2018-2019 OKC Thunder Regular Season Pt 1: A Renewed Hope

[CROklahoma]

Speaking of Adams, he dropped off again when Russ returned. He aint getting touches in the paint, he aint passing the ball, he isnt involved nearly on a level which is understandable, but he proved he is able to contribute a lot more than just a screener and alley dunker of the roll.
I hate that with our team ...

[slick_watts]

On abrines. His percentage isn't ideal. He is spreading the floor as a threat, and I think he's improved quite a bit defensively. You seem to be acknowledging he's the best option if he shoots at a higher clip, which leads to my next point.

he is who i would start with andre roberson out, yes. but i don't see the evidence for him being 'much improved' that you are seeing.

You are missing the point on me being happy not to see those long lulls where okc has no chance to score for big stretches. Their offense isn't as stagnant as before, and those stretches aren't happening nearly as often.

what is your definition of a 'long lull'? i dunno how else to define the frequency of long lulls other than how the offense is producing. you don't seem willing to accept the offense's productivity as evidence for how the offense is performing. so how would you like to proceed here?

I don't care much about all your lineup data because those numbers include about 15 teams that won't make the playoffs, and playoff basketball is alot different than the regular season, whose numbers you swear by. It's about matchups and having guys who can knock down shots in the halfcourt, when the opposing D knows what you are going to do. This is where okc has ultimately come up short over the years.

lets talk about this. because last year after 'dre was out and while melo was still struggling, what we heard from you was how it would all be different in the playoffs because we had threats now and the playoffs are different and the regular season lineup data didn't matter. so we have as much playoff performance data post-kd now with 'dre as we do without him. how would you rate our offense's performance against utah in the playoffs last year? did having guys who can 'knock down shots' eliminate the long lulls last year? did we not miss andre roberson? did your long awaited playoff melo finally show up?

You can't play offensive scrubs, especially on the perimeter, 25mpg in the NBA. It isn't 1980. It hasn't worked in the playoffs. I'm more about identifying the teams optimal lineups in projecting for playoff basketball. You seem really, really into swearing by regular season stats, accrued against half non playoff teams and playing against teams who bring playoff style intensity in about 10-20 percent of those games.

have you heard the fable 'a boy who cried wolf'?

these are the same talking points you made last year, and fortunately we do have playoff data to look at in order to validate your statements and predictions. the thunder offense ranked 15th of 16 in the playoffs last year without andre roberson. the previous season, with andre roberson, they ranked 12th of 16 in the playoffs. so it seems like the offense got worse without him, no?

There's no question that the defense could be better with him, but i have major doubt their offensive success is sustainable with him when it matters. A fluid, less predictable offense, with 5 capable guys, is needed in the playoffs. He can have a role, which will elevate the defense, but to ignore how good a guy like burton looks is foolish.

so burton is the next one. burton has played < 100 nba minutes. i don't think anyone is ignoring how burton looks. just take a trip to thunder twitter or reddit for that. but considering the track record of thunder fan casuals anointing andre roberson replacements prematurely and rashly, excuse me if i cannot take your statement here seriously.

I know you only care about the data, and not how it looks. But how it looks is also a predictor on how it will perform when it matters and whether it's sustainable. While numbers in the past with Roberson have been great, the style of the offense where everyone stands there while russ/KD do everything just wasn't practical to hold up to win a title. Them hitting long cold stretches in the playoffs wasn't a surprise. This team isn't hitting those stretches nearly as often. It's a good thing.

i think you've been thoroughly debunked here.

[Pillendreher]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25407024/10-things-like-including-luka-doncic-moves-nba

Lowe on Grant:

3. Jerami Grant, rounding out the Thunder

I will have to contact him to let him know about the error of his ways. He'll retract this preposterous nonsense posthaste, I'm sure of it.

