Not an OKC fan - but I have to vent about the Harden trade

[Lindecision]

The trade just makes me sick to my stomach. Yeh, it didn't really affect OKC in the regular season, but the playoffs are a different story.

They were primed to make the finals every year for the next 5 years. I'm not an OKC fan but I wanted to see what Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Harden could do with an extended run together. But No... They decided to break it up just when those 4 guys were starting to peak and enter their primes. THEIR PRIMES!!! Think about that for a second. As a basketball fan that is scandalous and unforgivable.

They could have amnestied Perkins to keep the core together, but for some odd reason they decide not to. I don't want to blame Presti because ownership could have tampered, but I would still be disgusted either way. If it was ownership I would be more disgusted because its ultimately the fans who pay.

If OKC aren't able to get back to the finals in the next couple of years, then guess what? Durant and Westbrook's contracts are up for renewal and, without a finals return by that point, the Harden trade will already be unanimously accepted as a complete and utter disaster of a trade. To get back to the finals OKC needs is another all-star caliber player. That player was James Harden.

The Harden trade has the potential to be a franchise-destroyer. A dynasty-destroyer. If the ball doesn't bounce in OKC's favor soon, we will be talking about this trade for the next 30 years as one of the biggest "what ifs" in NBA history. If OKC actually regress then forget about it, Durant and Westbrook are gone and we're looking at a rebuild. If it ever gets to that point then oh my god. Just imagine the fallout.

[sonictecture]

Was it strange that neither Durant nor Westbrook ever lamented the fact that Harden was traded? Not during the regular season and not during the playoffs. While some pine for the dynasty that might have been the core players of the team simply take on the responsibility and accountability of moving themselves and the team forward.

You describe on doomsday scenario, where the trade of Harden sets a path that "destroys" the franchise, but another equally likely scenario is that OKC wins one or more championships without Harden and is a contender for the next 6-8 years.

Harden was a well liked player and recognized here as the player he is today, but if you have three players who are high usage one will always have to sacrifice to the point that they no longer produce like a top player. They instead become a kind of insurance. Miami is a great example, three high usage players, one who sacrifices his game and is expected to be insurance when needed, but as we saw with Harden during the 2012 finals, players can't always rise to the occasion and save the day after a season of forming to a lesser role. Older star players struggle to sacrifice, much less young players still trying to establish themselves.

Non OKC fans should be happy about the Harden trade because it enabled Harden, Durant and Westbrook to all show the best of their games. All three players were part of winning environments and the league is stronger for the trade.

Presti believes the team can win with Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka as the core of the team and more importantly the players believe it.

[Chalky White]

You are correct, OKC's front office is obviously lead by fools, with Sam Presti at the head. Most OKC fans won't criticize the trade because they don't know any better; as most legitimately buy into the notion that billionaires can't afford their hobbies. But if OKC continues to experience post season failure due bad roster management, as well as strapping such talented players with an equally incompetent coach, It'll be interesting how they react when Durant doesn't resign and OKC never again puts together a competitive team.

OKC would be in the finals right now, with the prospect of playing Indiana instead of Miami. But, they prefer flexibility to championships.

[spearsy23]

Why do people continually pretend presti traded a 25/5/5 player? He didn't. And yes, with harden we beat Memphis, but we don't sniff the finals.

[comingbacktousa]

People need to realize two things about the Harden trade.

First, Harden had a chance to sign for 52 million when the max OKC could offer is 60. He declined. Presti didn't decline that, Harden did. To pay you're third perimeter option max money doesn't make much sense. Harden went on and on about the team and sacrificing, but it came down to it he didn't. He was all talk. Harden didn't want to be with the Thunder. The Manu/Joe Johnson comparison is perfect here. Manu took less money and has championships. Joe Johnson took the money, and you've seen the results. I can't blame Harden, but at the end of the day Harden not Presti wanted 8 million over 4 years instead of the chance to win multiple championships.

2nd, Presti knew what he was doing when he traded Harden. The trade was more than just saving the owners millions. He could have done that by trading Harden this off season. Instead he traded him at the beginning of the season to max his value. You may not like the package he got in return but I'm sure he does. He was not under any pressure to pull the trigger so he got a package he truly liked for Harden.

In my opinion both teams won the trade. Houston got the franchise player. OKC as a team was better in every statistical way possible this season compared to last. Offensive rating, defensive rating, turnover %, margin of victory, winning percentage, eFG%. Westbrook, Durant, and Ibaka all had their best year in their career's. I don't see how anyone can say the Thunder were a worse team without Harden.

