RealGM

Do the Thunder beat the Warriors in 5 possibly 6 games this series if Harden was still on this team instead of Ibaka? We know the Thunder had difficulty finishing up games but I truly believe when KD/Russ is gassed with 3 min remaining to play, Harden's game would of been huge weather he makes tough shots or finds his way to the ft line. So, would he make that differences Thunder needed or it wouldn't of mattered and he'd make bone headed plays?

JellyRolling wrote:Do the Thunder beat the Warriors in 5 possibly 6 games this series if Harden was still on this team instead of Ibaka? We know the Thunder had difficulty finishing up games but I truly believe when KD/Russ is gassed with 3 min remaining to play, Harden's game would of been huge weather he makes tough shots or finds his way to the ft line. So, would he make that differences Thunder needed or it wouldn't of mattered and he'd make bone headed plays?

Nope, not a shot, and they wouldn't have made it this far.

You keep Harden you also get rid of Adams.

bondom34 wrote:

JellyRolling wrote:Do the Thunder beat the Warriors in 5 possibly 6 games this series if Harden was still on this team instead of Ibaka? We know the Thunder had difficulty finishing up games but I truly believe when KD/Russ is gassed with 3 min remaining to play, Harden's game would of been huge weather he makes tough shots or finds his way to the ft line. So, would he make that differences Thunder needed or it wouldn't of mattered and he'd make bone headed plays?

Nope, not a shot, and they wouldn't have made it this far.

You keep Harden you also get rid of Adams.

And Ibaka?

jayu70 wrote:

bondom34 wrote:

JellyRolling wrote:Do the Thunder beat the Warriors in 5 possibly 6 games this series if Harden was still on this team instead of Ibaka? We know the Thunder had difficulty finishing up games but I truly believe when KD/Russ is gassed with 3 min remaining to play, Harden's game would of been huge weather he makes tough shots or finds his way to the ft line. So, would he make that differences Thunder needed or it wouldn't of mattered and he'd make bone headed plays?

Nope, not a shot, and they wouldn't have made it this far.

You keep Harden you also get rid of Adams.

And Ibaka?

Yep. So you don't have the 2 best bigs.

I think it's ridiculous to believe the team isn't better with Harden than Adams. At the same time you can't just say the team would be the same except no Serge or Steven. We would have gotten something for Serge, never would have traded for Dion, likely wouldn't have selected Cam, may or may not have selected Roberson....

I love Steven and I'm not that frustrated by the trade, but we would have a higher ceiling with Harden.

there's not enough ball for russ, durant, AND harden.

bbconair wrote:there's not enough ball for russ, durant, AND harden.

Of course there's truth to that and they wouldnt be the same players. but we watched Durant go 7/30 and 10/31 in the playoffs, him not having the ball as much would've been a good thing. Having Harden run the offense when Russ was on the bench would've been good,. Having Harden instead of Dion down the stretch would've kept us from blowing 50 4th quarter leads.

I don't think we would have gotten this far this year with Harden but I do believe we would have a ring by now if we had kept him.

Adams 2016 > Harden 2012

Harden would never be anything more than a 6th man for the Thunder. He didn't have in him to improve defensively enough to convince anybody he could start next to Westbrook. The starting SG of the Thunder is always someone to rest Westbrook defensively. I don't think Harden would enjoy being sixth man for so long. He wanted stardom.

bbms wrote:Harden would never be anything more than a 6th man for the Thunder. He didn't have in him to improve defensively enough to convince anybody he could start next to Westbrook. The starting SG of the Thunder is always someone to rest Westbrook defensively. I don't think Harden would enjoy being sixth man for so long. He wanted stardom.

He wasn't bad defensively with OKC though

I think keeping him would have been better for OKC, but Steven Adams was a nice get in hindsight

bondom34 wrote:

JellyRolling wrote:Do the Thunder beat the Warriors in 5 possibly 6 games this series if Harden was still on this team instead of Ibaka? We know the Thunder had difficulty finishing up games but I truly believe when KD/Russ is gassed with 3 min remaining to play, Harden's game would of been huge weather he makes tough shots or finds his way to the ft line. So, would he make that differences Thunder needed or it wouldn't of mattered and he'd make bone headed plays?

Nope, not a shot, and they wouldn't have made it this far.

You keep Harden you also get rid of Adams.

Right. Harden sucks on D and OKC really does not NEED another volume scorer.
They need a ALL Round guy to add to what's there. If it meant no Ibaka or Adams (or both) OKC probably lost to the Spurs.