[slick_watts]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25407024/10-things-like-including-luka-doncic-moves-nba

Lowe on Grant:

3. Jerami Grant, rounding out the Thunder

I will have to contact him to let him know about the error of his ways. He'll retract this preposterous nonsense posthaste, I'm sure of it.

this is the hill you're going to die on?

i'm still skeptical on some of what grant is doing but if we're going to denigrate people for not taking into account objective evidence for one consideration, isn't it hypocritical to not do so for all considerations? and objectively, grant has been pretty darn effective this year so far.

[hardenASG13]

On abrines. His percentage isn't ideal. He is spreading the floor as a threat, and I think he's improved quite a bit defensively. You seem to be acknowledging he's the best option if he shoots at a higher clip, which leads to my next point.

he is who i would start with andre roberson out, yes. but i don't see the evidence for him being 'much improved' that you are seeing.

You are missing the point on me being happy not to see those long lulls where okc has no chance to score for big stretches. Their offense isn't as stagnant as before, and those stretches aren't happening nearly as often.

what is your definition of a 'long lull'? i dunno how else to define the frequency of long lulls other than how the offense is producing. you don't seem willing to accept the offense's productivity as evidence for how the offense is performing. so how would you like to proceed here?

I don't care much about all your lineup data because those numbers include about 15 teams that won't make the playoffs, and playoff basketball is alot different than the regular season, whose numbers you swear by. It's about matchups and having guys who can knock down shots in the halfcourt, when the opposing D knows what you are going to do. This is where okc has ultimately come up short over the years.

lets talk about this. because last year after 'dre was out and while melo was still struggling, what we heard from you was how it would all be different in the playoffs because we had threats now and the playoffs are different and the regular season lineup data didn't matter. so we have as much playoff performance data post-kd now with 'dre as we do without him. how would you rate our offense's performance against utah in the playoffs last year? did having guys who can 'knock down shots' eliminate the long lulls last year? did we not miss andre roberson? did your long awaited playoff melo finally show up?

You can't play offensive scrubs, especially on the perimeter, 25mpg in the NBA. It isn't 1980. It hasn't worked in the playoffs. I'm more about identifying the teams optimal lineups in projecting for playoff basketball. You seem really, really into swearing by regular season stats, accrued against half non playoff teams and playing against teams who bring playoff style intensity in about 10-20 percent of those games.

have you heard the fable 'a boy who cried wolf'?

these are the same talking points you made last year, and fortunately we do have playoff data to look at in order to validate your statements and predictions. the thunder offense ranked 15th of 16 in the playoffs last year without andre roberson. the previous season, with andre roberson, they ranked 12th of 16 in the playoffs. so it seems like the offense got worse without him, no?

There's no question that the defense could be better with him, but i have major doubt their offensive success is sustainable with him when it matters. A fluid, less predictable offense, with 5 capable guys, is needed in the playoffs. He can have a role, which will elevate the defense, but to ignore how good a guy like burton looks is foolish.

so burton is the next one. burton has played < 100 nba minutes. i don't think anyone is ignoring how burton looks. just take a trip to thunder twitter or reddit for that. but considering the track record of thunder fan casuals anointing andre roberson replacements prematurely and rashly, excuse me if i cannot take your statement here seriously.

I know you only care about the data, and not how it looks. But how it looks is also a predictor on how it will perform when it matters and whether it's sustainable. While numbers in the past with Roberson have been great, the style of the offense where everyone stands there while russ/KD do everything just wasn't practical to hold up to win a title. Them hitting long cold stretches in the playoffs wasn't a surprise. This team isn't hitting those stretches nearly as often. It's a good thing.

i think you've been thoroughly debunked here.

Re abrines: he looks more confident in his release, and more aware and capable defensively. I think the team has looked their best when he's hitting threes. He's not a star, but can play 10-25 minutes depending on how he's shooting.

Re long lulls: if you've watched the thunder the past 6 or 7 years, you know what exactly what I'm talking about. The stretches where they don't score for long chunks of quarters /games due to the predictability of their offense has decreased alot this year, in part because of what grant, schroeder and adams are doing, and in part bc Roberson isn't out there standing in the corner.

