OKC Thunder Offseason 2015

[Bravenewworld]

He can handle like a guard, not a great guard but far better than most players his size.

Dubious. But acceptable. Jones can handle the ball better than most players his size. How useful that is? Up for debate.

Really?
How useful it is to have a big man who can handle the ball well is up for debate? What year are you responding from? 1949 you say? I'd say the "debate" is nonexistent at best.

He has good vision and good passing. Which also indicates a good IQ and feel for the game.

Disagree. This is where I think you start to get married to his college scouting report and disregard his experience as a pro. Perry Jones has AST% lower than 5% in his NBA minutes. In college, it was very low as well. Reminds me of Jeff Green. Passing was an advertised strength of Jeff Green but it never materialized in games. Same with Jones. This is what I call a 'highlights conclusion'. Making a determination about a player from watching highlights. In reality, his vision and passing hasn't produced results.

Except that to ensure i was not applying too much from his NCAA reports, i decided to watch some highlight videos from the past two seasons, a couple video scouting reports from the past two seasons and read a couple scouting reports from the past couple seasons. Just to ensure i remembered the past two seasons correctly.

BTW, you keep mentioning Jeff Green (which is actually a solid comparison)... My response to you was based on the fact that you called him "awful" and basically proclaimed he has no future.

He has great foot work.

To what end? Posting up? Explain this.

Not really posting up, but he is good with his lane work. He does a good job of getting to the rim gracefully or forcefully. If he needs to side step, he will side step. He is quick with the first couple steps, has the double jump, etc.

For his size he has distance shooting. This is something that's hard to teach big men and its natural for him.

Jones is shooting < 30% from three in his NBA career and < 30% from three in his college career. He is also < 30% on shots from 16 to 23 feet. He certainly takes a lot of long distance shots. But I wouldn't call this a skill. Again, 'highlights conclusion'.

He's also < 70% FT shooter which is a strong indicator that he's not good at shooting.

Distance shooting is not a skill?
Distance shooting for a big man is not an uncommon skill to naturally possess? Again, what year are you posting from?

He's raw, he needs steady minutes so he can get some real in game experience. Again, this is a good base to work from and should be able to be expanded on.

70% shooting from the free throw line, for a big man, actually indicates he is a decent shooter. Again... for a big man.
When we look at big men who can shoot the ball, the minority are the one's who shoot above say... 85% or so and they are often going to be labeled as superstars.
Dirk (who even had a year of 73%.... when he was PJ3 age), Bosh (multiple years in the 70s), Boozer who became a jump shooter over the past six or seven years is at a career 72%, Battier shot a career 74%... etc. etc. etc.

What it seems like we are seeing (given all the players i checked out) is big men..... again... big men... who post 70% to say, 80% FT shooting, wont be an amazing jump shooter but jump shooting will play a solid role in their game and be a part of their skill set.

Can generally get to the rim at will. Not like RWB or Wade or anything but like Gwall or even a lesser AI2 w/Philly.

Can you provide basis for this? I didn't see a lot of this in OKC.

Outside of telling you to go to watch his highlight videos or look at his shooting from the paint, no. His time was so limited with OKC but we still saw it and he has seemed to retain this ability over time.
Either way, again, the point is we know this is a solid skill set he has that can be expanded on.

He knows his position and role on a team.

Disagree. And this is the biggest problem with Jones. He's so terrible on the boards and so bad at shooting he can't be a stretch big. He's better playing as a wing or even a guard but then he gets blown by on defense -- does not possess lateral quickness to defend guards.

This is simply not true. One of his greatest abilities on this OKC team has been his defense. He has had no problems switching from guard to forward to center and being effective. Again, this is not only highlighted by me but you can go to the front page where it is mentioned in greater detail.

Im done at this point.

