Oklahoma City early offseason in review (HW/bondom34/dbrandon/Slava)

[DreDay]

Whether Durant leaving was the fault or not of OKC management, facts are that OKC entered the offseason an incredibly good team set to compete for the next 5 or so titles, and left in a bit of a lurch as a mid to lower tier playoff team. Whether it could be predicted or not, it happened and the team fortunes shifted dramatically. It's not OKC management in review, but OKC offseason in review, and with that in mind I give it an F. Not saying OKC management did anything wrong, but the question isn't about them but about the offseason and you lose years of contention and a top 5 player.

[bondom34]

Whether Durant leaving was the fault or not of OKC management, facts are that OKC entered the offseason an incredibly good team set to compete for the next 5 or so titles, and left in a bit of a lurch as a mid to lower tier playoff team. Whether it could be predicted or not, it happened and the team fortunes shifted dramatically. It's not OKC management in review, but OKC offseason in review, and with that in mind I give it an F. Not saying OKC management did anything wrong, but the question isn't about them but about the offseason and you lose years of contention and a top 5 player.

The entire point is grading the management...

[DreDay]

Whether Durant leaving was the fault or not of OKC management, facts are that OKC entered the offseason an incredibly good team set to compete for the next 5 or so titles, and left in a bit of a lurch as a mid to lower tier playoff team. Whether it could be predicted or not, it happened and the team fortunes shifted dramatically. It's not OKC management in review, but OKC offseason in review, and with that in mind I give it an F. Not saying OKC management did anything wrong, but the question isn't about them but about the offseason and you lose years of contention and a top 5 player.

The entire point is grading the management...

Thread is OKC early offseason in review, not OKC management in review.

[bondom34]

Whether Durant leaving was the fault or not of OKC management, facts are that OKC entered the offseason an incredibly good team set to compete for the next 5 or so titles, and left in a bit of a lurch as a mid to lower tier playoff team. Whether it could be predicted or not, it happened and the team fortunes shifted dramatically. It's not OKC management in review, but OKC offseason in review, and with that in mind I give it an F. Not saying OKC management did anything wrong, but the question isn't about them but about the offseason and you lose years of contention and a top 5 player.

The entire point is grading the management...

Thread is OKC early offseason in review, not OKC management in review.

And its about what the management did in the offseason. I mean, if you want just what they did, you can look it up on any site. The thread was analysis of how the offseason was performed by the front office.

[DreDay]

The entire point is grading the management...

Thread is OKC early offseason in review, not OKC management in review.

And its about what the management did in the offseason. I mean, if you want just what they did, you can look it up on any site. The thread was analysis of how the offseason was performed by the front office.

Well yeah we can look what they did on any site, but this thread seems to be discussing how we rate what happened, not how it was handled. That's just how I interpreted this thread.

[bondom34]

Thread is OKC early offseason in review, not OKC management in review.

And its about what the management did in the offseason. I mean, if you want just what they did, you can look it up on any site. The thread was analysis of how the offseason was performed by the front office.

Well yeah we can look what they did on any site, but this thread seems to be discussing how we rate what happened, not how it was handled. That's just how I interpreted this thread.

They're rating what the front office did, yes.

[DreDay]

And its about what the management did in the offseason. I mean, if you want just what they did, you can look it up on any site. The thread was analysis of how the offseason was performed by the front office.

Well yeah we can look what they did on any site, but this thread seems to be discussing how we rate what happened, not how it was handled. That's just how I interpreted this thread.

They're rating what the front office did, yes.

And I'm rating what actually happened. A championship contender for the next 5 years heading into the offseason, a 2nd round contender now. That's an F in my book in a thread titled offseason in review. Agree to disagree.

[spearsy23]

Win prediction: 48

[Old Man Game]

Well yeah we can look what they did on any site, but this thread seems to be discussing how we rate what happened, not how it was handled. That's just how I interpreted this thread.

They're rating what the front office did, yes.

And I'm rating what actually happened. A championship contender for the next 5 years heading into the offseason, a 2nd round contender now. That's an F in my book in a thread titled offseason in review. Agree to disagree.

If Durant HAD re-upped with OKC but then blown out his knee in the Olympics and been out for the season would that also have resulted in a lower grade of the Thunder's offseason in your view? Just curious. By the standard you've set forth they would have entered the offseason a title contender and come out of it a middle of the pack type also ran team.