Factor in the fact that OKC also got a young prospect and highly rated sg last year, #12 pick, and a future pick. How can you say they didn't make a good trade? Because they lost to a top 5 team,without their 2nd best player, in the playoffs in a series where every game was decided in the final 2 minutes? That is a terrible argument.

[sonictecture]

I believe it was Presti's decision to not offer Harden the a maximum contract, not ownership.

I believe Presti earned the right to make the decision to trade Harden.

I believe Harden earned the 4yr/60m max contract that was available to him.

I believe Harden wanted to stay in OKC. Harden knew he could get a guaranteed fifth year with another team, but was willing to give that up to stay in OKC. Harden was willing to sacrifice, but wanted to be recognized as well. It's a fine line.

I believe that if Harden had accepted the 4yr/52m offer Presti would have eventually traded him due to the imposing luxury tax penalties.

I believe Presti traded Harden because of sustainability, not flexibility.

If you're paying attention, the Spurs have just reached the NBA Finals again. Sustainability. The resources for paying punitive luxury tax is simply not sustainable for this franchise and ownership group. Most of the league is in the same situation, so there is no need for a pity party. This team has a good chance to be better next year than they were this year and remain in contention for the championship. Sustainability. Throwing insults at Presti because he traded Harden is hurt feelings, not sound observation.

[comingbacktousa]

I believe Harden wanted to stay in OKC. Harden knew he could get a guaranteed fifth year with another team, but was willing to give that up to stay in OKC. Harden was willing to sacrifice, but wanted to be recognized as well. It's a fine line.

I agree with pretty much everything you just said except for this. Harden could have just as easily been dealt to a team that had already used their designated 5th year. There is no way that he could be sure he would get the fifth. As it turned out he did but when he was making the decision it was between 4 year 52 million and 4 year 60 million.

As far as sacrificing goes, the other 3 "core" players all clearly sacrificed. Durant gave up his final year player option. Ibaka could have gotten more on the open market, especially after improving offensively. And possibly the biggest sacrifice of all came from Westbrook. He gave up his player option as well as a guaranteed 2.9 million per a year. That's almost 15 million over the course of his deal. Westbrook earned the Rose rule but chose not to use it for the benefit of the team. That is a real sacrifice.

I think Harden wanted his own team and did not want to be OKC's third option. For all he knew when he turned down the deal, he could be traded to a bottom feeder. He wanted the money and his own team over the potential of multiple title runs.

[Chalky White]

I believe it was Presti's decision to not offer Harden the a maximum contract, not ownership.

I believe Presti earned the right to make the decision to trade Harden.

I believe Harden earned the 4yr/60m max contract that was available to him.

I believe Harden wanted to stay in OKC. Harden knew he could get a guaranteed fifth year with another team, but was willing to give that up to stay in OKC. Harden was willing to sacrifice, but wanted to be recognized as well. It's a fine line.

I believe that if Harden had accepted the 4yr/52m offer Presti would have eventually traded him due to the imposing luxury tax penalties.

I believe Presti traded Harden because of sustainability, not flexibility.

If you're paying attention, the Spurs have just reached the NBA Finals again. Sustainability. The resources for paying punitive luxury tax is simply not sustainable for this franchise and ownership group. Most of the league is in the same situation, so there is no need for a pity party. This team has a good chance to be better next year than they were this year and remain in contention for the championship. Sustainability. Throwing insults at Presti because he traded Harden is hurt feelings, not sound observation.

If you're paying attention, San Antonio never traded Manu. Not to mention, Brooks is no Pop.

[Chalky White]

I believe Harden wanted to stay in OKC. Harden knew he could get a guaranteed fifth year with another team, but was willing to give that up to stay in OKC. Harden was willing to sacrifice, but wanted to be recognized as well. It's a fine line.

I agree with pretty much everything you just said except for this. Harden could have just as easily been dealt to a team that had already used their designated 5th year. There is no way that he could be sure he would get the fifth. As it turned out he did but when he was making the decision it was between 4 year 52 million and 4 year 60 million.

As far as sacrificing goes, the other 3 "core" players all clearly sacrificed. Durant gave up his final year player option. Ibaka could have gotten more on the open market, especially after improving offensively. And possibly the biggest sacrifice of all came from Westbrook. He gave up his player option as well as a guaranteed 2.9 million per a year. That's almost 15 million over the course of his deal. Westbrook earned the Rose rule but chose not to use it for the benefit of the team. That is a real sacrifice.

