Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=334&t=1266583
Balkman32 wrote:Its funny how everyone rips the Harden deal right no. We have no idea what Lamb and Adams are. They were both picked with the 12th pick. Plus we have an extra first rounder from Dallas (top 20 protected). If Lamb and Adams turn out to be capable starters with Ibaka and next to Durant and Westbrook, this team will be on the up and up and might even be able to keep these guys together for even longer.
So we tie up our whole salary to our backcourt? dumb, dumb, dumb. I agree that Harden is a better player then Ibaka but could you imagine our frontcourt containing Perkins and someone lesser of Ibaka's quality? It would be woeful, Ibaka's cheaper contract also gives more flexibility.CBB_Fan wrote:Balkman32 wrote:Its funny how everyone rips the Harden deal right no. We have no idea what Lamb and Adams are. They were both picked with the 12th pick. Plus we have an extra first rounder from Dallas (top 20 protected). If Lamb and Adams turn out to be capable starters with Ibaka and next to Durant and Westbrook, this team will be on the up and up and might even be able to keep these guys together for even longer.
Would you be willing to trade Westbrook for two fringe lottery picks? No. The Harden trade is rightfully ripped. If nothing else, Harden > Ibaka, and you give up Ibaka. You don't let Harden just walk away for practically nothing in case that nothing somehow magically fixes everything.
CBB_Fan wrote:Balkman32 wrote:Its funny how everyone rips the Harden deal right no. We have no idea what Lamb and Adams are. They were both picked with the 12th pick. Plus we have an extra first rounder from Dallas (top 20 protected). If Lamb and Adams turn out to be capable starters with Ibaka and next to Durant and Westbrook, this team will be on the up and up and might even be able to keep these guys together for even longer.
Would you be willing to trade Westbrook for two fringe lottery picks? No. The Harden trade is rightfully ripped. If nothing else, Harden > Ibaka, and you give up Ibaka. You don't let Harden just walk away for practically nothing in case that nothing somehow magically fixes everything.
kdthunderup wrote:So we tie up our whole salary to our backcourt? dumb, dumb, dumb. I agree that Harden is a better player then Ibaka but could you imagine our frontcourt containing Perkins and someone lesser of Ibaka's quality? It would be woeful, Ibaka's cheaper contract also gives more flexibility.
Podirk wrote:
How did Harden walk away for practically nothing. 1 yr of Martin(60 wins and a meniscus away from knowing what could have been, and a 6.6 M TPE for Martin), Lamb, Adams, Abrines, a future Dallas 1st and got rid of crap with Harden(Cook, Cole, Lazar).
Team is better off with roster flexibility and financially.
CBB_Fan wrote:kdthunderup wrote:So we tie up our whole salary to our backcourt? dumb, dumb, dumb. I agree that Harden is a better player then Ibaka but could you imagine our frontcourt containing Perkins and someone lesser of Ibaka's quality? It would be woeful, Ibaka's cheaper contract also gives more flexibility.
A team should take the best players available. Yes, we'd like to have the salary spread throughout the line-up, but teams should not give up talent for fit. There were options available that wouldn't leave a completely depleted frontcourt. One simple option would have been to play Durant more at the PF spot, and try to get a good defensive big for Ibaka.
Of course, the ultimate problem is that the owners have reached their spending limit. They can't afford to keep the team together, let alone improve it. When you are playing with a smaller hand, it is going to be an uphill battle against the teams that buy the moon. If the owner's had been willing to dip deep into the luxury tax, like several contending teams have this season, Harden and Ibaka could both be on the roster. Instead, the Thunder are giving rookies 80% money.
kdthunderup wrote:CBB_Fan wrote:I'm glad you aren't our GM then, giving Harden the max would of been a dumb move and would of crippled the franchise, Harden to us is only a 16ppg scorer which can be replaced and not worth the max just for that. Ibaka was worth less then the max which gives us more flexibility and we keep a young elite defensive presence in the post. Harden for what he would give us is not worth the max, it would be a dumb move to have 3 max contracts tied up in just the backcourt.
lol, Durant can only play PF when the other team goes small but he is simply to fragile to go up against quality PF's, Could you see him going up against Randolph?CBB_Fan wrote:kdthunderup wrote:CBB_Fan wrote:I'm glad you aren't our GM then, giving Harden the max would of been a dumb move and would of crippled the franchise, Harden to us is only a 16ppg scorer which can be replaced and not worth the max just for that. Ibaka was worth less then the max which gives us more flexibility and we keep a young elite defensive presence in the post. Harden for what he would give us is not worth the max, it would be a dumb move to have 3 max contracts tied up in just the backcourt.
