OKC Thunder Offseason 2015

[Soonerule]

Well if he does now you called him a turd and scared him off lol.

LOL, if that scared him off he should have heard what I called him a week ago....

May I ask or don't wanna know .

it was in reference to a feminine hygiene product... an old one

[spearsy23]

Also, pretty solid SL showing today. Semaj and Dakari both played pretty well and Mitch is definitely in full NBA ready mode. Reminds me of last year when you could tell Adams was just a man amongst boys out there and really didn't need to be there at all. Orlando has some decent young guys too, Gordon looked good. Hezonja I don't know what to make of other than he's really athletic and absurdly confident.

McGary hitting over 61% of his shots in 2 games.

He's clearly on a different level than everyone else. He's the tallest guy on the court and is still outrunning people with the ball in his hands, making no look passes, and just shooting over his guy. He looks like a D1 player playing small time high school ball.

[slick_watts]

Bone to pick with the Enes Kanter / Defense crowd here.

2014-15 DRPM, Enes Kanter ranked 73 of 73 among qualified centers:



DRPM is an APM based, ridge regressed +/- metric.

There's compelling lineup data both from Kanter's time in Utah last season and in OKC that call into question his defense. First off, here are some Serge Ibaka PF/C player pairings this year and their points allowed per 100 possessions:

Ibaka-Perkins 101.3
Ibaka-Collison 99.6
Ibaka-McGary 104.4
Ibaka-Adams 104.2
Ibaka-Kanter 111.1

View full list of Ibaka player pairings here: http://bkref.com/tiny/ItJh4

I've seen some excusing the team's inability to defend with Ibaka and Kanter on the court together, usually by claiming Ibaka was injured. But he clearly had no issue forming productive player pairings on defense with all of the other big men on the team.

Another 'explanation' is that Kanter and Ibaka had to play with poor wing defenders. Well, here's a breakdown of McGary-Collison from nbawowy: http://nbawowy.com/jcq7t3l2duyaxlxr#/jcq7t3l2duyaxlxr

As you can see, this pairing played very little with Andre Roberson -- by far the best wing defender on the team, and almost all of its minutes with DJ Augustin and Anthony Morrow. Yet the pairing allowed a paltry 96.8 points per 100 possessions.

Speaking of DJ Augustin, he's a poorly rated defensive player himself. But we can see the 'Kanter Dichotomy' with him, as well. Here's Augustin's nbawowy with Kanter off the court: http://nbawowy.com/rrzbygg6p7qzolxr#/rrzbygg6p7qzolxr

And here's Augustin's nbawowy with Kanter on the court: http://nbawowy.com/pnwxncz7dq60qkt9#/pnwxncz7dq60qkt9

A difference of almost 10 points per 100 possessions defensively.

Now, there are ways to massage this data to implicate Russell Westbrook, as he played a ton of his minutes with Enes Kanter. Westbrook is certainly not the best defender in the world, but we have plenty of data last year on Kanter in a scenario absent Westbrook: the Utah Jazz.

I know what everyone says. Rudy Gobert is the reason why the Jazz improved so much on defense, and Kanter's influence was negligible. Well, what better way to address this 'explanation' than to remove Gobert from the data.

Enes Kanter and Derrick Favors played 841 minutes together in 2014-15. Here's their nbawowy: http://nbawowy.com/p7k16d6dleszia4i#/p7k16d6dleszia4i

Derrick Favors played 579 minutes in the Jazz front court last year without Kanter OR Rudy Gobert. Here's that nbawowy: http://nbawowy.com/2trkjqfwz1j4te29#/2trkjqfwz1j4te29

How curious. In the first scenario, the Jazz are allowing 112.4 points per 100 possessions (about the same as Kanter-Ibaka, hmm...). In the second scenario without Kanter and without Gobert, the Jazz are allowing 104.3 points per 100 possessions. Sound familiar?

After what point to the 'explanations' read more as 'excuses'. There's a truckload of data here that is in consensus with the fact that Enes Kanter is one of the worst, if not the worst, defensive centers in the NBA.

But wait, you say. Enes Kanter is skilled offensively. He showed massive improvement on the Thunder, posting career highs in TS%, ORB%, etc. I'll address this in the next post.

