’16 Draymond Green vs ’17 Russell Westbrook

[Jaivl]

Am I missing the case for Westbrook's portability and team-independent value? It's not like he's been particularly impactful outside of OKC teams that were more or less built around him.

I mean, that's true, but I think it's like the Johny Hendricks / USADA argument in MMA. Correlation, but not causation.

Westbrook dropped off not because he was incapable of adjusting to different contexts, but because he declined significantly as a player. I mean, his last significant moments in OKC are him being made a fool by Ricky Rubio and Damian Lillard in back to back years, and while I love Ricky, he is **not** the kind of guy who should be outplaying your MVP caliber player.

[Im Your Father]

Am I missing the case for Westbrook's portability and team-independent value? It's not like he's been particularly impactful outside of OKC teams that were more or less built around him.

I mean, that's true, but I think it's like the Johny Hendricks / USADA argument in MMA. Correlation, but not causation.

Westbrook dropped off not because he was incapable of adjusting to different contexts, but because he declined significantly as a player. I mean, his last significant moments in OKC are him being made a fool by Ricky Rubio and Damian Lillard in back to back years, and while I love Ricky, he is **not** the kind of guy who should be outplaying your MVP caliber player.

Westbrook used to be able to shoot a little bit from three and mid range and was an excellent free throw shooter on high volume. He can't do either of those things anymore.

[JordansBulls]

Basically like comparing Peak Oscar Robertson to peak Ben Wallace. Peak Oscar is the answer.

[eminence]

Am I missing the case for Westbrook's portability and team-independent value? It's not like he's been particularly impactful outside of OKC teams that were more or less built around him.

I mean, that's true, but I think it's like the Johny Hendricks / USADA argument in MMA. Correlation, but not causation.

Westbrook dropped off not because he was incapable of adjusting to different contexts, but because he declined significantly as a player. I mean, his last significant moments in OKC are him being made a fool by Ricky Rubio and Damian Lillard in back to back years, and while I love Ricky, he is **not** the kind of guy who should be outplaying your MVP caliber player.

Sounds like someone needs to love Ricky more.

[HeartBreakKid]

Basically like comparing Peak Oscar Robertson to peak Ben Wallace. Peak Oscar is the answer.

You would think Westbrook is like Robertson juts because they both have triple doubles.

[tsherkin]

Westbrook used to be able to shoot a little bit from three and mid range and was an excellent free throw shooter on high volume. He can't do either of those things anymore.

2017 was indeed the only season where he could have been mistaken for being basically competent from 3 at 34.3%, and on 7.2 attempts per game, no less. It was a wild, wild outlier. He actually had a sub-par year below the arc, shooting a shade under 46%. His last strong year in terms of draw rate (and one of his best overall), and as you said, he was always a competent FT shooter... until he started tailing off immediately after the 2017 season, season after season. Also one of his worst seasons as far as perimeter twos, but he had a good jumper around 13-15 feet. Sub-par finishing in close, and non-elite finishing has sort of been a hallmark for Westie. Ultimately, the three-point shooting is what helped his scoring efficiency. Huge Box Creation, if you're into ElGee's stuff, I think that season tops the list. Wild stuff. And while it looks like something in the neighborhood of a 2:1 AST-TOV ratio, given his absurd usage and his massive AST%, he was doing crazy stuff on that end that season. Very weird season.

[SpreeS]

Everyone goal is to win championship so both as team leaders aren’t close to do it, but as second most important player Green is way better option than Westbrook.

[Ambrose]

Floor raiser-Westbrook, not close.
Ceiling raiser-Draymond, not close.

[dooki667]

damn hard question. Drummond shot 38.8% from three that year in the finals showed if left open he can damage you had 32 and 28 over 40 from 3 he had real offensive capabilities yeah I think I'm taking Dray here

[HeartBreakKid]

Everyone goal is to win championship so both as team leaders aren’t close to do it, but as second most important player Green is way better option than Westbrook.

Westbrook was plenty close in 2016.

Westbrook and Durant were close to each other during the end of their run. Curry and Green were not close.

[SpreeS]

Everyone goal is to win championship so both as team leaders aren’t close to do it, but as second most important player Green is way better option than Westbrook.

Westbrook was plenty close in 2016.

Westbrook and Durant were close to each other during the end of their run. Curry and Green were not close.

KD was the leader in 2016 not Westbrick.

[Jaivl]

Everyone goal is to win championship so both as team leaders aren’t close to do it, but as second most important player Green is way better option than Westbrook.

Westbrook was plenty close in 2016.

Westbrook and Durant were close to each other during the end of their run. Curry and Green were not close.

