RealGM

Over the last few years, we've been crowning different teams as the next "dynasty", only for them to fall short. We first thought it'd be the Bucks. Then we thought it would be the Nuggets. Then we finally thought it'd be the Celtics with all their ridiculous talent, but even they couldn't come through.

Now we have the Thunder. They have yet to win a championship, but they are heavy favourites regardless of who comes out of that Knicks/Pacers series. And as we look ahead to the future, they are probably the best team setup to win multiple titles. They have an MVP. They have two all-star calibre 2nd and 3rd options that are still young and improving. Their roster is incredibly deep and full of young, versatile talent. And even when the inevitable tax bill comes in and forces the Thunder to trim some of their roster, they have an excess draft pick surplus to replenish their talent over the next several years, overseen by one of the best GMs in the game, Sam Presti.

So do you guys think this Thunder has what it takes to become the next dominant team?

NBA evolves so fast that it only takes a season for teams to adjust

Can we just wait and see if they win the chip first?

Chet Holmgren is too injury prone for them to be a dynasty.

Imo dynasty is a team that's won 3+ championships within a ~6-8 year stretch.

It's hard to imagine OKC winning 3. There is a lot of talent in this league and one injury can be make or break.

1000%. I've said this for years now.

COMPLETELY DISREGARD the fact that they are already the best team by a lot despite being the 2nd or 3rd youngest. Now you look at the fact that the best drafting team in the NBA has something like 25 picks (mostly 1st round picks) over the next what 5-6 years? They are NOT going to miss on more than 50%-60% of these picks. So let's hypothetically say they retain Williams and Chet. Even if you lose a piece or two along the way the next few years like Dort or Caruso or Wiggins. Now you add 5-6 young players with upside to extend this window year again.

There is just no scenario I see where they don't win 3-4 rings the next 10-15 years. I said prior a few times I think they are the next Spurs. A title contender for 12-15 years that wins say 4 rings in that span, but is just lingering around FOREVER. Not a dominant peak, shorter window like the Kobe/Shaq Lakers or Miami Heart.

Did anyone really think MIL or DEN were going to be a dynasty? Felt like those teams would always be competitive because of Giannis/Jokic but I wouldn’t say either of those rosters were crazy stacked behind them.

Even Boston, if they kept everyone together and healthy, had probably a 3 year window. It looked like they’d have a legit shot at winning again this year or next if they kept the team together but was always going to be a reset after.

OKC the first team that seems like they could be a real 6-8 year run. Pieces will change but they’re set up for sustained dominance unlike any of the last winners.

Dr Aki wrote:NBA evolves so fast that it only takes a season for teams to adjust

There is no adjustment you can even make when the gap between them (historically a top 5 team ever) and the next few teams is big BUT they also have SO many more assets than the competitors to load up again and again.

hugepatsfan wrote:Did anyone really think MIL or DEN were going to be a dynasty? Felt like those teams would always be competitive because of Giannis/Jokic but I wouldn’t say either of those rosters were crazy stacked behind them.

Even Boston, if they kept everyone together and healthy, had probably a 3 year window. It looked like they’d have a legit shot at winning again this year or next if they kept the team together but was always going to be a reset after.

OKC the first team that seems like they could be a real 6-8 year run. Pieces will change but they’re set up for sustained dominance unlike any of the last winners.

6-8 year peak maybe but with SGA being 26, Jdub being 24 and Chet 24... I think it's more like 10-13 year window (even counting later years where they may be more fringe).

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

hugepatsfan wrote:Did anyone really think MIL or DEN were going to be a dynasty? Felt like those teams would always be competitive because of Giannis/Jokic but I wouldn’t say either of those rosters were crazy stacked behind them.

Even Boston, if they kept everyone together and healthy, had probably a 3 year window. It looked like they’d have a legit shot at winning again this year or next if they kept the team together but was always going to be a reset after.

OKC the first team that seems like they could be a real 6-8 year run. Pieces will change but they’re set up for sustained dominance unlike any of the last winners.

6-8 year peak maybe but with SGA being 26, Jdub being 24 and Chet 24... I think it's more like 10-13 year window (even counting later years where they may be more fringe).