[Thunderhead]

Interview with Donovan today in Orlando

http://www.basketballinsiders.com/video-billy-donovan-orlando-summer-league/

[slick_watts]

There's no denying Enes Kanter's productivity on offense. But, I'd contend that his problems on defense will most likely limit our ability to win a championship, no matter how productive he is on offense. Why?

DBPM is a rough defensive productivity metric. It's boxscore / +/- based. It's not perfect, but it's a rough estimate of defensive value. For our purposes it's sufficient here, especially since we've already established beyond reasonable doubt that Kanter is a very poor defensive player.



As you can see, Kanter's career DBPM is -1.9. We can use this to do an analysis on past champions. Here's a list of the past 20 NBA champions and the DBPM of their starting C:

Andrew Bogut: 5.5
Tim Duncan: 4.0
Udonis Haslem: 0.0
Udonis Haslem 0.7
Tyson Chandler: 1.7
Andrew Bynum: 1.3
Andrew Bynum: 1.6
Kendrick Perkins: 4.3
Francisco Elson: 3.4
Shaquille O'Neal: 1.2
Rasho Nesterovic: 4.1
Ben Wallace: 6.8
David Robinson: 3.3
Shaquille O'Neal: 1.5
Shaquille O'Neal: 1.6
Shaquille O'Neal: 3.5
David Robinson: 5.3
Luc Longley: 1.8
Luc Longley: 1.9
Luc Longley: 2.4

Zero NBA champions in this sample had a starting C with a negative DBPM, much less one as far into the negatives as Enes Kanter. But wait, you say. We can bring Enes Kanter off the bench. Well, here's a list of the worst rotation big men (by DBPM, mininum 1000 minutes played, minutes per game also included) on the same sample of NBA Champions:

Marresse Speights (-1.3, 15.9)
Aron Baynes (-.3, 9.3)
Udonis Haslem (0.0, 18.9)
Chris Bosh (0.3, 35.2)
Dirk Nowitzki (0.6, 34.3)
Andrew Bynum (1.3, 30.4)
Andrew Bynum (1.6, 28.9)
Glen Davis (1.1, 13.6)
Fabricio Oberto (2.2, 17.3)
Antoine Walker (-.6, 26.8)
Malik Rose (1.4, 17.2)
Corliss Williamson (-1.0, 19.9)
Malik Rose (1.2, 24.5)
Shaquille O'Neal (1.5, 36.1)
Horace Grant (0.5, 31.0)
A.C. Green (1.8, 23.5)
Will Perdue (2.5, 12.0) *** This Spurs team went thru a lot of bigs. Purdue is worst DBPM of the bunch with > 400 minutes
Jason Caffey (0.2, 13.9)
Jason Caffey (-.5, 18.7)
Bill Wennington (-.2, 15.0)

Here we see some negative performers, but again, nobody as negative as Kanter. Only six of the last twenty champions even had a major rotation player in the negatives on DBPM! Of those six, only Antoine Walker played more than 20 minutes per game.

It's clear, at least from this data, that re-signing Enes Kanter represents a big risk, and a faith that the Thunder can buck this twenty season long trend.

But wait, you say. Enes Kanter is only 23 years old, he will surely improve defensively. We can address this as well.

Since 1994-95 , 43 F and C have had -1.0 and worse DBPM through the first four years of their career (4000 minutes minimum): http://bkref.com/tiny/ZHoLB

This isn't a fun list. Zach Randolph, by my estimation, is the ONLY big man on this list who would later mature into a capable defensive player. This didn't occur until he played for Memphis, his ninth year in the league.

Again, there are ways to massage this data. Maybe make it look not quite as bad for Kanter. But in my opinion, where there is smoke there is fire. Re-signing Kanter would be a very strong statement by the Thunder that they can either a) win a title IN SPITE of Kanter's current defensive ineptitude (a scenario unprecedented in the past 20 seasons), or b) improve Kanter's defense in short enough order to the point they can win a title (again, weak support in the data for this, at least in the foreseeable future).

Stranger things have happened, and Kanter is an exciting player on offense. The Thunder may be in a position where they have to keep him, just to appease Durant. But let's not disregard reason and precedent. Winning with Kanter would topple at least one, perhaps more, strong precedents.

This has been a public service announcement. Proceed with your posting.