[Trader_Joe]

There is no right or wrong way to grade a team's off-season as long as you are clear how you are looking at it IMO.

That said, if you want to look at what OKC management had in their control since their season ended, one could argue they had a good off-season. at the same time if you think their trade of Ibaka influenced Duran't decision or impacted the team negatively overall, maybe you did not think they did. Or perhaps you think there where other moves they could have made to keep Durant.

Also, some may say what they had control over is not based on a single point in time, rather a culmination of moves and efforts. The fact that a top 3 player left a contender is a rather harsh reality and can be viewed as something that they did have plenty of influence over leading up to the actual decision by KD. Or perhaps you think they had no influence over the matter and KD was going to leave no matter what.

Overall, I for one do have to have to penalize them for losing one of their own FAs. Most top FAs stay with their teams (especially contenders) if for no other reason than money and familiarity and I do wonder if there were moves they could have made or moves they shouldn't have made. As good as the value of the Ibaka trade was, Ibaka was still part of their core and fit a very important role for that team. I think his demise was over-stated and their breaking up of the starting 5 by not only moving him but adding a ball dominant, non-shooter in Oladipo and and inferior PF to the mix was understated.

[bwgood77]

There is no right or wrong way to grade a team's off-season as long as you are clear how you are looking at it IMO.

That said, if you want to look at what OKC management had in their control since their season ended, one could argue they had a good off-season. at the same time if you think their trade of Ibaka influenced Duran't decision or impacted the team negatively overall, maybe you did not think they did. Or perhaps you think there where other moves they could have made to keep Durant.

Also, some may say what they had control over is not based on a single point in time, rather a culmination of moves and efforts. The fact that a top 3 player left a contender is a rather harsh reality and can be viewed as something that they did have plenty of influence over leading up to the actual decision by KD. Or perhaps you think they had no influence over the matter and KD was going to leave no matter what.

Overall, I for one do have to have to penalize them for losing one of their own FAs. Most top FAs stay with their teams (especially contenders) if for no other reason than money and familiarity and I do wonder if there were moves they could have made or moves they shouldn't have made. As good as the value of the Ibaka trade was, Ibaka was still part of their core and fit a very important role for that team. I think his demise was over-stated and their breaking up of the starting 5 by not only moving him but adding a ball dominant, non-shooter in Oladipo and and inferior PF to the mix was understated.

I agree. I don't think it matters what people grade them on as long as they give their reasoning. I was grading the offseason. How OKC's offseason impacted the team, fans, their chances, etc. If the thread was titled "What do you grade the team's FO?" or "What do you grade how the FO handled the offseason?" I would have given them a B. I think Presti is still one of the best in the business regardless of what some think of his past moves. I expect them to stay relevant and in the mix despite all that.

[bondom34]

Well yeah we can look what they did on any site, but this thread seems to be discussing how we rate what happened, not how it was handled. That's just how I interpreted this thread.

They're rating what the front office did, yes.

And I'm rating what actually happened. A championship contender for the next 5 years heading into the offseason, a 2nd round contender now. That's an F in my book in a thread titled offseason in review. Agree to disagree.

Fair enough. It is a totally uninformed and uninspired way to analyze things, and if golden state has one injury I will remember to fail them as well. You are more than welcome to start up your own series if you'd like to write this up for everything, though I know you won't. Your intent was clear enough.

[Trader_Joe]

They're rating what the front office did, yes.

And I'm rating what actually happened. A championship contender for the next 5 years heading into the offseason, a 2nd round contender now. That's an F in my book in a thread titled offseason in review. Agree to disagree.

Fair enough. It is a totally uninformed and uninspired way to analyze things, and if golden state has one injury I will remember to fail them as well. You are more than welcome to start up your own series if you'd like to write this up for everything, though I know you won't. Your intent was clear enough.

Bondom, I feel you're being a bit unfair to him. He explained the angle he's taking and why.

As for an injury, that is very subjective
a. An injury to Shaun Livingston isn't the same as one to Curry, just like losing Dion Waiters isn't the same as losing Durant.

b. An injury is completely out of one's control, while player movement is often very dependent on what a front office is doing as has done.

c. But even if a poster explicit says I'm taking into account injuries as judging their off-season (not judging their management/performance, rather simply the circumstance) it is their right to.

