OKC Thunder Offseason 2015

[slick_watts]

I wonder how many here are old enough to catch this reference:

It's 7:25 pm, Sam Presti, do you know where your free agents are?

The Thunder may still match Portland's offer, but it is becoming apparent it was not the done deal we were led to believe.....

I don't think the delay means much. It's customary to wait as long as possible to stick it to the other team. Portland has the money tied up for as long as the offer sheet remains on the table. Even if Sam Presti knows what he is going to do, there's no reason to do it now.

[Bravenewworld]

Rondo rode the coat tails of 3 guys, Smith was the same player as always but playing clearly the wrong position, and D Will basically quit. Kanter has a chance to be very good, but an equal chance to blow up in the face of whoever signs him.

Your rhetoric is showing, might wanna zip that up.

Rondo was easily a top 5 PG in the league before the Celtics tanked and i suspect he will have no issues getting back to that position.

DWill was mostly a product of Jerry Sloan. That situation actually made me wonder what would have happened if Stockton went to a different team. I wonder how inflated Stocktons stats were due to Jerrys system.

Kanter skill wise, there is no question to his abilities on offense at least. Defensively he will improve, but even if he does not we have a defensive system that can mask his inability. He seemed to simply want to be appreciated. This "equal chance of blowing up in the face" is laughable hyperbole. Its comedic and on par with freaking out about Mayan prophecies 2012.

[slick_watts]

Kanter skill wise, there is no question to his abilities on offense at least.

Sure there are. Kanter set career highs in ~800 minute sample in OKC on TS%, ORB%, AST%, etc. I'd say it's very open to debate whether or not Kanter's productivity for the Thunder is representative of his true abilities -- as he has not reproduced them at any other point in his career. 'No question' is a strong statement for such a small representation of Kanter's career output.

Defensively he will improve

This is an extraordinary claim that requires evidence to support. Kanter's defense, statistically, is extremely poor -- and as far as I've seen there's a lot of precedent for similar players remaining poor defenders their entire careers. Only scant precedent for similar players becoming better defenders later in their careers (Z. Randolph, A. Jefferson, etc.). Zero precedent for similar players becoming better defensive players this early in their careers. Maybe I've missed something. Do you have any evidence to share?

but even if he does not we have a defensive system that can mask his inability. He seemed to simply want to be appreciated.

This is anecdotal support for your claims. To have any merit we require examples. Please share with us examples of a system masking the inability of as poor a defensive big man as Enes Kanter. I know of some, but I'd be interested in your examples.

Secondly, let us know how many times a team has won a championship masking the defensive deficiencies of such a player.

I await your response.

[Bravenewworld]

Well, if -1.4 net per 100 possessions is your definition of a good pairing then so be it.

I wish you would get it through your head that i dont care about silly nit picked advanced statistics.
I saw a duo that was capable of defending together, could still preform where needed and could be a good situation combo.
But hey, those couple stats you wanna bring up .... man... i should question my whole understanding of the game!

You can call it cocky or whatever you want, but im confident that my understanding of basketball is far superior to probably most, not all but most. And stupid things like that, i just don't give a **** about. It does nothing to counter my "eye evaluation".

[slick_watts]

I wish you would get it through your head that i dont care about silly nit picked advanced statistics.
I saw a duo that was capable of defending together, could still preform where needed and could be a good situation combo.
But hey, those couple stats you wanna bring up .... man... i should question my whole understanding of the game!

Point differential is as close as you can come to finding a data point for winning and losing as you can get. If your eye test told you one team played better basketball than the other team -- but the other team won by 20 -- would you consider the losing team superior anyway? Because your 'eye test' said so?

In my experience, it's impossible for one person to observe everything that is occurring on the court. Discarding data because it doesn't fit the necessarily limited perception of your senses is foolish.

[slick_watts]

Rondo was easily a top 5 PG in the league before the Celtics tanked and i suspect he will have no issues getting back to that position.

Rajon Rondo is 29 years old and has missed more than half his games the last three seasons due to injury. I'd give you excellent odds on a bet that Rondo will return to the form he had during his prime in Boston.

DWill was mostly a product of Jerry Sloan. That situation actually made me wonder what would have happened if Stockton went to a different team. I wonder how inflated Stocktons stats were due to Jerrys system.

