Moderators: retrobro90, Dadouv47
Dadouv47 wrote:Nah. Playoff Schroeder enters after 6-7 minutes in the first quarter as usual. He starts hitting 3-4 shots in a row and can't stop making shots until the end of games (and the playoffs). After he gets Finals MVP title we trade him and Patterson for Beal and Washington first pick.
ThunderBolt wrote:spearsy23 wrote:ThunderBolt wrote:The shot selection is a big issue. We have several guys that shoot a capable percentage from three.
Not really when you account for shot quality
I don't understand. Are you agreeing with me?
“If you're getting stops and you're making threes and the other team's not scoring, that's when you're going to see a huge point difference there,” coach Billy Donovan said.
bisme37 wrote:If there were magnets in basketballs so strong they changed the path of the ball as it flew through the air, wouldn't the ball then stick magnetically to the rim when it got there?
slick_watts wrote:we're a team that gets exposed in the playoffs since kd left and westbrook became the leader. this team way over-performed in 2015-16 in the postseason relative to the regular season with billy at the helm and kd around.
we're losing to a team that was better than us in the regular season. i dunno that losing in the 1st round w/o hca is under-performing. the thunder since the new year have been close to a .500 team.
Old Man Game wrote:Say they do end up losing this series (which appears likely given the 0-2 hole), I think it's safe to say the end result of a third consecutive 1st round exit is under performing for a team with 2 all stars, especially given the competition here.
Old Man Game wrote:slick_watts wrote:we're a team that gets exposed in the playoffs since kd left and westbrook became the leader. this team way over-performed in 2015-16 in the postseason relative to the regular season with billy at the helm and kd around.
we're losing to a team that was better than us in the regular season. i dunno that losing in the 1st round w/o hca is under-performing. the thunder since the new year have been close to a .500 team.
Say they do end up losing this series (which appears likely given the 0-2 hole), I think it's safe to say the end result of a third consecutive 1st round exit is under performing for a team with 2 all stars, especially given the competition here. Portland lost their starting center like a month ago. They're starting Enes Kanter FFS. This thing was set up perfectly for the Thunder to at least make the second round. But its hard to overcome this lack of on court leadership, coaching, and shot making.
Next season could be another big one for this team. Could definitely see Geroge requesting a trade if Russ doesn't turn it around. He's wasting the best years of his career trying to prop up Russ' beligerent, washed up ass.
slick_watts wrote:Old Man Game wrote:Say they do end up losing this series (which appears likely given the 0-2 hole), I think it's safe to say the end result of a third consecutive 1st round exit is under performing for a team with 2 all stars, especially given the competition here.
kind of a narrow way to evaluate the teams, right? just because we have two all-stars doesn't make us better, obviously. portland's played well since nurkic got hurt, better than us down the stretch. we might have 3 or 4 players who aren't net negatives, and one of them has been bad this series (j. grant).
Old Man Game wrote:slick_watts wrote:Old Man Game wrote:Say they do end up losing this series (which appears likely given the 0-2 hole), I think it's safe to say the end result of a third consecutive 1st round exit is under performing for a team with 2 all stars, especially given the competition here.
kind of a narrow way to evaluate the teams, right? just because we have two all-stars doesn't make us better, obviously. portland's played well since nurkic got hurt, better than us down the stretch. we might have 3 or 4 players who aren't net negatives, and one of them has been bad this series (j. grant).
How can you say all that and still miss the broader point that there's no reason one could easily quantify for which they SHOULD be better than us since Nurk went down. You put these rosters on paper up against each other, is the Thunder's worse? I would say no but even if you conclude it is worse is it 20 points worse in a pivotal game 2 that the team needed to show up for? Seems absurd on its face in my opinion. NO, the results in total are an indictment of job the organization has done fielding the team, not an exoneration of them.
Old Man Game wrote:How can you say all that and still miss the broader point that there's no reason one could easily quantify for which they SHOULD be better than us since Nurk went down. You put these rosters on paper up against each other, is the Thunder's worse? I would say no but even if you conclude it is worse is it 20 points worse in a pivotal game 2 that the team needed to show up for? Seems absurd on its face in my opinion. NO, the results in total are an indictment of job the organization has done fielding the team, not an exoneration of them.
Old Man Game wrote:Westbrook last night was just ridiculous. .
Jstock12 wrote:Old Man Game wrote:Westbrook last night was just ridiculous. .
He was 1 rebound away from a triple-double though.
Kizz Fastfists wrote:Jstock12 wrote:Old Man Game wrote:Westbrook last night was just ridiculous. .
He was 1 rebound away from a triple-double though.
That means he had a very good game! Triple double is everything! Efficiency is just something the haters use so they can claim Russ isn't the best player to ever play. How many other players have averaged a triple double for 3 seasons? That alone proves Russ is the best ever!!!
I have heard multiple people recite that garbage. They are what I consider the worst type of Thunder fan. They are more fans of the Russ show than of the Thunder winning in my opinion. Being critical of Russ' flaws does mean you deny he is a great player. It just means that you want everyone on your team to maximize their potential and when you see ho Russ fails to do that you want him to improve. It is no different than saying Roberson needs to find a shooting motion that allows him to become a 35% 3pt shooter and 80% FT shooter so he can be a great 3&D player. If I say Adams needs to develop a mid-range game and a 3pt shot to have a higher impact that isn't being critical of his work in the paint it is wanting him to become better to maximize himself and the team.
Some people believe that you aren't allowed to be a Thunder fan and be critical of Russ and I have no idea why so many fans believe that. Appreciating that Russ resigned after OKC was never going to be a contender again is great. Appreciating the insane show that Russ puts on is great. Russ is one of the most entertaining players in the NBA. If Russ were a better shooter and more willing to play in an offense with more motion and getting players their best shots I would appreciate the extra wins more than the triple doubles.
ThunderBolt wrote:I heard a clip yesterday on the radio that some season ticket holder said he wouldn't be renewing his full allotment of tickets next year. His ticket rep asked why and he said that basically if the team doesn't care every night then why should he? Having enough people take on that mentality is really the only hope for major changes. Presti clearly doesn't get it.
Jstock12 wrote:
Not saying Russ can't improve a little in an area or two. I just think that Thunder fans are taking him for granted sometimes. The vast majority of NBA players have never had a triple-double in their careers. They're extremely hard to get.
Return to Oklahoma City Thunder