My original response was to you listing things he was bad at or whatever and then proclaiming that he was "awful".
I simply said that "no", he is still young and we know he is an amazing athletic specimen and has some solid skill sets that he should be able to expand on.
Every highlight video, scouting report video and scouting report, highlight area's of his game that he should be able to improve on and that are positive highlights. No one has ever proclaimed he is a star at any of these things or that he is great at any of them, rather he shows good work in many of these area's and definitely has room for improvement. Its as simple as that.
He is a short term project with a fairly visible ceiling but is worth attempting to develop if a team can give him that time.
You can choose to dismiss these things however you want, but its silly to say he is "awful" and suggest that he has no future. Again even if we look at his worst case scenario, he should still be able to maintain a career as a defensive back up man.... which i dont know what to say if i have to explain that value for a team.

People who evaluate players and a players skill and potential, just don't agree with your assessment and in none of your points did you give us anything backed through... anything, its rather just how you feel. They have all taken a look at this mans skill set and physical attributes and determined that he should be able to evolve if given the right minutes and is in the right situation. Again, this is not to say he is great in these aspects, but its clear everyone can see these positive aspects of his game and physical abilities that given his age, should be able to be built on. Whether or not this happens is entirely subjective. Personally, i think it will for the above stated reasons of his defense and how that will always keep him in a rotation. If you want to think otherwise, that is fine. But you cant argue that this man does not have a valid set of basketball skills he could possibly build on.

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/238765/The-Second-Chances-Of-Perry-Jones-Jeremy-Lamb
http://hoopshabit.com/2014/08/24/oklahoma-city-thunder-giving-perry-jones/
http://www.welcometoloudcity.com/2014/10/10/6938857/preseason-andre-roberson-jeremy-lamb-perry-jones
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2523363-boston-celtics-gambling-on-perry-jones-talent-with-no-risk-trade
http://www.scout.com/nba/celtics/story/1563596-celtics-acquire-perry-jones-from-okc
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/perry-jones-oklahoma-city-thunder-savior/

[slick_watts]

Really?
How useful it is to have a big man who can handle the ball well is up for debate? What year are you responding from? 1949 you say? I'd say the "debate" is nonexistent at best.

Sure. Handling the ball is only as useful as what you're going to do with the ball afterwards. Jones is measurably poor at shooting off the dribble, he hasn't displayed any useful proficiency at creating shots for others in either college or the pro level. Contrast to someone like Kevin Durant, who is adept at both of these things, and the idea that there are degrees of usefulness to handling the ball is clear.

Except that to ensure i was not applying too much from his NCAA reports, i decided to watch some highlight videos from the past two seasons, a couple video scouting reports from the past two seasons and read a couple scouting reports from the past couple seasons. Just to ensure i remembered the past two seasons correctly.

I note the word 'highlight videos'. Danger, Will Robinson. Highlights make anyone look good. That's kind of the purpose.

Can you link us to the video scouting reports, please? It doesn't serve to further the discussion if you keep that to yourself. I'd be interested in watching.

BTW, you keep mentioning Jeff Green (which is actually a solid comparison)... My response to you was based on the fact that you called him "awful" and basically proclaimed he has no future.

I'd be surprised if he had a productive future as anything much better than a 9th or 10th man off the bench. He has genuinely been awful in his NBA minutes and is already 23 years old.

Not really posting up, but he is good with his lane work. He does a good job of getting to the rim gracefully or forcefully. If he needs to side step, he will side step. He is quick with the first couple steps, has the double jump, etc.

Okay.

Distance shooting is not a skill?
Distance shooting for a big man is not an uncommon skill to naturally possess? Again, what year are you posting from?

You misunderstood me. Shooting is a skill. Jones hasn't shown he is good at it. But, he's not shy about taking shots. I guess he's skilled at taking jump shots. But not making them.

He's raw, he needs steady minutes so he can get some real in game experience. Again, this is a good base to work from and should be able to be expanded on.

< 30% 3pt shooting is a good base to work from for a shooter? Isn't the point of shooting to make them? What is the 'good base to work from' that you speak of?

70% shooting from the free throw line, for a big man,

Whoa, whoa, whoa. We are calling Perry Jones a big man, now? When did this happen? Jones can't defend bigs, he's atrocious on the defensive boards, and most of the defensive success you keep harping on about occurred when he was playing on the wing. He even started at SG for us last year for 10 games or so. Calling Perry Jones a big man would be like calling Danilo Gallinari a big man, or Kyle Singler.