[Soonerule]

nice work Slick

[bondom34]

Slick, please do stop by more often. Fantastic post!

Also, did a little research. Kanter had one season (2012-13) where he posted decent defensive numbers. He had a barely better than neutral DRAPM (0.3), though he still had a negative DBPM. The only things I can find different that season are:
He seemed to be on court w/ basically all plus defenders (Utah had Demarre Carroll that year, plus Favors with him), and he came off the bench. I'm definitely rethinking my stance he should start.

[slick_watts]

Slick, please do stop by more often. Fantastic post!

Also, did a little research. Kanter had one season (2012-13) where he posted decent defensive numbers. He had a barely better than neutral DRAPM (0.3), though he still had a negative DBPM. The only things I can find different that season are:
He seemed to be on court w/ basically all plus defenders (Utah had Demarre Carroll that year, plus Favors with him), and he came off the bench. I'm definitely rethinking my stance he should start.

That's a small bright spot. That Jazz team allowed ~102 points per 100 possessions with Kanter on the court (70% of those minutes also had Favors present). Kanter without Favors was also effective. The main thing Kanter avoided was playing with Al Jefferson, who coincidentally played the Kanter role on that team being defensive poison to whatever lineup he happened to be a part of. Your instincts re: Carroll are also supported. Kanter's weakest performing defensive lineups that year were when Carroll was absent, the Jazz allowing 107.7 points per 100 possessions in those minutes.

It's rare that data is 100% conclusive. Especially with a player like Kanter who is young / developing and a product of several different coaching environments. If we do re-sign Kanter, maybe it'd be worth it to investigate what made those defensive lineups on that Jazz team effective. What kind of defense were they playing, etc. My one caveat would be that Kanter only played 1000 minutes, or just over 15 minutes per game. Situational role players often have the benefit (from a numbers perspective) of only being used when matchups are agreeable. A good example is Hasheem Thabeet in 2012-13, when he posted a sub-100 individual DRTG and had a lot of compellingly positive lineup data. But he only played 770 minutes, Scott Brooks being careful not to play Thabeet in disadvantageous circumstances (i.e. versus jump shooting big men, etc.). I'm not certain, but given the minutes per game, the same could be true for Enes Kanter in 2012-13. Just something to think about.

On that note, if it were possible to re-sign Kanter and play him off the bench 20-25 minutes a game -- not overextending him in poor matchups and exploiting advantageous ones -- re-signing him would be far more amenable to me. But I don't think that role is what he would be looking for.

[bondom34]

Slick, please do stop by more often. Fantastic post!

Also, did a little research. Kanter had one season (2012-13) where he posted decent defensive numbers. He had a barely better than neutral DRAPM (0.3), though he still had a negative DBPM. The only things I can find different that season are:
He seemed to be on court w/ basically all plus defenders (Utah had Demarre Carroll that year, plus Favors with him), and he came off the bench. I'm definitely rethinking my stance he should start.

That's a small bright spot. That Jazz team allowed ~102 points per 100 possessions with Kanter on the court (70% of those minutes also had Favors present). Kanter without Favors was also effective. The main thing Kanter avoided was playing with Al Jefferson, who coincidentally played the Kanter role on that team being defensive poison to whatever lineup he happened to be a part of. Your instincts re: Carroll are also supported. Kanter's weakest performing defensive lineups that year were when Carroll was absent, the Jazz allowing 107.7 points per 100 possessions in those minutes.

It's rare that data is 100% conclusive. Especially with a player like Kanter who is young / developing and a product of several different coaching environments. If we do re-sign Kanter, maybe it'd be worth it to investigate what made those defensive lineups on that Jazz team effective. What kind of defense were they playing, etc. My one caveat would be that Kanter only played 1000 minutes, or just over 15 minutes per game. Situational role players often have the benefit (from a numbers perspective) of only being used when matchups are agreeable. A good example is Hasheem Thabeet in 2012-13, when he posted a sub-100 individual DRTG and had a lot of compellingly positive lineup data. But he only played 770 minutes, Scott Brooks being careful not to play Thabeet in disadvantageous circumstances (i.e. versus jump shooting big men, etc.). I'm not certain, but given the minutes per game, the same could be true for Enes Kanter in 2012-13. Just something to think about.