Deron Williams' best season statistically may have been 2012-13 with Brooklyn. Career high in OBPM, tied career high in individual ORTG, career high RAPM. One thing I would agree on for Williams re: Jerry Sloan is that his assist totals were definitely tied into Sloan's system. Maybe the same for John Stockton as well.

[bbms]

So, slick, whats your general opinion on the Kanter addition to this franchise? Do you find it fair to say that Kanter's addition decreases the chances of Thunder winning a title, straight up?

In my eyes, Kanter has been a polarizing player that has made positive Impact offensively and on the boards, while making negative impact on defense. That is common sense, but seeing Westbrook's development on offense with Kanter in front of him something to weight in, when it comes to his value to this franchise?

I can see pretty well your point of view regarding Kanter, but I'm afraid even of the final verdict on Kanter is that he's overall negative to our chances of winning, I'm afraid we'll have to take the gamble on him, his willingness to stay with the Thunder, and his room for development in OKC under new coaching. Mainly because of free agency issues regarding Durant and the fact that the only moments in the past season where the Thunder actually looked back to being a team capable of constantly beating top level of competition was after his trade.

To the point I tend to believe in whatever Presti and Donovan's decisions regarding Kanter. We can all bet these two are not ignorant to every argument using here, and I don't buy them deciding without a plan, and I bet these two are on the same page regarding the Kanter situation.

Too bad Portland is trying to take away a lot of our leverage here.


Enviado do meu iPhone usando o RealGM Forums

[slick_watts]

So, slick, whats your general opinion on the Kanter addition to this franchise? Do you find it fair to say that Kanter's addition decreases the chances of Thunder winning a title, straight up?

If the plan is to keep Kanter and start him, then I think it decreases our chances of winning a title in the short run barring some unprecedented turnaround in Kanter's defensive impact. I don't think we come out of the West with a 10th ranked defense or worse, and if Kanter is playing at his current level defensively and getting starter's minutes I think it's unrealistic that defense could perform that well.

If he comes off the bench in a 20-25 minute role? There are intriguing lineup combinations there that he may be able to improve.

In my eyes, Kanter has been a polarizing player that has made positive Impact offensively and on the boards, while making negative impact on defense. That is common sense, but seeing Westbrook's development on offense with Kanter in front of him something to weight in, when it comes to his value to this franchise?

I'm not ready to claim how positive Kanter's impact is offensively. We've had elite offenses with Westbrook-Durant-Ibaka combinations before, 113+ ORTG (would be #1 in the league). And that's with Perkins and Thabo and Roberson floating in and out of those lineups. Kanter set several career highs here in his 800 minutes and it remains to be seen how he can keep those up. But there's no denying his negative impact on defense, which is supported by his four years of play under multiple coaches, many lineup combinations, and different systems.

I can see pretty well your point of view regarding Kanter, but I'm afraid even of the final verdict on Kanter is that he's overall negative to our chances of winning, I'm afraid we'll have to take the gamble on him, his willingness to stay with the Thunder, and his room for development in OKC under new coaching. Mainly because of free agency issues regarding Durant and the fact that the only moments in the past season where the Thunder actually looked back to being a team capable of constantly beating top level of competition was after his trade.

That's the only way it could make sense; if Kevin Durant staying in OKC is riding on Enes Kanter being retained. I don't think it's the end of the world to let him go, because I think the team will be elite and contend, and likely make WCF or better without Kanter. But I can see how some people could think the opposite and believe Durant would see it as an affront. Either way, we have no way of knowing, so it's kind of a lame talking point.

To the point I tend to believe in whatever Presti and Donovan's decisions regarding Kanter. We can all bet these two are not ignorant to every argument using here, and I don't buy them deciding without a plan, and I bet these two are on the same page regarding the Kanter situation.

I think Presti is surprised Kanter signed an offer sheet. I don't think this scenario was part of his plan whatsoever. Matching an offer sheet is pretty much the worst case scenario for us since it imposes additional trade restrictions for one year if we do -- and we can't get value out of Kanter in a sign and trade anymore if we don't. Presti's valuation of players is another talk entirely. The trade for Dion Waiters makes me question what he values, exactly. Kanter may fit into his vision for what he wants to develop -- high upside players with high draft pedigree. And keeping him is now the best value since s&t is impossible. If we do keep him, I would hope that Presti has some sense on his deficiencies. I won't just assume that, though, since keeping him could also be interpreted as asset optimization. Presti's been known to optimize assets at the cost of basketball performance in the past.