But the bigger issue here is your continued insistence of categorizing players and their performance in the vaguest, imprecise, terms. Your argument here, and below, is hung on the shaky premise that Jones is a 'big man'. The argument is meaningless if you do not define what that is. Jones wouldn't fit into any criteria for being a 'big man' that I've seen, save his height.
.

Dirk (who even had a year of 73%.... when he was PJ3 age)

Dirk only shot below 80% from the line once. His rookie season, when he shot 77%.

Bosh (multiple years in the 70s)

Bosh shot below 75% once in his career, his rookie season. His career percentage is 80%. By Jones' age, he was 79% career.

Boozer who became a jump shooter over the past six or seven years is at a career 72%

I don't think anyone would characterize Carlos Boozer as a 'distance shooter'. And are we really comparing Perry Jones to Carlos Boozer...?

Battier shot a career 74%... etc. etc. etc.

Well, you're 1/4 on accuracy I guess. Unfortunately, Battier is the exception to the rule. You'll generally find a direct correlation between FT shooting and 3PT shooting. It doesn't mean there are not exceptions to this. Fortunately, we have a much more accurate barometer for Perry Jones' three point shooting -- the fact that he's not good at it.

Outside of telling you to go to watch his highlight videos or look at his shooting from the paint, no. His time was so limited with OKC but we still saw it and he has seemed to retain this ability over time.
Either way, again, the point is we know this is a solid skill set he has that can be expanded on.

I have no interest in highlights. But you did mention a scouting video. I'd be interested in that for sure. Please post.

Im done at this point.

And yet, two long paragraphs follow. I think what you meant to say was -- "I'm done sticking to the discussion because I want to tap dance some more".

My original response was to you listing things he was bad at or whatever and then proclaiming that he was "awful".
I simply said that "no", he is still young and we know he is an amazing athletic specimen and has some solid skill sets that he should be able to expand on.

And we're discussing them. That's what people do! You seem extraordinarily uncomfortable defending any of your positions.

Every highlight video, scouting report video and scouting report, highlight area's of his game that he should be able to improve on and that are positive highlights. No one has ever proclaimed he is a star at any of these things or that he is great at any of them, rather he shows good work in many of these area's and definitely has room for improvement. Its as simple as that.
He is a short term project with a fairly visible ceiling but is worth attempting to develop if a team can give him that time.
You can choose to dismiss these things however you want, but its silly to say he is "awful" and suggest that he has no future. Again even if we look at his worst case scenario, he should still be able to maintain a career as a defensive back up man.... which i dont know what to say if i have to explain that value for a team.

People who evaluate players and a players skill and potential, just don't agree with your assessment and in none of your points did you give us anything backed through... anything, its rather just how you feel. They have all taken a look at this mans skill set and physical attributes and determined that he should be able to evolve if given the right minutes and is in the right situation. Again, this is not to say he is great in these aspects, but its clear everyone can see these positive aspects of his game and physical abilities that given his age, should be able to be built on. Whether or not this happens is entirely subjective. Personally, i think it will for the above stated reasons of his defense and how that will always keep him in a rotation. If you want to think otherwise, that is fine. But you cant argue that this man does not have a valid set of basketball skills he could possibly build on.

Two long paragraphs with no substance at all.

http://basketball.realgm.com/analysis/238765/The-Second-Chances-Of-Perry-Jones-Jeremy-Lamb
http://hoopshabit.com/2014/08/24/oklahoma-city-thunder-giving-perry-jones/
http://www.welcometoloudcity.com/2014/10/10/6938857/preseason-andre-roberson-jeremy-lamb-perry-jones
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2523363-boston-celtics-gambling-on-perry-jones-talent-with-no-risk-trade
http://www.scout.com/nba/celtics/story/1563596-celtics-acquire-perry-jones-from-okc
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/perry-jones-oklahoma-city-thunder-savior/

Whoa, actual information. I will post my findings and rebuttal.

[bondom34]

PJ did make a good highlight video.

And this is going about as expected.

[bondom34]

I always liked him, but now I may love Barkley forever.