Maybe but I’m never going to look at a team and predict a 10-13 year window. There’s just way too much variance there. Guys could get hurt, no one is immune to a cold spell drafting, players develop egos, etc.

For the Thunder to be serious contenders or even front 10 years from now that either requires Shai being that #1 guy still at age 36 which is not the norm or it requires them landing that type of player other ways and I’m just not predicting that with any confidence. But it’s not impossible.

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

hugepatsfan wrote:Did anyone really think MIL or DEN were going to be a dynasty? Felt like those teams would always be competitive because of Giannis/Jokic but I wouldn’t say either of those rosters were crazy stacked behind them.

Even Boston, if they kept everyone together and healthy, had probably a 3 year window. It looked like they’d have a legit shot at winning again this year or next if they kept the team together but was always going to be a reset after.

OKC the first team that seems like they could be a real 6-8 year run. Pieces will change but they’re set up for sustained dominance unlike any of the last winners.

6-8 year peak maybe but with SGA being 26, Jdub being 24 and Chet 24... I think it's more like 10-13 year window (even counting later years where they may be more fringe).

It is absolutely impossible to predict the NBA 10 years, and much less 13 years, into the future. No team has a projectable window that long. Even 5 years is incredibly difficult to correctly predict to the extent that you'd probably have to be lucky to guess right.

Boston was also a dynasty last year and see what happened. At least let them win the ship this year first.

hugepatsfan wrote:

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

hugepatsfan wrote:Did anyone really think MIL or DEN were going to be a dynasty? Felt like those teams would always be competitive because of Giannis/Jokic but I wouldn’t say either of those rosters were crazy stacked behind them.

Even Boston, if they kept everyone together and healthy, had probably a 3 year window. It looked like they’d have a legit shot at winning again this year or next if they kept the team together but was always going to be a reset after.

OKC the first team that seems like they could be a real 6-8 year run. Pieces will change but they’re set up for sustained dominance unlike any of the last winners.

6-8 year peak maybe but with SGA being 26, Jdub being 24 and Chet 24... I think it's more like 10-13 year window (even counting later years where they may be more fringe).

Maybe but I’m never going to look at a team and predict a 10-13 year window. There’s just way too much variance there. Guys could get hurt, no one is immune to a cold spell drafting, players develop egos, etc.

For the Thunder to be serious contenders or even front 10 years from now that either requires Shai being that #1 guy still at age 36 which is not the norm or it requires them landing that type of player other ways and I’m just not predicting that with any confidence. But it’s not impossible.

Which MVP tier superstars in his tier have fallen off by then? Kobe, Jordan, LeBron were still great. Harden just made All NBA 3rd team at this age basically. Wade may be the one I guess who fell off at 33, but he also was a much more injury prone, physical and explosive player than SGA. I don't think SGA will be MVP level like Jordan was. I'm thinking if he's even a 2nd tier all star and Jalen or Chet is better and they maintain elite depth. I think their peak would be 6-8 years. Then a dead cat bounce type ring like the Spurs had in 2014

As long as they can stay healthy

hugepatsfan wrote:Did anyone really think MIL or DEN were going to be a dynasty? Felt like those teams would always be competitive because of Giannis/Jokic but I wouldn’t say either of those rosters were crazy stacked behind them.

Even Boston, if they kept everyone together and healthy, had probably a 3 year window. It looked like they’d have a legit shot at winning again this year or next if they kept the team together but was always going to be a reset after.

OKC the first team that seems like they could be a real 6-8 year run. Pieces will change but they’re set up for sustained dominance unlike any of the last winners.

Yeah, I never saw Denver or Milwaukee as a dynasty team, especially Denver.
I felt Boston could though, but it’s so hard these days with all the salary cap restrictions to increase parity.

I hope not

Considering how bad the teams look in the West, OKC should be able to make the championship next season, and repeat. Yes, they win this year.


The Celtics are dismantling, Cavs lack a superstar. Unless Mobley is it, and I doubt the Pacers/Knicks make any major adjustments this off-season.

OKC is on their way to becoming a dynasty unless a Jokic team or Luka team can stop them.

Last year "Will the Celtics be a dynasty?" the year before "Will the Nuggets be a dynasty?"


It's really, really hard to three peat, or even repeat.

Jinx.