First, Kevin Durant is not confined to the backcourt. He can play SF or PF, eliminating the "all the money is in the backcourt" concern.
Second, that isn't even a problem in today's NBA. The Heat have won two titles in a row with a backcourt dominant team, playing Chris Bosh at center and Lebron at PF. In the modern NBA, titles are won and lost by 3PT shooting and penetration, not big men.
Third, if Harden is "only" a 16ppg scorer for the Thunder, fire Brooks immediately. That is a waste of talent that comes from improper coaching, and making any moves because your coach is unable to exploit a max contract level player is beyond silly. Furthermore, Ibaka doesn't get the max because he doesn't deserve it. He can block shots, but statistically his defense does not have the impact his shot-blocking skills would suggest (19th in DRtg for Fs and Cs with more than 20 MPG).
Fourth, the Thunder have ZERO roster flexibility right now, because they absolutely cannot and will not pay the luxury tax for any reason and no ability to draw FAs (or willingness to trade). Hence the Thunder bringing back virtually the same line-up as last year. Theoretical flexibility is worthless if you just end up losing talent without the ability to get talent back, which is the situation the Thunder is in now.
Fifth, they DID NOT need to make the trade when they did. They could have still had Harden till the end of this season, and that could have won them a championship. There was no reason to make that trade at that time, and they certainly should have gotten more than peanuts for him. And yes, they got back peanuts. Unless Steven Adams, Jeremy Lamb, or the lottery-protected pick from the Mavs turns into a top 20 player in the NBA, the Thunder got fleeced.
CBB_Fan wrote:Podirk wrote:
The team gave up an All-Star (or at least, the best 6th man in the league by far) for one year of an inferior aging player with injury problems, a couple young players that may never make an impact, and one solitary draft pick.
No other team in the NBA would make that trade. Virtually every single opposing fan was shocked and happy the Thunder made that trade, and the only supporters of the trade are Thunder fans that want to be insanely optimistic. I haven't seen a single non-Thunder fan that thinks the trade is anything but a disgrace.
kdthunderup wrote:lol, Durant can only play PF when the other team goes small but he is simply to fragile to go up against quality PF's, Could you see him going up against Randolph?
It is no way Brooks fault that Harden only averaged 16ppg on the Thunder, you do realise there are 2 better scorers on the team that need to get theres? Name a 3rd option on a team that averages more then 16ppg, there just simply isnt enough ball to go around for Harden to average what he averages on the Rockets. And did I say Ibaka was a max player? I made the point he didnt ask for the max which is why he was a better decision financially, Harden demanded it and he simply wasnt worth that to us and we couldnt afford to give it to him anyway.
We are willing to go into the luxury tax as evidenced by offering Harden an extension, we will only go into the tax for the right players, not just for the hell of it
Presti isnt an idiot unlike you and all of his decisions make perfect sense, so please stay out of talk you obviously no nothing about
CBB_Fan wrote:Let me make this real simple for you. With Harden, the Thunder have chance for a championship last year. Without him they are worse than they were a season before, when they lost badly in the Finals to the Heat. And the Thunder regressed again in terms of the competition, meaning they have a small chance to win a title this year.
In the West, you can make a good case that at least Houston is better team from a talent standpoint. And the Spurs, Clippers, Grizzlies, and Warriors are all capable of beating of the Thunder in a 7 game series. And in the East, you have the Heat which have gotten better since they beat the Thunder in the Final and both the Nets and Bulls.
At BEST, the Thunder have a 1/6 chance of winning a title. In reality, I think that the difficulty of reaching the Final may make even optimistic. And how are the Thunder going to manage the Heat, which have only added more pieces while the Thunder have gotten worse these last two years?
Trading Harden created OKC's biggest roadblock to the Finals, and could be the reason OKC doesn't win a title with Durant. There is a reason why the trade is UNIVERSALLY acclaimed as a horrible move by all but the biggest of homers, and it is because all the excuses in the world cannot explain away trading away a chance for titles.
And on and on. And let's not even go into the worst-case scenario. If Durant leaves the Thunder for a better shot at the ring, the entire OKC front office should be fired and the Harden trade will be THE reason. You cannot excuse that away for "flexibility" (which has proved worthless), or finances, or the slender possibility Lamb becomes half the player Harden is.
NaturalThunder wrote:CBB_Fan wrote:Let me make this real simple for you. With Harden, the Thunder have chance for a championship last year. Without him they are worse than they were a season before, when they lost badly in the Finals to the Heat. And the Thunder regressed again in terms of the competition, meaning they have a small chance to win a title this year.