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/17/charles-barkley-on-kevin-durant-i-hope-he-stays-in-okc/

[spearsy23]

Did i once compare him to James Harden? No. I compared the role he would take to the a similar role as Harden on OKC. If you cant distinguish a difference, then dont talk basketball.... go to the Barbie forum and talk about Barbie dolls.... something you should be able to grasp the complexities of.

The worst things we can say about Waiters are the things we would say about most every third year offensive minded player. Ceiling and talent wise, this guy will most likely give us a Harden back.

Waiters potential is scary. The highest ceiling this guy has, really is similar to Westbrook and Harden. Even if he does not get a jump shot down (which im sure he will), he could have a very similar driving mentality. But he's also very strong, so i guess maybe more like a SG Ron Artest.

You certainly have, and these are just the two I could find quickly.

Certain aspects of his game, yes, he is very similar to him.

In that they're both athletic? That's about the end of the similarities, well that and shooting, but Wallace was a better shooter even though he wasn't particularly good at it.

Again, PJ was injured pretty much the entire time KD was out.
The second time KD was injured, Brooks had already created a new rotation and wanted to give the new players playing time and the franchise had seemingly given up on PJ, Lamb and Reggie was already gone.

So when Lamb is cut from the rotation it is due to his failings, PJ is just 'eh, Brooks decided to go in a different direction.'?

The year before last he played 64 games (short time injured)and averaged over 12 mpg. Which is exactly what we would expect.... i guess that's not considered playing time though. Apparently he should have been splitting minutes with KD or... what exactly? We cant evaluate him?

He was in and out of the lineup constantly, and we ended up signing Caron Butler because Lamb and PJ both sucked.

You do realize that you really just described GWalls career right?
Of course the "bad defender" is simply wrong on your part and no one would suggest this except you.

Slick has posted the stats, players shoot better from every single area with PJ guarding them. He's 6'10 and gets abused in the post, he's slightly better against wings but still bad.

Lets see though...... bad shooter... check. (PJ actually better than GWall)

You realize there are actually sites to check these things out right? PJ is a worse shooter.

High Defense.... check.

See above.

Disappear for months at a time... check. This had less to do with PJ and more to do with a set rotation that his development does not fit into. With GWall, he simply vanished time and time and time again.

Wallace "in his hey-day" never vanished. He was constantly doing the little things that helps teams win. You didn't compare PJ to 'a bad Gerald Wallace.'

Rebounding? Humm.... Lets see what GWall did with 12mpg....2.7 rebounds. First 30mpg season? 5RPG. Huh.. oh, he really didnt become an elite rebounder until year 9 and then it quickly dropped back down to the 6 or so we would expect. Which, is most likely exactly what PJ would be doing with 30mpg.

Wallace had a reb% of 12 during that 2.7 per game year, PJ was 5.5. And again "GWall in his hey-day'"

These are two very comparable players with very similar builds and skill sets. This is not to suggest that PJ is capable of the best years of GWalls career

That's literally what you suggested...

Again, you don't seem to grasp that we are comparing skill sets that could potentially lead to similar production.

You compared PJ to an all-star, do you not expect people to call you out on BS like that? Then you back-track and say 'well I meant that they could do some things kinda alike.' Seriously dude, you do this all the time. "Dion will give us a Harden" "Well I didn't say Dion could be Harden, just that he could be our sixth man." I will continue to tell you why comparisons like that are wrong until you aren't making them. If you said "PJ could still end up developing into a productive player. He has the physical tools to be good defensively, and could be useful as a stretch four if he learns to shoot." I wouldn't take issue with that. Instead you make these wildly inaccurate comparisons then act like we should revere you as an authority figure when you're challenged on them. We've taken multiple player comparisons to different forums and the overwhelming response has been that you're wrong, Slick is telling you you're wrong, almost everyone is telling you why you're wrong, but your response is 'well, I know basketball better than you guys.' If you would back your arguments up instead of just stating your opinion as fact this wouldn't be a problem, but you don't. You just say I'm right, you're wrong.

