle didn't want Big Baby they wanted Jeff Green. They simply drafted him because that is who Boston wanted.

[Balkman32]

I an not saying go sign Bosh to a max deal. But, he has to be in the mix. He is a guy who fits the need. So there is going to be discussion about this untill he signs somewhere else.

Really Jole Prizbella? Where is that getting the Thunder. He is older and comming off another knee injury, doubtful he ops out of a 8 million dollar deal.

Do you really believe the thunder can not go into the Luxury Tax? Every team in the NBA is basically over the Cap. The Thunder are going to have to go over the Cap if they want to compete.

[wiff]

Do you really believe the thunder can not go into the Luxury Tax? Every team in the NBA is basically over the Cap. The Thunder are going to have to go over the Cap if they want to compete.

So you are saying, no you don't understand the difference between the salary cap and the luxury tax.

You can go over the cap without hitting the luxury tax.

2008/09 Salary cap was set at 58.68mil
2008/09 Luxury tax was set at 71.15mil

2009/10 Salary cap 57.7mil
2009/10 Luxury tax 69.92mil

So you can go over the cap by about twelve mil but once you hit the lux tax you have to pay dollar for dollar for every dollar you are over the tax. So for example if you are into the lux tax by 5 mil you have to pay ten mil.

[sonictecture]

Just to clarify, as a dollar for dollar tax penalty, if you are over the tax threshold by 5 million in salary, you must pay an additional 5 million in tax. This tax is then divided amongst all of the teams under the tax threshold.

If you were near the tax threshold and wanted to add a player costing 5 million, the player would essentially cost you 10 million due to the 5 million salary and 5 million tax penalty for going over the luxury tax threshold to sign him.