On that note, if it were possible to re-sign Kanter and play him off the bench 20-25 minutes a game -- not overextending him in poor matchups and exploiting advantageous ones -- re-signing him would be far more amenable to me. But I don't think that role is what he would be looking for.

Personally I feel the same, but they're kind of stuck. As has been said a few times, its Kanter or nothing unless a sign and trade is worked out, and they need another big than Adams. I wish they could get him to take something reasonable and play bench minutes, I just can't imagine it.

Also, I found it hilarious that on NBA Gametime they put up a shot of best remaining FAs and Stu Jackson said of Kanter "he can protect the rim a little" !

[slick_watts]

Personally I feel the same, but they're kind of stuck. As has been said a few times, its Kanter or nothing unless a sign and trade is worked out, and they need another big than Adams. I wish they could get him to take something reasonable and play bench minutes, I just can't imagine it.

Also, I found it hilarious that on NBA Gametime they put up a shot of best remaining FAs and Stu Jackson said of Kanter "he can protect the rim a little" !

There's certainly a broader discussion to be had regarding the Thunder's position and how they got here. But that's for another time, perhaps.

I'm a proponent of letting Kanter walk and rolling the dice with Mitch McGary and more small ball. McGary had a productive rookie season, was a part of productive reserve lineups next to Nick Collison, and seems to have lost some weight over the summer which could bode well for his health. The Thunder's most consistently productive lineups have historically featured Kevin Durant and Serge Ibaka at PF and C. Over the last three seasons those small ball lineups are +10 points per 100 possessions. Quite a feat considering all the wings that have flowed in and out of that sample over the years. In 2013-14, our best season, Durant played 20% of his minutes at PF. Seems unlikely we hit that figure if Kanter is retained. The incumbent starters (Adams-Ibaka-Durant-Roberson-Westbrook) have also been monstrously productive at +19 points per 100 possessions the last two seasons.

Having said that, I recognize Kanter will likely be re-signed. Either to a long term deal, or to the qualifying offer. The motivation to do so seems strange to me, especially when most of the discussion regarding Kanter (Thunder fans, or otherwise) appears centered more on mitigating his weaknesses than anything.

Now, if by some chance Kanter is re-signed and he becomes an acceptable defensive player? Then the broader discussion regarding Presti's decision making can be shelved for awhile.

[bondom34]

Personally I feel the same, but they're kind of stuck. As has been said a few times, its Kanter or nothing unless a sign and trade is worked out, and they need another big than Adams. I wish they could get him to take something reasonable and play bench minutes, I just can't imagine it.

Also, I found it hilarious that on NBA Gametime they put up a shot of best remaining FAs and Stu Jackson said of Kanter "he can protect the rim a little" !

There's certainly a broader discussion to be had regarding the Thunder's position and how they got here. But that's for another time, perhaps.

I'm a proponent of letting Kanter walk and rolling the dice with Mitch McGary and more small ball. McGary had a productive rookie season, was a part of productive reserve lineups next to Nick Collison, and seems to have lost some weight over the summer which could bode well for his health. The Thunder's most consistently productive lineups have historically featured Kevin Durant and Serge Ibaka at PF and C. Over the last three seasons those small ball lineups are +10 points per 100 possessions. Quite a feat considering all the wings that have flowed in and out of that sample over the years. In 2013-14, our best season, Durant played 20% of his minutes at PF. Seems unlikely we hit that figure if Kanter is retained. The incumbent starters (Adams-Ibaka-Durant-Roberson-Westbrook) have also been monstrously productive at +19 points per 100 possessions the last two seasons.

Having said that, I recognize Kanter will likely be re-signed. Either to a long term deal, or to the qualifying offer. The motivation to do so seems strange to me, especially when most of the discussion regarding Kanter (Thunder fans, or otherwise) appears centered on mitigating his weaknesses than anything.

Now, if by some chance Kanter is re-signed and he becomes an acceptable defensive player? Then the broader discussion regarding Presti's decision making can be shelved for awhile.

I assume this dates back to Harden, but the Lopez deal as well? Just curious, because I hated that rumor at the deadline.

[slick_watts]

I assume this dates back to Harden, but the Lopez deal as well? Just curious, because I hated that rumor at the deadline.