[Bravenewworld]

Sure. Handling the ball is only as useful as what you're going to do with the ball afterwards. Jones is measurably poor at shooting off the dribble, he hasn't displayed any useful proficiency at creating shots for others in either college or the pro level. Contrast to someone like Kevin Durant, who is adept at both of these things, and the idea that there are degrees of usefulness to handling the ball is clear.

Well. Im glad you cleared that up.
I guess the fact that GMs and coaches generally apply this as massive positive for big men is just generally wrong.
I was under the impression that good ball handling helped players with almost every aspect of their game and was useful and very important every single second they had the ball in their position...... i guess not though.

I note the word 'highlight videos'. Danger, Will Robinson. Highlights make anyone look good. That's kind of the purpose.

And again, i mentioned highlight videos, scouting videos and scouting reports... "That's kind of the purpose". I attempted to make you aware that it was not highlight video's that was being relied on.

But even if it was simply highlight videos you seem to be misunderstanding what you can see in them.
Despite a highlight video only showing the best of a player for a game (usually) you can still watch to see if they say... have a consistent release point.
Or if say, they seem to favor driving to the left for a quick pop shot.
You clearly wont be able to gauge production or whatever you seem to be thinking its suggesting. Again, all you're looking for is common and/or repeated things.

I provided a bunch of links down low to articles from major outlets providing low to scouting evaluations of him.
If you want video scouting reports simply youtube it and look for evaluations with OKC or Boston. Basketball....Analysis (the young black kid) i think is the name of one. Sadly there is not more detailed one's except his college scouting video's, but those provide solid information as well. I simply left them out because you'd just try to dismiss them. Why? I really don't know. All that is being shown is the base skill sets we know he can build on. No one has attempted to show that he is great at any of this or is.. ii have no idea.. this is getting tedious.

BTW, you keep mentioning Jeff Green (which is actually a solid comparison)... My response to you was based on the fact that you called him "awful" and basically proclaimed he has no future.

I'd be surprised if he had a productive future as anything much better than a 9th or 10th man off the bench. He has genuinely been awful in his NBA minutes and is already 23 years old.

Already 23? Oh no! I guess we can chalk him up as a loss... its not like until the late 90's, a 23 year old was more often than not, often a second year player. Come on, this does not indicate anything and after next year you better get used to far more second year 23 year olds (the 2 year rule will be implemented).

The biggest problem he faced on OKC, be it for whatever reason, has been minute consistency.
Its very hard for players to develop when they are faced with inconsistent minutes.
With PJ he has always been stuck behind KD. A guy who would often get 35 minutes at the 3 and OKC would often go small, putting KD at the four and then bringing a guard in for the 3.
At the four, another position he can play, Ibaka was there along with Collison who earned his minutes years ago and then again, small ball KD at the 4.

I sympathize with the guy for being in that situation.
Players don't often develop when in a situation like that. Consistency and regularity, especially for younger players, is the name of the game and is possibly the most important thing in their development and role.
Given his situation i think his numbers are that much more impressive. When the guy had the chance to really show us what he can do, he never really let us down. Unless of course, you had unrealistic expectations of a 21/22 year old (at the time) who spent 1 year in college and half his NBA career injured.

Not really posting up, but he is good with his lane work. He does a good job of getting to the rim gracefully or forcefully. If he needs to side step, he will side step. He is quick with the first couple steps, has the double jump, etc.

Okay.

You misunderstood me. Shooting is a skill. Jones hasn't shown he is good at it. But, he's not shy about taking shots. I guess he's skilled at taking jump shots. But not making them.

I didnt misunderstand you, this is why i highlighted the whole "big man" thing.
Again, no one is suggesting he is a great jump shooter. Rather given his size and what we've seen from him, its very reasonable to assume he can build upon where he is at.
He has shown very clearly that for his size, his distance shooting is a clear and positive skill.
Last season we saw...
10-16 feet he shot 54%.
23% from the 3 (basically 1 for 4, which is not good for a guard but for someone 6'11+ its good and easy to suggest he could quickly bring that to 35%.

This is a very clear display of skill.
And again, the only thing being suggested here is that this is something he can build on. We know its not fantastic numbers for someone who is expected to be a franchise player or star and is 8 years in the league. But there is a solid chance that player started off with similar numbers where we saw poor shooting in instances, but skill set was displayed.