Yet no numbers support this wildly popular belief.In the West, you can make a good case that at least Houston is better team from a talent standpoint. And the Spurs, Clippers, Grizzlies, and Warriors are all capable of beating of the Thunder in a 7 game series. And in the East, you have the Heat which have gotten better since they beat the Thunder in the Final and both the Nets and Bulls.
So by the simple addition of Howard (who I admit is very, very good) and OKC losing Martin, Houston is now better and more talented? That addition of Howard and subtraction of Martin makes up the 15 games that separated them last year in the standings?At BEST, the Thunder have a 1/6 chance of winning a title. In reality, I think that the difficulty of reaching the Final may make even optimistic. And how are the Thunder going to manage the Heat, which have only added more pieces while the Thunder have gotten worse these last two years?
Why do people constantly say this and believe this? First off, the Heat in the playoffs last year were worse than they were in the playoffs in 2013. Wade, who's already having durability issues and showing signs of slowing down, will turn 32 next season. Allen will be a year older. Bosh's role has been diminished every season he's been there. I'm not sure the Heat are better, anymore, than they were in 2012; it greatly hinges on Wade's health. They aren't going to have Mike Miller and Shane Battier to bail them out with random 5/8 or 6/10 3P games in the playoffs anymore, either.
And when you, and others, say the Thunder have gotten worse since 2012, you're completely ignoring all logic and the history of how players progress. Durant and Westbrook were 23 years old in 2012 and Ibaka was 22. Players, especially the very talented "gym rat" types like KD, Russ, and Serge, generally improve until their mid to late 20's. A big reason why OKC, according to almost every single statistic, improved in 2013 despite losing Harden was because of the continual development and improvement of Durant, Russ, and Serge. For whatever reason, people on RealGM just keep glossing over the very real possibility that those three players will just continue to get better over the next 3-5 seasons. All three were better in 2013 than they were in 2012 and, due to their age, there's a pretty damn good chance they'll be better in 2014 than they were in 2012.Trading Harden created OKC's biggest roadblock to the Finals, and could be the reason OKC doesn't win a title with Durant. There is a reason why the trade is UNIVERSALLY acclaimed as a horrible move by all but the biggest of homers, and it is because all the excuses in the world cannot explain away trading away a chance for titles.
I agree, the trade sucked. But the people that are relentlessly bashing it and killing OKC's FO aren't looking at the other side of the coin. The OKC fans who Chalky calls "sheeple" also understand the financial ramifications of having $60M/year tied up in 4 players, and understand Harden was going to continue being a 16-4-4 type player, which isn't worth $13M-$15M/yr. He had an offer on the table of 4yrs/$55M and turned it down.
It may sound ignorant, and like we're trying to make ourselves feel better, but there is some credibility, from a basketball personnel standpoint, that having 75%-80% of the salary cap tied up in three ball-dominant perimeter players, and a very weak frontcourt makes little to no sense.
For whatever reason you, many posters here and other places, the media, etc. gloss over those facts, because it's easier to just use hindsight, look at what Harden did this past season in Houston, and assume OKC traded away that exact player; like they traded away a player that would've given them similar production and not have been limited in a 6th Man/3rd option role. If some of you could just open your minds a little bit, see both sides of the argument, it'd be a lot easier for us OKC "sheeple" to admit losing Harden sucks.And on and on. And let's not even go into the worst-case scenario. If Durant leaves the Thunder for a better shot at the ring, the entire OKC front office should be fired and the Harden trade will be THE reason. You cannot excuse that away for "flexibility" (which has proved worthless), or finances, or the slender possibility Lamb becomes half the player Harden is.
Did you not see the recent Tweets by Durant in his back-and-forth with Chris Palmer? He understands what happened with Harden. He knows it wasn't going to work financially. Didn't seem too upset or worked up about it to me. And he, unlike us, probably actually knows what went down in the negotiations, and understands the direction the franchise is moving in since trading Harden.
Durant very well may leave in three years when his contract is up; but, for now, you and everyone else on here that is blindly and relentlessly killing the OKC FO, without knowing or understanding all the facts, need to calm the bleep down and let things play out. We have no idea how good of players Reggie, Lamb, Adams will be. And, believe it or not, Presti has said they are willing to pay the luxury tax for the right player(s). The reason they're trying so hard to avoid it right now is because it's going to be unavoidable going forward, and the repeat offender penalties under the new CBA are very harsh. He's not being cheap, he's being patient, waiting to see what he's got in Reggie, Lamb, Adams, Perry Jones, and Roberson.