[bbms]

Isn't the fact that, ever since Kanter came into the NBA, he played with lots of defensive set ups, systems, coaching, actually detrimental to Kanter's development as a defensive player?

I think the main problem with Portland's offer sheet is that this takes away all of Thunder's strenght in the resigning, which puts us in the weird spot of either letting go off him, or taking him without any guarantees on his commitment to keep developing.

Waiter's situation was flat out weird with reasonable high cost. Only thing that actually gives some sense to this situation is that if he panned out, Thunder would have another combo guard to handle the scoring in the second unit a lá Jackson and Harden, which clearly failed. I don't think high pick pedigree factor much in here.


Enviado do meu iPhone usando o RealGM Forums

[slick_watts]

Isn't the fact that, ever since Kanter came into the NBA, he played with lots of defensive set ups, systems, coaching, actually detrimental to Kanter's development as a defensive player?

I think the main problem with Portland's offer sheet is that this takes away all of Thunder's strenght in the resigning, which puts us in the weird spot of either letting go off him, or taking him without any guarantees on his commitment to keep developing.

I don't know if it's been detrimental to him. If it has, he has been uniquely affected, since Derrick Favors, Trevor Booker, and Rudy Gobert have had no issues performing. Kanter came here and it was more of the same -- every big on our roster's worst defensive pairing was with Kanter.

I'm not saying it's impossible he improves. I'm saying that for it to happen sooner rather than later seems unprecedented for a big man with his negative defensive impact.

And I agree. The offer sheet sucks. The fact that Kanter did not come back to OKC to negotiate with Presti the same terms says a lot about what he and his agent value. It's why I'm unmoved by the thought that Kanter will turn over a new leaf any time soon.

[Bravenewworld]

You're missing the point of comparative analysis. The point of referencing Kanter's minutes on the Jazz is not to prove a point, but to supplement the data we have for his time in OKC. The fact that the Jazz showed similar issues with Enes Kanter that the Thunder did strengthens both sets of data.

I dont think i missed any points made or any "analysis".
I put "analysis" in quotations because you cant really provide an accurate or even beginning to be accurate, statistical analysis that reflects on next season, based on 20 games, with a roster that was new, and a quarter of a roster that was injured and then of course, the addition of a new coach next season.
What exactly is so hard to understand about the fact that the data gathered in that time span, is not going to be reflective of what would occur next season? Just one of those factors is enough to suggest a significant difference. But something like the injury issue, will guarantee a significant data differences.

As for the Jazz thing, i dont understand what people think they can take away from that whole thing.
You're talking about two teams that could not be further from one another and then trying to highlight a Jazz team that goes from worst defense to best defense for a 20 game stretch and then an OKC team that slightly drops in def. efficiency for that same 20 games.... any points of comparison for any kind of team suggestion or team statistical points or whatever, are miles apart.

Example: Russell Westbrook was an MVP candidate last year so he should have a good season next year.
Argument: Billy Donovan is the coach now, in a different system. Kevin Durant is healthy. The teammates are different. Westbrook is a year older. What does Westbrook's MVP caliber season last year have to do with this year?

Not quite.
I was going to fix it but, eh, just read above.

I'm wary of people like you in arguments who toss data aside willy-nilly. There's plenty of data available on Kanter and his defense and it's practically all in agreement on the same conclusion. If you have some data or non-reductive thoughts to share that call this conclusion into question I'm sure everyone would love to hear it.

No one is actually presenting any viable data for OKC are they?
The only "data" we see brought up are nit picked single instances of advanced statistics and its the same two or three examples every time.

No one is arguing that Kanter is not a bad defender. Again, i dont know why i have to keep mentioning this... its almost as if people are not paying attention.
The point being made, as stated again, is having a bad defender at one position is not going to destroy our overall defense. Will our defense be as good as it possibly could? No. But that as a team, a slightly worse defense is the trade off we have to make in order to land a low post center that will keep our offense flowing instead of it becoming stagnant. Which again, is the cause for at least half of our lost games over the past few seasons. Excluding the disaster that was last season.

[Soonerule]

Well, if -1.4 net per 100 possessions is your definition of a good pairing then so be it.

I wish you would get it through your head that i dont care about silly nit picked advanced statistics.
I saw a duo that was capable of defending together, could still preform where needed and could be a good situation combo.
But hey, those couple stats you wanna bring up .... man... i should question my whole understanding of the game!