Trading for Kanter was a value proposition, as things usually seem to be with Sam Presti. Pending UFA Kendrick Perkins was used as cap ballast to acquire pending RFA Kanter. Dion Waiters was acquired for a protected first round pick because there's some measure of expected value in salvaging a player like him with his draft pedigree, strengthened again by Waiters' RFA status. Examples of this approach are littered everywhere. Value, value, value.

The problem is that value does not play on the basketball court. Trading or using the amnesty provision on Kendrick Perkins before 2014-15 would have been poor value since the return would have been low with a year left on his deal. But it likely would have been the best basketball move to make. We ended up with Enes Kanter because Sam Presti is so averse to making value-poor transactions that may increase on-court performance. Sometimes you just have to do that in the NBA. In June 2013 the Warriors unloaded a bunch of cap ballast and threw away draft picks for the privilege of paying 30 year old Andre Iguodala $48 million. A terrible value proposition, but two years later he's Finals MVP. That trade improved the Warriors; they weren't overly concerned about value.

Sam Presti would have never made a trade like that. He's going to re-sign Enes Kanter because that's the value thing to do right now. Is it the basketball thing to do?

[bondom34]

I assume this dates back to Harden, but the Lopez deal as well? Just curious, because I hated that rumor at the deadline.

Trading for Kanter was a value proposition, as things usually seem to be with Sam Presti. Pending UFA Kendrick Perkins was used as cap ballast to acquire pending RFA Kanter. Dion Waiters was acquired for a protected first round pick because there's some measure of expected value in salvaging a player like him with his draft pedigree, strengthened again by Waiters' RFA status. Examples of this approach are littered everywhere. Value, value, value.

The problem is that value does not play on the basketball court. Trading or using the amnesty provision on Kendrick Perkins before 2014-15 would have been poor value since the return would have been low with a year left on his deal. But it likely would have been the best basketball move to make. We ended up with Enes Kanter because Sam Presti is so averse to making value-poor transactions that may increase on-court performance. Sometimes you just have to do that in the NBA. In June 2013 the Warriors unloaded a bunch of cap ballast and threw away draft picks for the privilege of paying 30 year old Andre Iguodala $48 million. A terrible value proposition, but two years later he's Finals MVP. That trade improved the Warriors; they weren't overly concerned about value.

Sam Presti would have never made a trade like that. He's going to re-sign Enes Kanter because that's the value thing to do right now. Is it the basketball thing to do?

Just quoting to say this is great insight. Similar in a way to Morey and Hinkie. Ultimately asset collection in one way or another. I was hopeful for Waiters but that hope is long gone and he's become my least liked player game wise on the roster. I've yet to see enough of Kanter to feel the same, but could see it getting there. I just wonder if he has any teams willing to trade for him if need be.

But again, great insight (and please do stop by here more, you're a very welcome sight ).

[bondom34]

Also to pile on, 2 more worrisome defensive numbers from 2015 using negative as bad:
PI DRAPM: -1.8 (same as Amare)
NPI: -3.13

[Thunderhead]

I don't buy the non amnesty of Perk as a " value " move , I think Presti's options were limited. Perk was untradeable, who was gonna take on that contract ? Presti moved Perk as soon as possible. As to amnesty, there was nothing to be gained when the amnesty was available. The possible upgrade of the position was so small, it was not worth making the move, especially considering Perks value in the locker room. Which btw, I bet Adams misses Perk and Kanter could use a lot of Perk .

But overall, yes Presti collects assets. That's how he built the team from day one in Seattle. He collected small assets, combined them, and moved them for more value.

Before I write off Kanter as a mistake, I want to see what this coaching staff can do with him. But I'm not optimistic. I don't discount the coaching he got in Utah. I would feel better if Brooks was still in place, he and his coaches are proven at developing players. I got a feeling Donovan is gonna be hip deep in learning, before he can get much involved in defense and specifically , Kanter's development. I'm afraid training camp will be mostly an adjustment by everyone, coaches acclimating to each other and players acclimating to new coaches.

In the exit interviews after this past season, every Thunder player who spoke of defense, spoke in terms of team defense, not man on man on ball defense. And that's what has been in place since Ron Adams was here in 2010. Will that continue ? That would serve Kanter and he would gain from a full training camp in that type of defense.