< 30% 3pt shooting is a good base to work from for a shooter? Isn't the point of shooting to make them? What is the 'good base to work from' that you speak of?

Yes.
Again, for a 6'11 player who is 2 years in the league, this is a great starting point for a developing team to work with. This is an uncommon trait we see with players this big.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. We are calling Perry Jones a big man, now? When did this happen? Jones can't defend bigs, he's atrocious on the defensive boards, and most of the defensive success you keep harping on about occurred when he was playing on the wing. He even started at SG for us last year for 10 games or so. Calling Perry Jones a big man would be like calling Danilo Gallinari a big man, or Kyle Singler.

1. Jones is a 6'11 tweener.... has he ever been anything else? He can even play the center position. You don't want that to be long term, but he can easily play it.
And no, calling him a big man is not like calling Singler or Gallinari a big man (although you seem to ignore the fact that Gallinari spent more time at the PF then the SF position with Denver before his injury) Its like calling Perry Jones a big man. Again, hes 6'11 235 pounds.... that's a big man who is athletic enough to play the 3.
At this point i dont think you're being serious. He has always been a tweener. Be it at Baylor or with OKC. And as a tweener you are either a 2/3 (more guard attributes) or a 3/4 (more big attributes). Did i suggest a center? Maybe you should attempt to use actual data or some kind of credible information or sources to dispute the things i said instead of coming up with something as pathetic as this.

2. I hate to break this to you, but the number of defensive rebounds does not indicate a players ability to defend bigs. This has nothing to do with their ability to keep someone from driving, out of the post, from getting the ball, their ball stopping ability, charges, etc.

3. The defensive success i was referencing was him defending the 2,3 and 4. He stopped every player he spent any kind of long term minutes defending. Its not just "the wing", but even if it was you seem to be missing the demonstrated value of defense. And why this is surprising or escaping you i have no idea. Presti only tends to draft high defense guys. If there is one thing all of them have in common, its the high effort and ability on defense. PJ3 proved that he was no exception to this and everyone knows this.

But the bigger issue here is your continued insistence of categorizing players and their performance in the vaguest, imprecise, terms. Your argument here, and below, is hung on the shaky premise that Jones is a 'big man'. The argument is meaningless if you do not define what that is. Jones wouldn't fit into any criteria for being a 'big man' that I've seen, save his height.

Are you even trying to pay attention?
At what point has anything i said been reliant on a single term?
When i went over all the individual skills he possess is that vague to you? Is that what you consider vague? Great detail is vague to you?
Did i once say "big man" and then leave everything at that?
Yah.... im not taking you serious at this point.
You are either intentionally ignoring the massive amount of detailed information ive given you, or you're trolling.

Whoa, actual information. I will post my findings and rebuttal.

.... You mean the thing you have never provided in this entire conversation or in an attempt to counter anything ive said or any point youve brought up? Ive mentioned these sources before. What i would like to see some kind of information or source on is where you get the nonsense of say... ball handling not being extremely valuable to an NBA player.

Anyway... i skipped to that part when i deleted the rest.
Ive had this post half written in a side tab while i went to do other things.... including falling asleep for couple hours... anyway im not going to edit this right now . Maybe later i will go over a few more "points" but at this point i really feel that you're just being a being a troll.

[Marcus50]

https://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-enes-kanter-contract-and-okcs-gamble-in-the-year-of-kd/

Ouch. A brutal assessment of the Kanter signing

[Pillendreher]

For one thing, this contract makes it official: Thunder management was burned so badly by not wanting to pay the luxury tax to keep James Harden (four years, $60 million) that they were shamed into paying Kanter $70 million.

This is where I stopped reading. I don't like the signing, but I don't believe that assumption one bit. The Harden signing has absolutely nothing to do with Kanter. Just stop.

[bondom34]

https://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-enes-kanter-contract-and-okcs-gamble-in-the-year-of-kd/

Ouch. A brutal assessment of the Kanter signing

He's a Wizards fan, and not a basketball analyst. You honestly could have asked a fan on the forums to write an article and gotten smarter analysis. Sharp isn't a sports analyst, he's basically a comedian who talks basketball.