You can call it cocky or whatever you want, but im confident that my understanding of basketball is far superior to probably most, not all but most. And stupid things like that, i just don't give a **** about. It does nothing to counter my "eye evaluation".

That's it? A self proclaimed superior knowledge and "eye evaluation"..... wow .... ok .... I guess that about covers it. Don't worry, I get it.

[Soonerule]

I wonder how many here are old enough to catch this reference:

It's 7:25 pm, Sam Presti, do you know where your free agents are?

The Thunder may still match Portland's offer, but it is becoming apparent it was not the done deal we were led to believe.....

I don't think the delay means much. It's customary to wait as long as possible to stick it to the other team. Portland has the money tied up for as long as the offer sheet remains on the table. Even if Sam Presti knows what he is going to do, there's no reason to do it now.

yeh, it's just wishful thinking.... plenty of that going around..

[Soonerule]

On the subject of Kanter improving his defense:

...His fundamentals, instincts and positioning leave a lot to be desired. He can often be found standing straight up in the paint with his arms down, putting in little to no effort. He rarely boxes out his opponent and generally looks disinterested in anything that has to do with defense. He rarely bends his knees and often fails to get back in transition--doing very little to protect the paint when he does.

Who said it and when?

[slick_watts]

I dont think i missed any points made or any "analysis".
I put "analysis" in quotations because you cant really provide an accurate or even beginning to be accurate, statistical analysis that reflects on next season, based on 20 games, with a roster that was new, and a quarter of a roster that was injured and then of course, the addition of a new coach next season.

Sure you can. You can apply analysis to any data. 800 minutes is about 20% of Enes Kanter's career to date. Enough to be some representation of his abilities, but also small enough to apply some uncertainty to the conclusions. That's where comparative analysis is useful. We have more data from Kanter's time in Utah. Data that corroborates fairly well, at least on the defensive side of the ball, with what we saw. This strengthens both sets of data.

What exactly is so hard to understand about the fact that the data gathered in that time span, is not going to be reflective of what would occur next season? Just one of those factors is enough to suggest a significant difference. But something like the injury issue, will guarantee a significant data differences.

The best predictor for the future is the past. The data is not perfect, but it's all we have. The data is also in strong consensus.

As for the Jazz thing, i dont understand what people think they can take away from that whole thing.
You're talking about two teams that could not be further from one another and then trying to highlight a Jazz team that goes from worst defense to best defense for a 20 game stretch and then an OKC team that slightly drops in def. efficiency for that same 20 games.... any points of comparison for any kind of team suggestion or team statistical points or whatever, are miles apart.

We can analyze lineup data and find compelling arguments. Kanter had trouble forming productive defensive pairings in Utah just like he did here. But Derrick Favors had no issue performing in good defensive lineups without Kanter present (or Gobert). Trevor Booker and Favors was good defensively. Kanter and Favors was not. Ibaka and Kanter was poor defensively. Ibaka and just about any other big we have was good.

This is a simplification of what we can do, but the final conclusion is that Enes Kanter has had issues across multiple teams, coaches, and philosophies co-existing in strong defensive lineups with bigs that otherwise performed well defensively with other players. This is comparative analysis.

No one is actually presenting any viable data for OKC are they?
The only "data" we see brought up are nit picked single instances of advanced statistics and its the same two or three examples every time.

See my posts earlier regarding Kanter's performance on OKC. It's not nitpicking when every data point is in agreement my friend. I think you're the one nitpicking.

The point being made, as stated again, is having a bad defender at one position is not going to destroy our overall defense. Will our defense be as good as it possibly could? No. But that as a team, a slightly worse defense is the trade off we have to make in order to land a low post center that will keep our offense flowing instead of it becoming stagnant. Which again, is the cause for at least half of our lost games over the past few seasons. Excluding the disaster that was last season.

Please provide examples of defenses covering up for big men as poor as Kanter is defensively. You're making many claims that this will happen on the Thunder, but have provided no evidence or precedent to support them.

Regarding the claim that we need a low post center for our offense, please address the fact that Westbrook-Durant-Ibaka lineup combinations have put up 113+ points per 100 possessions the last three seasons. A figure that would be #1 in the league. Explain why that group requires Kanter's presence at the likely cost of defensive efficiency. I'll wait.

[Bravenewworld]

Well, if -1.4 net per 100 possessions is your definition of a good pairing then so be it.