Re burton: I'm not anointing him to the all star team. The guy looks comfortable on an NBA court on both ends. The same can't be said of Roberson, who doesn't want to catch the ball or draw a foul on offense. That's all I'm saying with him.

Re melo: he didn't come through, you won't here me argue otherwise. I don't feel foolish hoping he would based on his track record as a scorer and me being a fan of the thunder. Quite frankly I find it weird a thunder fan wouldn't have been optimistic in hoping he'd step it up. It was the only chance they had to peak. I know the warriors are the best team, believe me. I just choose to look for ways that okc can play at their highest level, as a fan of them. You seem to be more about criticism of players who don't fit advanced metrics, doubt any optimism of improvements, and predicting injuries. It's not the way I consume sports, but live your dream.

Re your debunked comment: you can't keep having it both ways. You denounce people's credibility whenever they have an opinion or prediction that turns out wrong. Yet you, like anyone have plenty. You argued w stats toronto could handle Cleveland last yr. I remember you predicting the Celtics wouldn't win another game vs. Philly in the playoffs last year after they won game 1. You used stats to say there was no indicator he'd develop, when the eye test made it obvious that he wasn't close to reaching his potential (he still has room for improvement, btw, he could really be something). I'm not sure how you can say I've been debunked with their playoff results over the last 7 years. They made the finals once, had KD, Russ and ibaka. They did hit long lulls that cost them games against good offenses, even if the overall complete game numbers don't indicate it. Going scoreless for 5-6 minutes in a big playoff game is all it takes sometimes.

[hardenASG13]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25407024/10-things-like-including-luka-doncic-moves-nba

Nice part on grant here for those who may still doubt him or can't see what he's become and what it's meant for this team (still anyone? Is he a turd brother still?). He doesn't need to be replaced, and has become a starting caliber player in this league, like it or not.

[slick_watts]

Re abrines: he looks more confident in his release, and more aware and capable defensively. I think the team has looked their best when he's hitting threes. He's not a star, but can play 10-25 minutes depending on how he's shooting.

it seems we're in fundamental agreement on abrines' status, but i do not think he's "looked improved", these are all qualities he showed last year. and he's certainly not an andre roberson replacement, if andre roberson is healthy.

Re long lulls: if you've watched the thunder the past 6 or 7 years, you know what exactly what I'm talking about. The stretches where they don't score for long chunks of quarters /games due to the predictability of their offense has decreased alot this year, in part because of what grant, schroeder and adams are doing, and in part bc Roberson isn't out there standing in the corner.

you're making this really ambiguous and impossible to falsify, so it's not worth going into. i would think that an offense with fewer "long lulls" would perform better, right? otherwise what's the significance? you're saying the thunder's predictability has decreased 'alot' this year. in what way? has it made the offense more effective? doesn't seem like it. where's the evidence? lack of evidence is a theme here, in these discussions.

Re burton: I'm not anointing him to the all star team. The guy looks comfortable on an NBA court on both ends. The same can't be said of Roberson, who doesn't want to catch the ball or draw a foul on offense. That's all I'm saying with him.

i've always thought it was odd the spinning of 'dre being aware of his limitations as a negative. i can't say i'm surprised at your thoughts of deonte burton, though. he has more than a passing resemblance to dion waiters in form and style offensively.

Re melo: he didn't come through, you won't here me argue otherwise. I don't feel foolish hoping he would based on his track record as a scorer and me being a fan of the thunder.

except this isn't how you presented your opinions. had you presented them in this way (as your 'hopes', instead of as pillars to an argument you were making in an attempt to denigrate 'stat heads') i don't think you'd have received as much backlash as you did. the same is true in this conversation by the way. i wouldn't begrudge you whatsoever your hopes that the thunder can unearth an adequate 'dre replacement among the current wing stable. i think anyone would hope that, and you wouldn't find any disagreement hoping for positive outcomes on this board. but that's not what you are doing.