[Thunderhead]

I think a big issue was Westbrook's "defense" and Roberson's injury. Westbrook was all over the place going for steals, witch left his teammates on an island. Robes was a good enough P&R defender. PnR coverage is a two-way-street - you can't just depend on your big to bail you out, especially if that player's already weak defensively.

I think it will be very interesting , if Donovan continues to start Roberson. Brooks took a ton of heat from fans about starting Roberson and Thabo before him. it became extremely wearisome to hear/read fans complain about starting a non offensive player. I don't know what these fans are gonna say if Donovan starts Roberson. This is one of the things I'm anticipating for the upcoming season.

But I sure would not count on Roberson being on the floor as a way to bail out Kanter's defense.

I know plenty around here who are fans of Robes, I'd be really bummed if he weren't starting. He makes less sense w/ the bench and fits the starters perfectly.

What's his trade value ? Unless he develops a 3P shot over the summer ( which would be a small miracle ), then I would think he's not much in demand. He only really works, on a team with a KD and Russ, where his offense is not needed.

[Old Man Game]

I think it's on Kanter to improve defensively. He's got to want it and commit himself on that end. The issue is I'm afraid he'll be one of those guys who gets his big payday and sort of stops caring altogether.

As far as the change to Billy, head coaches don't really develop players despite the credit we as fans commonly give to them. Desmond Mason was on the radio around the time of the Donovan rumors percolating and said as much. Said NBA players develop in the offseason with their own personal trainers and shooting coaches (I know, I know, the irony). Even KD mentioned this when interviewed at Summer League the other day. Said Billy had actually been on the court working him out some and that was pretty cool to have your head coach doing that (the implication being because it wouldn't ordinarily occur).

[bondom34]

I think it will be very interesting , if Donovan continues to start Roberson. Brooks took a ton of heat from fans about starting Roberson and Thabo before him. it became extremely wearisome to hear/read fans complain about starting a non offensive player. I don't know what these fans are gonna say if Donovan starts Roberson. This is one of the things I'm anticipating for the upcoming season.

But I sure would not count on Roberson being on the floor as a way to bail out Kanter's defense.

I know plenty around here who are fans of Robes, I'd be really bummed if he weren't starting. He makes less sense w/ the bench and fits the starters perfectly.

What's his trade value ? Unless he develops a 3P shot over the summer ( which would be a small miracle ), then I would think he's not much in demand. He only really works, on a team with a KD and Russ, where his offense is not needed.

His value is higher to OKC than any other team, there's plenty of guys out there who fit a specific team better than others. Trade value doesn't say that much about player value.

[Thunderhead]

I think it's on Kanter to improve defensively. He's got to want it and commit himself on that end. The issue is I'm afraid he'll be one of those guys who gets his big payday and sort of stops caring altogether.

As far as the change to Billy, head coaches don't really develop players despite the credit we as fans commonly give to them. Desmond Mason was on the radio around the time of the Donovan rumors percolating and said as much. Said NBA players develop in the offseason with their own personal trainers and shooting coaches (I know, I know, the irony). Even KD mentioned this when interviewed at Summer League the other day. Said Billy had actually been on the court working him out some and that was pretty cool to have your head coach doing that (the implication being because it wouldn't ordinarily occur).

I don't think head coaches develop players. But their coaching staffs do. And their schemes and philosophies can help players develop. Reggie Jackson was terrible as a rookie, I don't think he got to where he's at on his own in the summer. I think the coaching staff worked with him, and he was allowed to play his way to getting better. For him, it was gaining confidence as much as skill improvment.

All due respect to Desmond, but for young players, PT in real games with coaches grading and guidance, is a huge part of development. They can work out on their own, but until they put it on the court in real games, it falls short. Just watch the start of this season, when players try to add what they worked on during the summer in real games. Some times it helps them, some times it does not, some times they keep that as part of their game, and some times not.

And what Kanter needs is a scheme. His on ball , one on one skill , is not nearly as important as just knowing where to be on the court. And being able to recognize the play developing. He won't get that on his own in the summer.

[Thunderhead]

If its all on players to work out on their own and get better, then why do so many role players seem to improve greatly when they are on the Spurs ?