KD was the leader in 2016 not Westbrick.

dude said Westbrick god how can one person be so funny????

[HeartBreakKid]

Everyone goal is to win championship so both as team leaders aren’t close to do it, but as second most important player Green is way better option than Westbrook.

Westbrook was plenty close in 2016.

Westbrook and Durant were close to each other during the end of their run. Curry and Green were not close.

KD was the leader in 2016 not Westbrick.

Good rebuttal. I'm convinced.

The Thunder nearly beat the Warriors despite Durant having the lowly WestBRICK and roleplayers. Does that mean Durant >>> Curry? (I'll give you a few minutes to prevent your brain from exploding)

[No-more-rings]

GSW definitely had a better cast outside of Curry/Dray than OKC did outside of Westbrook/KD. Using GSW beating them that year as evidence for Dray>Westbrook is such a nonsense argument and overly simplistic.

[parsnips33]

GSW definitely had a better cast outside of Curry/Dray than OKC did outside of Westbrook/KD. Using GSW beating them that year as evidence for Dray>Westbrook is such a nonsense argument and overly simplistic.

Is anybody arguing that?

[No-more-rings]

GSW definitely had a better cast outside of Curry/Dray than OKC did outside of Westbrook/KD. Using GSW beating them that year as evidence for Dray>Westbrook is such a nonsense argument and overly simplistic.

Is anybody arguing that?

Well one user said that Draymond is a better second option, along with the other "ceiling raiser" claims. If Curry was better than KD in 2016, and Draymond better than Westbrook in 2016, that would have to mean OKC had a solidly better supporting cast outside of those guys which I don't think you can argue within reason.

[AEnigma]

Do you think the 2016 Thunder going seven games against the 2016 Warriors proves they were at a similar level? Why would it “have to” mean the Thunder had a better cast?

[Jaivl]

Do you think the 2016 Thunder going seven games against the 2016 Warriors proves they were at a similar level? Why would it “have to” mean the Thunder had a better cast?

Thunder starters played at a +14.4 level all season over +1000 minutes, went -0.5 MOV vs a +10 SRS team in the Spurs (probably more like a typical 8ish SRS considering lineup distribution) and went +1 MOV vs another +10 SRS team in the Warriors (plus a +20 MOV against an average team in the Mavs).

Warriors were probably a bit better but it's certainly not a clear difference.

re/ cast... Thompson, Iggy, Barnes and Bogut versus Ibaka, Waiters, Adams and Roberson. I mean, come on.

[AEnigma]

Do you think the 2016 Thunder going seven games against the 2016 Warriors proves they were at a similar level? Why would it “have to” mean the Thunder had a better cast?

Thunder starters played at a +14.4 level all season over +1000 minutes, went -0.5 MOV vs a +10 SRS team in the Spurs (probably more like a typical 8ish SRS considering lineup distribution) and went +1 MOV vs another +10 SRS team in the Warriors (plus a +20 MOV against an average team in the Mavs).

Warriors were probably a bit better but it's certainly not a clear difference.

re/ cast... Thompson, Iggy, Barnes and Bogut versus Ibaka, Waiters, Adams and Roberson. I mean, come on.

The 2015 Warriors were a +20 team over a large sample of their core three playing with any two of Barnes, Iguodala, or Bogut. In 2016 their 5-man lineups are substantially more variable, but 4-man lineups with the core trio and one of those other pieces is still going +18 over similar samples. They underperformed expectations against the Thunder — up to you whether that is just random variance, a bad matchup, a slightly hampered Curry, or some mix — but no, I am pretty confident they could generally be marked as the better collective. If we want to argue that Klay + Iguodala/Barnes/Bogut should be more than whatever we see that difference as, fair enough, but no I do not see the lineup results themselves as basically equal.

By the way, the 2015 Clippers had a +19 starting lineup with over a thousand minutes played together. The 1997 Hawks had a +16 starting lineup with over a thousand minutes played together. The 1999 Heat did not glue their starters together to the same extent but consistently posted +15 4-man lineups with any mix of their starters. And if we scale down further, you can get a +12 heavy minutes starting lineup from the 2013 Pacers. I recognise you are mostly working that lineup strength in tandem with how they performed in the postseason against two all-time teams — in contrast to the four teams I just mentioned off the top, as well as to other messier groupings like the 2021 Jazz and 2020 Bucks, who never fared that well against their competitoon — but a +14 lineup itself is not an astounding point for the Thunder either.

[Asianiac_24]

I just don't think you can win a championship with Russell Westbrook. Individually he's definitely more talented, but like Iverson his usage rate means your team would be good at best. With Green you can have an elite team