Re your debunked comment: you can't keep having it both ways. You denounce people's credibility whenever they have an opinion or prediction that turns out wrong.

i'm denouncing your credibility when you are presenting the same opinions without any supporting evidence. having evidence of a thing doesn't mean it would happen. if anyone here could perfectly predict the future of the nba we wouldn't be typing about it on blogs, we'd be making money in vegas. i think the fact that you have anointed five thunder wings as adequate 'dre replacements the last couple years, and none of them worked out at all, speaks to your credibility on the topic this season if you don't have any more evidence to support your claims.

I'm not sure how you can say I've been debunked with their playoff results over the last 7 years. They made the finals once, had KD, Russ and ibaka. They did hit long lulls that cost them games against good offenses, even if the overall complete game numbers don't indicate it. Going scoreless for 5-6 minutes in a big playoff game is all it takes sometimes.

seven years? what? lol. why are we talking about anything before kd left in this conversation as if it is pertinent? in 2016 the thunder made the wcf and had a killer playoff run and 'dre was a monster that year.

yeah, your view on the playoffs has been debunked because we saw what the thunder did without 'dre last year in the playoffs and it was worse. i dunno what else to tell ya'.

[Dadouv47]

Grant is by far the Thunder player that is playing over ''our'' expectations so far this season (well and Adams but I personally always have been very high on him)

[slick_watts]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25407024/10-things-like-including-luka-doncic-moves-nba

Nice part on grant here for those who may still doubt him or can't see what he's become and what it's meant for this team (still anyone? Is he a turd brother still?). He doesn't need to be replaced, and has become a starting caliber player in this league, like it or not.

grant has shown to be especially synergistic with westbrook, insofar as his own performance offensively is concerned. it would be better of course to have a decent shooter at the position. grant's been that so far this year but there's still a dark cloud of regression to the mean hanging over his 3pt%.

the idea of an effective patrick patterson is still superior at starting pf in my view. it's getting harder to justify that thought of patterson, though, as he continues to struggle and struggle next to westbrook in particular.

if (when?) grant's three point shooting regresses back to the 30% range and if (when?) patterson's three point shooting progresses back to the 38% range, this might be a topic to re-visit. for now, grant is outproducing patterson by a wide enough margin that making the switch is untenable.

i do think that the best starting lineup for this team sans-robes would be westbrook-abrines-george-patterson-adams. this lineup has not seen much time, if any. a wasted opportunity on the level of morrow small ball. if nothing else, it's difficult to argue that grant hasn't received more benefit of the doubt than patterson and has been given more of a chance to succeed. patterson's post-okc career will be revealing.

[Dn4sty]

I'm tempted to post it....not sure if RHJ plays too much 4 for them or not. But it might work. Bjelica is the guy I'd look to ideally.

I’m guessing that Kings fans say no as they view Ferg as a 2, where they have like 45 guys who can already play that position.

I think the only reason this makes sense is that Bjelica somewhat blocks Bagley’s playing time.

Yeah there's the Joerger rumor that their FO is annoyed Bagley's behind him in the rotation. I'd wonder if they'd rather Diallo almost if he can play some 3. Seems like a tiny shot, maybe Tolliver's more attainable.

I wouldn’t move Diallo for Bjelica. Bjelica helps this team a ton, but I’m not willing to part with Diallo for him. It’s also likely that Bjelica wouldn’t even start

[slick_watts]

are you guys serious? i'd trade diallo, ferg or any of our young guys for bjelica. he's cheap and on the books for two more years and fits exactly what we need at that position whether it's starting or off the bench.

[Pillendreher]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25407024/10-things-like-including-luka-doncic-moves-nba

Lowe on Grant:

3. Jerami Grant, rounding out the Thunder

I will have to contact him to let him know about the error of his ways. He'll retract this preposterous nonsense posthaste, I'm sure of it.

this is the hill you're going to die on?

i'm still skeptical on some of what grant is doing but if we're going to denigrate people for not taking into account objective evidence for one consideration, isn't it hypocritical to not do so for all considerations? and objectively, grant has been pretty darn effective this year so far.