Then too... the PAYROLL issues?

spearsy23 wrote:

bbconair wrote:there's not enough ball for russ, durant, AND harden.

Of course there's truth to that and they wouldnt be the same players. but we watched Durant go 7/30 and 10/31 in the playoffs, him not having the ball as much would've been a good thing. Having Harden run the offense when Russ was on the bench would've been good,. Having Harden instead of Dion down the stretch would've kept us from blowing 50 4th quarter leads.

Without our C and PF we might not have had leads to blow.

dbrandon wrote:

spearsy23 wrote:

bbconair wrote:there's not enough ball for russ, durant, AND harden.

Of course there's truth to that and they wouldnt be the same players. but we watched Durant go 7/30 and 10/31 in the playoffs, him not having the ball as much would've been a good thing. Having Harden run the offense when Russ was on the bench would've been good,. Having Harden instead of Dion down the stretch would've kept us from blowing 50 4th quarter leads.

Without our C and PF we might not have had leads to blow.

So they just disappear and we don't bother replacing them? Serge was borderline invisible for most of the year and Steven is much easier to replace than Harden. We probably would've gotten a similar pick for Serge anyway and still had Steven, if the pick wasn't quite as good then we could've had Gobert instead of Roberson. And if the pick was only a bit worse it could've been Giannis and Gobert.

spearsy23 wrote:

dbrandon wrote:

spearsy23 wrote:Of course there's truth to that and they wouldnt be the same players. but we watched Durant go 7/30 and 10/31 in the playoffs, him not having the ball as much would've been a good thing. Having Harden run the offense when Russ was on the bench would've been good,. Having Harden instead of Dion down the stretch would've kept us from blowing 50 4th quarter leads.

Without our C and PF we might not have had leads to blow.

So they just disappear and we don't bother replacing them? Serge was borderline invisible for most of the year and Steven is much easier to replace than Harden. We probably would've gotten a similar pick for Serge anyway and still had Steven, if the pick wasn't quite as good then we could've had Gobert instead of Roberson. And if the pick was only a bit worse it could've been Giannis and Gobert.

Could have had them anyway, there's no real thought that they were even on Presti's radar. And they would have filled those slots w/ 2 vet min guys. They'd have Elton Brand starting at C.

bondom34 wrote:

spearsy23 wrote:

dbrandon wrote:
Without our C and PF we might not have had leads to blow.

So they just disappear and we don't bother replacing them? Serge was borderline invisible for most of the year and Steven is much easier to replace than Harden. We probably would've gotten a similar pick for Serge anyway and still had Steven, if the pick wasn't quite as good then we could've had Gobert instead of Roberson. And if the pick was only a bit worse it could've been Giannis and Gobert.

Could have had them anyway, there's no real thought that they were even on Presti's radar. And they would have filled those slots w/ 2 vet min guys. They'd have Elton Brand starting at C.

Presti personally scouted Giannis, I know he was on his radar but we needed a C and Adams was there. If Adams came off the board and we had a similar pick I'm almost certain it would have been Giannis. Gobert actually requires even less inference, we HAD to have a center and if we didn't get Steven then he was the obvious guy in the range we picked at. It's a bitself serving to pretend Presti wouldn't have drafted some good players to replace Serge when we know for certain drafting is the one area you can't criticize him for.

Beyond that, Steven could have still been there when we drafted, especially since we wouldn't have gotten Lamb and K-Mart so we may have gotten a higher pick.

spearsy23 wrote:

bondom34 wrote:

spearsy23 wrote:So they just disappear and we don't bother replacing them? Serge was borderline invisible for most of the year and Steven is much easier to replace than Harden. We probably would've gotten a similar pick for Serge anyway and still had Steven, if the pick wasn't quite as good then we could've had Gobert instead of Roberson. And if the pick was only a bit worse it could've been Giannis and Gobert.

Could have had them anyway, there's no real thought that they were even on Presti's radar. And they would have filled those slots w/ 2 vet min guys. They'd have Elton Brand starting at C.

Presti personally scouted Giannis, I know he was on his radar but we needed a C and Adams was there. If Adams came off the board and we had a similar pick I'm almost certain it would have been Giannis. Gobert actually requires even less inference, we HAD to have a center and if we didn't get Steven then he was the obvious guy in the range we picked at. It's a bitself serving to pretend Presti wouldn't have drafted some good players to replace Serge when we know for certain drafting is the one area you can't criticize him for.