[Soonerule]

https://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-enes-kanter-contract-and-okcs-gamble-in-the-year-of-kd/

Ouch. A brutal assessment of the Kanter signing

cheap or stupid? or how about cheap and stupid?

ouch is right. we'll see...

[Soonerule]

https://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-enes-kanter-contract-and-okcs-gamble-in-the-year-of-kd/

Ouch. A brutal assessment of the Kanter signing

He's a Wizards fan, and not a basketball analyst. You honestly could have asked a fan on the forums to write an article and gotten smarter analysis. Sharp isn't a sports analyst, he's basically a comedian who talks basketball.

he definitely made it clear he was not speaking from an unbiased position.... Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo bad, lol

[bondom34]

https://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-enes-kanter-contract-and-okcs-gamble-in-the-year-of-kd/

Ouch. A brutal assessment of the Kanter signing

cheap or stupid? or how about cheap and stupid?

ouch is right. we'll see...

I'll add this to give optimism. Look at GSW, and basically their whole lineup improved in RPM from last year to this. Reason? New roles. Reason for roles? Coach. Give Donovan a shot before we write off the players. It may bomb, but its all in now.

Edit: And actually still don't get the "cheap" stuff.

And what the hell's going on on WTLC with that weird Pistons fan?

[Marcus50]

The cheap stuff refers to the Harden deal and that okc were forced to prove to KD that they were prepared to pay to recruit. Personally I feel the whole KD would go if Kanter wasn't signed is crap. KD will either do the Tim. Duncan thing and stay with a franchise for his career or he will go to Washington. I doubt he will do a nothing other than those 2 options and it wond necessarily be a decision based on money because he is going to get a max offer from everyone

[bondom34]

The cheap stuff refers to the Harden deal and that okc were forced to prove to KD that they were prepared to pay to recruit. Personally I feel the whole KD would go if Kanter wasn't signed is crap. KD will either do the Tim. Duncan thing and stay with a franchise for his career or he will go to Washington. I doubt he will do a nothing other than those 2 options and it wond necessarily be a decision based on money because he is going to get a max offer from everyone

I know, which shows 2 things:
1. He doesn't really know the Harden situation.
2. He's biased.

Sharp isn't really an analyst.

[Marcus50]

If Serge gets injured next season does that mean Kanter is injured too?

[bondom34]

Huh?

[Soonerule]

https://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-enes-kanter-contract-and-okcs-gamble-in-the-year-of-kd/

Ouch. A brutal assessment of the Kanter signing

cheap or stupid? or how about cheap and stupid?

ouch is right. we'll see...

I'll add this to give optimism. Look at GSW, and basically their whole lineup improved in RPM from last year to this. Reason? New roles. Reason for roles? Coach. Give Donovan a shot before we write off the players. It may bomb, but its all in now.

Edit: And actually still don't get the "cheap" stuff.

And what the hell's going on on WTLC with that weird Pistons fan?

You mean the guy that is bound and determined to give KD the nickname "Blackbird"?

[legit_savage]

Wassup guys, I'll be posting here from now on. I'm also a Heat fan so please don't judge, but there are way too many ***holes on that board.

[bondom34]

cheap or stupid? or how about cheap and stupid?

ouch is right. we'll see...

I'll add this to give optimism. Look at GSW, and basically their whole lineup improved in RPM from last year to this. Reason? New roles. Reason for roles? Coach. Give Donovan a shot before we write off the players. It may bomb, but its all in now.

Edit: And actually still don't get the "cheap" stuff.

And what the hell's going on on WTLC with that weird Pistons fan?

You mean the guy that is bound and determined to give KD the nickname "Blackbird"?

Yep....I believe its "The Black Bird" though, because he's like Larry Bird....except he's not .

[bondom34]

Wassup guys, I'll be posting here from now on. I'm also a Heat fan so please don't judge, but there are way too many ***holes on that board.

No prob, anyone's welcome to post around here . Bummer to hear about the other forum though, a couple Heat guys drop by here, they're pretty cool from my experiences.