Hier stehe ich und kann nicht anders! Gott helfe mir, Amen!

[Pillendreher]

are you guys serious? i'd trade diallo, ferg or any of our young guys for bjelica. he's cheap and on the books for two more years and fits exactly what we need at that position whether it's starting or off the bench.

He would probably stop making 3s just like most guys on this roster do.

[Dn4sty]

are you guys serious? i'd trade diallo, ferg or any of our young guys for bjelica. he's cheap and on the books for two more years and fits exactly what we need at that position whether it's starting or off the bench.

I believe Diallo has a borderline All Star ceiling. I’d view a trade like this as trading a 2018 lottery draft pick (which is where I view Diallo now) for Bjelica.

I can’t pull the trigger on that

[bondom34]

I’m guessing that Kings fans say no as they view Ferg as a 2, where they have like 45 guys who can already play that position.

I think the only reason this makes sense is that Bjelica somewhat blocks Bagley’s playing time.

Yeah there's the Joerger rumor that their FO is annoyed Bagley's behind him in the rotation. I'd wonder if they'd rather Diallo almost if he can play some 3. Seems like a tiny shot, maybe Tolliver's more attainable.

I wouldn’t move Diallo for Bjelica. Bjelica helps this team a ton, but I’m not willing to part with Diallo for him. It’s also likely that Bjelica wouldn’t even start

I'd start him personally, and he's locked up a couple more years. By the time Diallo is anything, which is likely a role player, Russ and PG are past prime most likely.

[Dn4sty]

are you guys serious? i'd trade diallo, ferg or any of our young guys for bjelica. he's cheap and on the books for two more years and fits exactly what we need at that position whether it's starting or off the bench.

He would probably stop making 3s just like most guys on this roster do.

At some point someone has to break this trend

[Dn4sty]

are you guys serious? i'd trade diallo, ferg or any of our young guys for bjelica. he's cheap and on the books for two more years and fits exactly what we need at that position whether it's starting or off the bench.

I believe Diallo has a borderline All Star ceiling. I’d view a trade like this as trading a 2018 lottery draft pick (which is where I view Diallo now) for Bjelica.

I can’t pull the trigger on that

Also I don’t think it would cost Diallo to get Bjelica. I think that is an overpay

[Pillendreher]

are you guys serious? i'd trade diallo, ferg or any of our young guys for bjelica. he's cheap and on the books for two more years and fits exactly what we need at that position whether it's starting or off the bench.

He would probably stop making 3s just like most guys on this roster do.

At some point someone has to break this trend

I'm just weary of overpaying for a certain kind of player we basically already have just because we're in need of shooting. We first should figure out why everybody keeps bricking wide open 3s before we make the same mistakes with new players.

[Dn4sty]

He would probably stop making 3s just like most guys on this roster do.

At some point someone has to break this trend

I'm just weary of overpaying for a certain kind of player we basically already have just because we're in need of shooting. We first should figure out why everybody keeps bricking wide open 3s before we make the same mistakes with new players.

I agree. I also wonder from just a “what they would actually provide to this team” perspective that Tolliver wouldn’t provide a similar level of impact as Bjelica

[Dn4sty]

Yeah there's the Joerger rumor that their FO is annoyed Bagley's behind him in the rotation. I'd wonder if they'd rather Diallo almost if he can play some 3. Seems like a tiny shot, maybe Tolliver's more attainable.

I wouldn’t move Diallo for Bjelica. Bjelica helps this team a ton, but I’m not willing to part with Diallo for him. It’s also likely that Bjelica wouldn’t even start

I'd start him personally, and he's locked up a couple more years. By the time Diallo is anything, which is likely a role player, Russ and PG are past prime most likely.

I’d start him as well, but we are not Billy