Should the Thunder start their rebuild now?

[TMoney99]

The OKC Thunder are in a tough situation of sorts, they have 1 true superstar MVP and then a bunch of high end role players and athletic wings/guards.

Right now as it stands the Thunder are capped out at as 1st or 2nd round exit every year and even then if we make the WCF somehow we would get creamed by the Warriors.

So the question stands, should the Thunder begin their inevitable rebuild by trading Westbrook now or hold off?

Reasons to rebuild now
- We could get a HUGE haul of assets from teams like the Celtics/Nuggets/Lakers
- Allowing Westbrook to free himself and play for a contending team like the Celtics
- Not falling into the same mistakes we made with J.Harden and the serpent by letting them walk or trading them for a bag of chips in their last contract year

Possible trades

Trade #1
Out: Westbrook, Gibson, Kanter
In: Pick #3 2017 draft, 18 BKN pick, Jae Crowder, Kelly O, Mid-Late 1st rounder

Why OKC: We kickstart the rebuild by trading our superstar along with some bad contracts for 2 top 5 picks, a good 2 way SF, and a late first which can be used to find a diamond in the rough late in the draft

Why BOS: Boston finally gets their superstar who can be used to lure in free agents such as, Gordon Hayward and Paul George to create a team to challenge the W's, while keeping their middle tier picks from LAC and MEM

Possible starting 5 OKC:
Pg. De'aaron Fox
Sg. Oladipo/Luke Kennard
Sf. Jae Crowder
Pf. Michael Porter Jr. (18 draft pick
C. Adams

Possible starting 5 BOS:
Pg. Westbrook (assuming IT is traded)
Sg. AB
Sf. Gordon Hayward or PG13
Pf. Taj
C. Al Horford

Trade #2
Out: Westbrook, Singler, Gibson
In: Jamal Murray, Wilson Chandler, Malik Beasley, Pick #13 2017 draft, 18 DEN Pick
Why OKC: Again, kickstart the rebuild with 2 young scoring guards with loads of potential, and a savvy veteran presence who can start or come off the bench in Wilson Chandler, we also get the 13th pick in this years draft and their 2018 pick.

Why DEN: Denver gets a superstar to pair with Nikola Jokic and Gallanari in hopes of making a deep playoff run

Possible starting 5 OKC:
Pg. Jamal Murray/Malik Beasley
Sg. Oladipo
Sf. Wilson Chandler
Pf. Wendall Carter or Miles Bridges
C. Adams

Possible starting 5 DEN:
Pg. Westbrook
Sg. Will Barton
Sf. Gallo
Pf. Faried
C. Jokic

Trade #3
Out: Westbrook, Singler, Kanter
In: Brandon Ingram, Clarkson, 2nd pick

Why OKC: OKC gets BI here to replace the hole KD left and also get a young shooting guard who can start or play behind Oladipo, along with this years 2nd pick (Lonzo Ball, Josh Jackson)

Why LAL: LA gets their hometown superstar who can be used to intrigue PG13 even more and build a potential superteam right there in LA

Possible starting 5 OKC:
Pg. Ball
Sg. Oladipo
Sf. Ingram
Pf. Sabonis
C. Adams
6 Man: Clarkson

Possible LAL starting 5:
Pg. Russ West
Sg. D'lo
Sf. Paul George
Pf.Julius Randle
C. Zublocka


Reasons no to rebuild
- Westbrook and Co. put butts in seats and OKC would go through a dark age if we traded him, fans and owner would not like it
- Westbrook and the Thunder could keep trying and possibly break through and win a title (Ex.2011 Mavs)
- We could possibly pair up another star with Westbrook to contend such as, Blake griffin, Paul George or Jimmy Butler
- We need to stay loyal to Westbrook since he stayed loyal to us
- We don't get enough from these trades and need to ride this out

So which is it? To rebuild or not to rebuild?

[ThunderBolt]

I think okc should rebuild, most do not. I think that Presti is going to do everything to keep Russ because the NBA is a business. Russ sells tickets and get okc on tv. If you can't compete for a title, that's the next best thing.