I think Harden wanted his own team and did not want to be OKC's third option. For all he knew when he turned down the deal, he could be traded to a bottom feeder. He wanted the money and his own team over the potential of multiple title runs.

I don't think you know what you're talking about to be honest. Harden was willing to sacrifice the magnitude of his own star by coming off the bench for this franchise when his talent obviously eclipsed that role. He was willing to take a pay cut as well, and this is well documented. The rest of your post is just noise.

[Chalky White]

Why do people continually pretend presti traded a 25/5/5 player? He didn't. And yes, with harden we beat Memphis, but we don't sniff the finals.

You're correct; he traded a 26/5/5/60ts% 23 year old SG with a year left on his rookie contract. He traded him for Kevin Martin, a D league player, and the 12th pick in a mediocre draft.

If you don't believe that Durant, Harden, and Ibaka would be enough to get OKC past SA, then you obviously believe the same of Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka. Making the trade even worse.

[bondom34]

Just reading this thread and 2 points come to mind:
1. OKC is a small market, no matter what some believe, it really is about sustaining the franchise for the long term. If the choice is between Harden and Westbrook, I like Russ and a decision had to be made. It was made for Westbrook, we have yet to see in full if it was the correct choice, as the injury prevented further analysis. I think they could have made it past SA with Russ, and maybe with Harden, but think Westbrook is a better fit and more acclimatized to what is needed with this team. All are entitled to opinions on fit, but that's mine, if yours is different fine, but its not changing mine until I see otherwise.
2. Off that final point, its just really annoying to have members from other teams boards come specifically to the OKC forum just to whine that they feel it was a bad trade. How about I go to the Memphis board to complain about the Rudy Gay deal, or Nuggets to tell them they shouldn't have traded Melo, hell any team has controversial deals, and this one has yet to play out. No need to troll other teams boards to moan about it. Get over it.

[Devilanche]

If you're paying attention, San Antonio never traded Manu. Not to mention, Brooks is no Pop.

I still think with a decent center we would do quite well but Brooks is definitely no Pops if he was close, Lamb/PJ3 would have seen some minutes.

You're correct; he traded a 26/5/5/60ts% 23 year old SG with a year left on his rookie contract. He traded him for Kevin Martin, a D league player, and the 12th pick in a mediocre draft.

If you don't believe that Durant, Harden, and Ibaka would be enough to get OKC past SA, then you obviously believe the same of Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka. Making the trade even worse.

This is just cherry picking. it's just year1 since the trade. Let see what those pieces can do for us.
#12 pick and that D league player you mentioned doesnt have to be Harden equal for us to be competitive, they just need to be adequate roleplayer.

[Chalky White]

Just reading this thread and 2 points come to mind:
1. OKC is a small market, no matter what some believe, it really is about sustaining the franchise for the long term. If the choice is between Harden and Westbrook, I like Russ and a decision had to be made. It was made for Westbrook, we have yet to see in full if it was the correct choice, as the injury prevented further analysis. I think they could have made it past SA with Russ, and maybe with Harden, but think Westbrook is a better fit and more acclimatized to what is needed with this team. All are entitled to opinions on fit, but that's mine, if yours is different fine, but its not changing mine until I see otherwise.
2. Off that final point, its just really annoying to have members from other teams boards come specifically to the OKC forum just to whine that they feel it was a bad trade. How about I go to the Memphis board to complain about the Rudy Gay deal, or Nuggets to tell them they shouldn't have traded Melo, hell any team has controversial deals, and this one has yet to play out. No need to troll other teams boards to moan about it. Get over it.

The small market sustainability argument is completely nonsense, if not insulting to our collective intelligence. Not only is Clay Bennett not losing money, but the idea that such a businessman would be so short sighted that he would exchange temporary cap relief for the potential revenue generated from multiple finals appearances is absolutely ridiculous. Whether or not OKC is in a small market is irrelevant; TV money is the pot, and where you play has no part in stirring it.

I'm glad more people are criticizing the trade. It was a joke and a robbery of the fans.

[Chalky White]

I still think with a decent center we would do quite well but Brooks is definitely no Pops if he was close, Lamb/PJ3 would have seen some minutes.

And where is OKC getting a decent center? Presti has failed repeatedly in his attempts to trade, sign, or draft a Center competent enough to catch, gather, and finish the ball. Not to mention he didn't even bother fishing Harden for a Center prospect in the vein of a Derrick Favors, Andre Drummond, Earl Monroe, or Demarcus Cousins; but instead opted for more perimeter players and ultimately decided on Kevin Martin as a one year rental. Kevin Martin.