Beyond that, Steven could have still been there when we drafted, especially since we wouldn't have gotten Lamb and K-Mart so we may have gotten a higher pick.

Except we have no proof Gobert would have been the guy, it could easily have been some random bust in the second round. And Giannis would back up KD, so why him?

And they'd still a real C and PF to start while whoever developed with no money.

bondom34 wrote:

spearsy23 wrote:

bondom34 wrote:Could have had them anyway, there's no real thought that they were even on Presti's radar. And they would have filled those slots w/ 2 vet min guys. They'd have Elton Brand starting at C.

Presti personally scouted Giannis, I know he was on his radar but we needed a C and Adams was there. If Adams came off the board and we had a similar pick I'm almost certain it would have been Giannis. Gobert actually requires even less inference, we HAD to have a center and if we didn't get Steven then he was the obvious guy in the range we picked at. It's a bitself serving to pretend Presti wouldn't have drafted some good players to replace Serge when we know for certain drafting is the one area you can't criticize him for.

Beyond that, Steven could have still been there when we drafted, especially since we wouldn't have gotten Lamb and K-Mart so we may have gotten a higher pick.

Except we have no proof Gobert would have been the guy, it could easily have been some random bust in the second round. And Giannis would back up KD, so why him?

And they'd still a real C and PF to start while whoever developed with no money.

Giannis and KD can both play the 4, and a lot of people believe KD should be anyway. plus Russ/Reggie/Cam all play the 1 so why select them? It's dumb to just assume Presti suddenly starts blowing picks left and right if he trades Serge instead of Harden. Beyond that, I think most likely scenario is that we would've still gotten Steven, started Collison for a year, and eventually moved to a smaller lineup. Nick didn't look done until last year. Oh, and we could've still moved Reggie for something less costly than Kanter if we had Harden.

spearsy23 wrote:

bondom34 wrote:

spearsy23 wrote:Presti personally scouted Giannis, I know he was on his radar but we needed a C and Adams was there. If Adams came off the board and we had a similar pick I'm almost certain it would have been Giannis. Gobert actually requires even less inference, we HAD to have a center and if we didn't get Steven then he was the obvious guy in the range we picked at. It's a bitself serving to pretend Presti wouldn't have drafted some good players to replace Serge when we know for certain drafting is the one area you can't criticize him for.

Beyond that, Steven could have still been there when we drafted, especially since we wouldn't have gotten Lamb and K-Mart so we may have gotten a higher pick.

Except we have no proof Gobert would have been the guy, it could easily have been some random bust in the second round. And Giannis would back up KD, so why him?

And they'd still a real C and PF to start while whoever developed with no money.

Giannis and KD can both play the 4, and a lot of people believe KD should be anyway. It's dumb to just assume Presti suddenly starts blowing picks left and right if he trades Serge instead of Harden. Beyond that, I think most likely scenario is that we would've still gotten Steven, started Collison for a year, and eventually moved to a smaller lineup. Nick didn't look done until last year. Oh, and we could've still moved Reggie for something less costly than Kanter if we had Harden.

But Reggie isn't as valuable b/c he never plays with Harden there to take over for Russ. And yeah Presti may have hit the pick, but who's to say he would for sure? His record of taking bigs is less than stellar. So no Adams, no Serge, Perk or vet min starting and who knows who they draft? You can't just say "Yeah he'd take Gobert or Giannis no problem".

bondom34 wrote:

spearsy23 wrote:

bondom34 wrote:Except we have no proof Gobert would have been the guy, it could easily have been some random bust in the second round. And Giannis would back up KD, so why him?

And they'd still a real C and PF to start while whoever developed with no money.

Giannis and KD can both play the 4, and a lot of people believe KD should be anyway. It's dumb to just assume Presti suddenly starts blowing picks left and right if he trades Serge instead of Harden. Beyond that, I think most likely scenario is that we would've still gotten Steven, started Collison for a year, and eventually moved to a smaller lineup. Nick didn't look done until last year. Oh, and we could've still moved Reggie for something less costly than Kanter if we had Harden.

But Reggie isn't as valuable b/c he never plays with Harden there to take over for Russ. And yeah Presti may have hit the pick, but who's to say he would for sure? His record of taking bigs is less than stellar. So no Adams, no Serge, Perk or vet min starting and who knows who they draft? You can't just say "Yeah he'd take Gobert or Giannis no problem".

If I can't say that then why can we assume we'd have vet minimum players starting at PF/C? Which is really the more likely scenario?

Serge was obviously worth a late lotto pick at the time anyway, so why assume no Steven?