I feel like if this wasn't an OKC off-season review and he wasn't an GSW fan, you guys wouldn't be having this discussion so I'll stop there.

[HartfordWhalers]

Yeah, put me down as someone that thinks both types of reviews are worthwhile.

[Slava]

Its good to have each reviewer approach their grade from a different stand point. I base my reviews strictly on improvement from last season to next season and roster planning and balance for the next season only.

Otherwise each review would be a replicate of the other adjusting for standard error.

[HartfordWhalers]

Its good to have each reviewer approach their grade from a different stand point. I base my reviews strictly on improvement from last season to next season and roster planning and balance for the next season only.

Otherwise each review would be a replicate of the other adjusting for standard error.

There is nothing standard about some of our errors!

[DocRI]

There is no right or wrong way to grade a team's off-season as long as you are clear how you are looking at it IMO.

That said, if you want to look at what OKC management had in their control since their season ended, one could argue they had a good off-season. at the same time if you think their trade of Ibaka influenced Duran't decision or impacted the team negatively overall, maybe you did not think they did. Or perhaps you think there where other moves they could have made to keep Durant.

Also, some may say what they had control over is not based on a single point in time, rather a culmination of moves and efforts. The fact that a top 3 player left a contender is a rather harsh reality and can be viewed as something that they did have plenty of influence over leading up to the actual decision by KD. Or perhaps you think they had no influence over the matter and KD was going to leave no matter what.

Overall, I for one do have to have to penalize them for losing one of their own FAs. Most top FAs stay with their teams (especially contenders) if for no other reason than money and familiarity and I do wonder if there were moves they could have made or moves they shouldn't have made. As good as the value of the Ibaka trade was, Ibaka was still part of their core and fit a very important role for that team. I think his demise was over-stated and their breaking up of the starting 5 by not only moving him but adding a ball dominant, non-shooter in Oladipo and and inferior PF to the mix was understated.

Yeah, put me down as someone that thinks both types of reviews are worthwhile.

I can't "+1" these two posts enough.

But I'd like to add two words to the first line of Joe's post — I'd humbly suggest, "as long as you are clear AND CONSISTENT how you are looking at it." As such, to his credit, I'd like to commend HW on this point — although I've vastly disagreed with him a few times in these threads (and even debated him about it regarding the Heat), he has been absolutely 100% consistent in grading "process over results" for each team. Which is great, 'cuz you can always count on him to fairly present that side of the coin.

As for me, call me a wishy-washy-waffle, but I try to balance both process and results 'cuz I don't think the two can ever be fully separated, at least not in the big picture. Take Utah — I gave them an "A-", and that's 'cuz I'm trying to be conservative in how I vote. I absolutely loved their offseason, and as such I expect them to improve in the standings and make the playoffs (i.e. the process EQUALS results). But, barring injuries, what if they don't? What if George Hill has peaked and struggles? What if they should've just cut out Indy and traded their pick straight up for Teague? As a franchise, the Jazz are at a point IN THE PROCESS where they should be seeing IMPROVED RESULTS. If Hill bombs and the Jazz miss the playoffs again, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong about their offseason and I'll argue against anyone who defends that they "did the right thing." No, they wouldn't have; they were clearly trying to win more games and they would've failed in that objective. On that same note, I panned the Lakers' offseason (I think I gave them a D) and I'll be the first of many to eat crow if Mozgov and Deng help lead them to a playoff berth. One process I loved and one process I hated, but that's because I'm trying to judge each team by where they currently are and I'm speculating what's going to come next.

[HartfordWhalers]

I like to be commended.

[Texas Chuck]

I like to be commended.

I can verify this.

[DreDay]

They're rating what the front office did, yes.

And I'm rating what actually happened. A championship contender for the next 5 years heading into the offseason, a 2nd round contender now. That's an F in my book in a thread titled offseason in review. Agree to disagree.

Fair enough. It is a totally uninformed and uninspired way to analyze things, and if golden state has one injury I will remember to fail them as well. You are more than welcome to start up your own series if you'd like to write this up for everything, though I know you won't. Your intent was clear enough.

I expect better than a mod accusing me of trolling when I explained my reasoning. And yes, if a warrior like Curry gets injured for the year it's a terrible offseason in my book. I'm certainly not going to get all pissy that you failed them. Try not to take my opinion so personally.