This is just cherry picking. it's just year1 since the trade. Let see what those pieces can do for us. #12 pick and that D league player you mentioned doesnt have to be Harden equal for us to be competitive, they just need to be adequate roleplayer.

I don't need to wait beyond what I have to declare this trade horrible, no more than I would if Golden State decided tomorrow to deal Steph Curry for flexibility and sustainability in what is cheap contracts and middling talent. I don't have to wait and see what these "assets" can do, as I've already seen what James Harden has done. He accepted a lesser role and smaller star to win, sitting behind Jeff Green and then Thabo because that's what OKC asked of him. Because of his selflessness the Thunder made it to the finals with one of the youngest rosters in history, there 4 core players all homegrown and under 23. And then the FO traded him, ruining it.

[Devilanche]

I still think with a decent center we would do quite well but Brooks is definitely no Pops if he was close, Lamb/PJ3 would have seen some minutes.

And where is OKC getting a decent center? Presti has failed repeatedly in his attempts to trade, sign, or draft a Center competent enough to catch, gather, and finish the ball. Not to mention he didn't even bother fishing Harden for a Center prospect in the vein of a Derrick Favors, Andre Drummond, Earl Monroe, or Demarcus Cousins; but instead opted for more perimeter players and ultimately decided on Kevin Martin as a one year rental. Kevin Martin.

This is just cherry picking. it's just year1 since the trade. Let see what those pieces can do for us. #12 pick and that D league player you mentioned doesnt have to be Harden equal for us to be competitive, they just need to be adequate roleplayer.

I don't need to wait beyond what I have to declare this trade horrible, no more than I would if Golden State decided tomorrow to deal Steph Curry for flexibility and sustainability in what is cheap contracts and middling talent. I don't have to wait and see what these "assets" can do, as I've already seen what James Harden has done. He accepted a lesser role and smaller star to win, sitting behind Jeff Green and then Thabo because that's what OKC asked of him. Because of his selflessness the Thunder made it to the finals with one of the youngest rosters in history, there 4 core players all homegrown and under 23. And then the FO traded him, ruining it.

He did try to trade for JV. Teams with young decent centers are better off holding on to them. Greg monroe btw not earl. How did you know he didn't try for any other? Did you get inside news that we're not privy to?
Not all failed trade offers get leaked.

Either your love of james harden is very strong or you just want to slam presti too easily. If you do want to declare it's bad then do so and just move on. No amount of harping on it will undo that trade.
He accepted that role cause he was the newest on the team. It's like the only time i see your post around here is related to Harden trade.

The thunder made it to the finals not purely just to him, Basketball is a team game and a collective effort. we only made it cause something clicked during that Spurs WCF and they somehow played more team ball.

[sonictecture]

If you're paying attention, San Antonio never traded Manu. Not to mention, Brooks is no Pop.

San Antonio never traded Manu, but they also never had an Ibaka and a prohibitive luxury tax penalty to drive a decision. Presti had four core players and he chose the three he wanted to keep. It was his decision to make.

OKC didn't return to the finals this season, but they were in contention to do so until Westbrook suffered a season ending injury. Presti traded Harden and still had the team in contention and the future still looks good. The Thunder aren't rebuilding, they aren't in danger of missing the playoffs and they aren't a middle of the road team after trading Harden.

Presti has struggled to upgrade the center position, but so has San Antonio and Miami. Perhaps its a difficult position to upgrade?

[sonictecture]

I believe Harden wanted to stay in OKC. Harden knew he could get a guaranteed fifth year with another team, but was willing to give that up to stay in OKC. Harden was willing to sacrifice, but wanted to be recognized as well. It's a fine line.

I agree with pretty much everything you just said except for this. Harden could have just as easily been dealt to a team that had already used their designated 5th year. There is no way that he could be sure he would get the fifth. As it turned out he did but when he was making the decision it was between 4 year 52 million and 4 year 60 million.

Presti was in control. Presti chose the amount to offer Harden. There has been a lot of talk about Harden not be willing to sacrifice the difference, but it shouldn't be forgotten that Presti also wasn't willing to "sacrifice" or make the difference smaller. Harden's agent made it clear that Harden wanted the 60M and Presti decided that Harden was going to have to sacrifice more to remain on the team. He even went so far as to give Harden an ultimatum. Presti was in control.