I wish you would get it through your head that i dont care about silly nit picked advanced statistics.
I saw a duo that was capable of defending together, could still preform where needed and could be a good situation combo.
But hey, those couple stats you wanna bring up .... man... i should question my whole understanding of the game!

You can call it cocky or whatever you want, but im confident that my understanding of basketball is far superior to probably most, not all but most. And stupid things like that, i just don't give a **** about. It does nothing to counter my "eye evaluation".

That's it? A self proclaimed superior knowledge and "eye evaluation"..... wow .... ok .... I guess that about covers it. Don't worry, I get it.

Hey, it is what it is.
You can like it, you can dislike it, i dont care.
I know what to look for in basketball and at the end of the day it turns out the people being paid millions to make these decisions and evaluate the advanced statics, numbers and potential for a team or player, coincide with my own evaluation. Of course this is not coincidence or happenstance, its due to 30 years of basketball experience and a long term relationship with a hall of fame coach. Like i said, it just is what it is and whether you like it or not it does not matter.

[Soonerule]

I wish you would get it through your head that i dont care about silly nit picked advanced statistics.
I saw a duo that was capable of defending together, could still preform where needed and could be a good situation combo.
But hey, those couple stats you wanna bring up .... man... i should question my whole understanding of the game!

You can call it cocky or whatever you want, but im confident that my understanding of basketball is far superior to probably most, not all but most. And stupid things like that, i just don't give a **** about. It does nothing to counter my "eye evaluation".

That's it? A self proclaimed superior knowledge and "eye evaluation"..... wow .... ok .... I guess that about covers it. Don't worry, I get it.

Hey, it is what it is.
You can like it, you can dislike it, i dont care.
I know what to look for in basketball and at the end of the day it turns out the people being paid millions to make these decisions and evaluate the advanced statics, numbers and potential for a team or player, coincide with my own evaluation. Of course this is not coincidence or happenstance, its due to 30 years of basketball experience and a long term relationship with a hall of fame coach. Like i said, it just is what it is and whether you like it or not it does not matter.

What part of "I get it" was unclear?

[Bravenewworld]

Please provide examples of defenses covering up for big men as poor as Kanter is defensively. You're making many claims that this will happen on the Thunder, but have provided no evidence or precedent to support them.

Go back a couple pages.

Regarding the claim that we need a low post center for our offense, please address the fact that Westbrook-Durant-Ibaka lineup combinations have put up 113+ points per 100 possessions the last three seasons. A figure that would be #1 in the league. Explain why that group requires Kanter's presence at the likely cost of defensive efficiency. I'll wait.

Its not necessarily a low post option we need. We just need a high percentage and high producing scorer who can step in when our offense gets stagnant.
Again, how many times have we lost games because of this? Or better yet, how often do we see OKC down in the first quarter and having to play catch up? With Kanter we can easily avoid these situations for the most part.
You can try to spin it however you want, but it still remains an issue that we have always been faced with. The only time that was really not true or far less of an issue, was Harden in third year. Again, when Ibaka was that fourth option.

Forgive me for not runing though your entire post, im kind of tired of typing and for the most part i seem to be answering questions or issues i already did. And i'd rather not spend the rest of my boring Friday night typing long drawn out responses.

[bondom34]

On the subject of Kanter improving his defense:

...His fundamentals, instincts and positioning leave a lot to be desired. He can often be found standing straight up in the paint with his arms down, putting in little to no effort. He rarely boxes out his opponent and generally looks disinterested in anything that has to do with defense. He rarely bends his knees and often fails to get back in transition--doing very little to protect the paint when he does.

Who said it and when?

Oh oh oh,I know! Dx 2011.

[bondom34]

Well, if -1.4 net per 100 possessions is your definition of a good pairing then so be it.

I wish you would get it through your head that i dont care about silly nit picked advanced statistics.
I saw a duo that was capable of defending together, could still preform where needed and could be a good situation combo.
But hey, those couple stats you wanna bring up .... man... i should question my whole understanding of the game!

You can call it cocky or whatever you want, but im confident that my understanding of basketball is far superior to probably most, not all but most. And stupid things like that, i just don't give a **** about. It does nothing to counter my "eye evaluation".

That's it? A self proclaimed superior knowledge and "eye evaluation"..... wow .... ok .... I guess that about covers it. Don't worry, I get it.

And FYI, this is how it always ends up.