This would be a clear cut case that Harden went for the money and wanted his own team..........if Presti had offered the full 4yr/60M amount. Why didn't Presti offer it? Why give a 24 hour ultimatum when Harden still had another year left on his contract? Houston wasn't going anywhere and if they did others would have come forward. Presti traded Harden because Presti wanted to trade Harden.

The majority of teams in the league do not have a 5 year max player on their roster. Presti offered 4yr/52M and Harden signed a 5yr/78.6M from the Rockets. That is 26.6M Presti was asking Harden to sacrifice in guaranteed money.

Presti made the decision to trade Harden, ownership didn't force his hand and neither did Harden. Presti did what he has always done. He analyzed the situation and was proactive in his decision making.

[comingbacktousa]

If you're paying attention, San Antonio never traded Manu. Not to mention, Brooks is no Pop.

Yeah, they didn't trade him because he sacrificed money to play on their team. That's the whole point of what I was saying.

People need to understand that Harden was not a 26 5 5 on the Thunder team. There just isn't enough shots to go around for that. If the Thunder had paid him the max, like he wanted. They traded a 16.8 4.1 3.7 with 2.2 turnovers player. Even if the Thunder gave him more usage(meaning KD and Westbrook's would go down) the max he could have been was a 20 5 and 4 with probably 3 turnovers.

Harden on OKC had two roles last year. To be the third scorer and the facilitator for the 2nd unit. Martin and Ibaka filled the scoring void left by him just as efficiently. And the facilitating came from a combination of staggering Westbrook and Durant's minutes so one of them was with the 2nd unit and from Jackson a little bit.
Harden's role on the Thunder was filled this past year without him. His role was not 25 5 5 or anything close.

Presti was in control. Presti chose the amount to offer Harden. There has been a lot of talk about Harden not be willing to sacrifice the difference, but it shouldn't be forgotten that Presti also wasn't willing to "sacrifice" or make the difference smaller. Harden's agent made it clear that Harden wanted the 60M and Presti decided that Harden was going to have to sacrifice more to remain on the team. He even went so far as to give Harden an ultimatum. Presti was in control.

I know Presti was in control. Presti is the GM, it is not up to him to sacrifice. Players have to sacrifice not gms if they want to play with a team. Its his job to do what he thinks is best for the team. Harden gave up 8 million. Not 25.


People that don't like the trade. Can you name anyway the Thunder suffered this year without Harden? Besides losing to a top 5 team without Westbrook?

[spearsy23]

Why do people continually pretend presti traded a 25/5/5 player? He didn't. And yes, with harden we beat Memphis, but we don't sniff the finals.

You're correct; he traded a 26/5/5/60ts% 23 year old SG with a year left on his rookie contract. He traded him for Kevin Martin, a D league player, and the 12th pick in a mediocre draft.

If you don't believe that Durant, Harden, and Ibaka would be enough to get OKC past SA, then you obviously believe the same of Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka. Making the trade even worse.

He traded a 16/4/4 player who plays negative defense for an 18/2/3 guy who is known for not playing defense (but still does better than harden), a rookie and a great chance at a center prospect to replace Perkins. Not long ago Kevin Martin scored 26pog on 60% shooting on a mediocre team just like harden did this year.

Westbrook is better and more important than harden, with him we have a >50% chance of beating SA. with harden and no Russ it's MUCH lower than that.

[sonictecture]

If you agree that Presti was in control then there is no room to blame Harden for not taking the arbitrary figure Presti offered. Harden earned a max contract, even if he didn't put up max numbers with the Thunder in his last season. It was obvious that the market would give him that contract.

The idea that Presti doesn't have to sacrifice is absurd. He doesn't make decisions in a vacuum. The market dictates player worth. Presti and every other GM is held to it. If this wasn't the case Presti would just offer every player the minimum.

Harden's contract isn't hypothetical, he signed for 78.6M. Meaning if he would have signed for 52M he would have been giving up 26.6M in guaranteed dollars. The 8m difference between what Presti could have offered and what he did offered is the hypothetical.

What we lost from Presti trading Harden, was the chance to see the most promising group of core players play together, even if it was even for one more season. It doesn't matter if they would have won a championship or not in my mind. It would have been special. I would have given up the perceived bigger return for Harden to watch them play together a while longer.

All of this talk about how Harden was just a sixth man or put up smaller numbers is just rationalizing, he's still the same player with the same skill set and is a difference maker. Harden would have earned his 60m contract with the Thunder. It was never offered.