Trade 1- i don't really want crowder. I would rather have Jaylen Brown. Crowder will need a payday soon and that doesn't fit the time frame with a rebuild.

Trade 2- having your young core set and getting allstar horny is a classic mistake. Denver has a good start and should probably stay where they are at now.

Trade 3- LA needs to do better than that. Ingram and number 2 are where that trade starts. I don't think Presti would really like Deangelo because he seems very immature. Also he sucked as a pg.

[spearsy23]

No.

[Kizz Fastfists]

OKC should rebuild. They should have started the process last off-season. If they use what few assets they have to dump Kanter and Singler so they can keep Taj and Roberson they are still more likely to miss the playoffs next year than make them. They were one of the healthiest teams in the NBA this year and had the same point differential as Denver. If they do not waste what few assets they have to dump Kanter and Singler they lose Roberson and Taj and they definitely miss the playoffs next year.

If OKC misses the playoffs with Russ on the roster ticket sales drop and nationally televised games decrease. Fans realize how hopeless the situation is. Right now some are still burying their heads in the sand and not accepting where OKC is. If OKC rebuilds, assuming they move Russ for a top 5 pick, they keep hope by giving fans a new young talent along with, most likely, more high picks next year. Fans embrace the new faces of the franchise and hope Presti can continue to dominate the top of the draft. Even if there is a minor drop off in attendance from a rebuild it will be less of a drop then if the team misses the playoffs with Russ. Fans will always rally behind a young team with a chance to improve more than they will a declining team that has no chance at the playoffs.

[TMoney99]

I think okc should rebuild, most do not. I think that Presti is going to do everything to keep Russ because the NBA is a business. Russ sells tickets and get okc on tv. If you can't compete for a title, that's the next best thing.

Trade 1- i don't really want crowder. I would rather have Jaylen Brown. Crowder will need a payday soon and that doesn't fit the time frame with a rebuild.

Trade 2- having your young core set and getting allstar horny is a classic mistake. Denver has a good start and should probably stay where they are at now.

Trade 3- LA needs to do better than that. Ingram and number 2 are where that trade starts. I don't think Presti would really like Deangelo because he seems very immature. Also he sucked as a pg.

Yeah, you're right changed it to BI instead of D'lo

[bondom34]

Nope.

[spearsy23]

If OKC misses the playoffs with Russ on the roster ticket sales drop and nationally televised games decrease. Fans realize how hopeless the situation is. Right now some are still burying their heads in the sand and not accepting where OKC is. If OKC rebuilds, assuming they move Russ for a top 5 pick, they keep hope by giving fans a new young talent along with, most likely, more high picks next year. Fans embrace the new faces of the franchise and hope Presti can continue to dominate the top of the draft. Even if there is a minor drop off in attendance from a rebuild it will be less of a drop then if the team misses the playoffs with Russ. Fans will always rally behind a young team with a chance to improve more than they will a declining team that has no chance at the playoffs.

Yeah, reality doesn't agree with this assessment. If I remember correctly rebuilding teams generally do pretty poorly in attendance until the year after they make the playoffs. Just looking at this year, the Lakers were the only team in the top half of the league that went into the year not looking to make the playoffs.

[Andre Roberstan]

If OKC misses the playoffs with Russ on the roster ticket sales drop and nationally televised games decrease. Fans realize how hopeless the situation is. Right now some are still burying their heads in the sand and not accepting where OKC is. If OKC rebuilds, assuming they move Russ for a top 5 pick, they keep hope by giving fans a new young talent along with, most likely, more high picks next year. Fans embrace the new faces of the franchise and hope Presti can continue to dominate the top of the draft. Even if there is a minor drop off in attendance from a rebuild it will be less of a drop then if the team misses the playoffs with Russ. Fans will always rally behind a young team with a chance to improve more than they will a declining team that has no chance at the playoffs.

Yeah, reality doesn't agree with this assessment. If I remember correctly rebuilding teams generally do pretty poorly in attendance until the year after they make the playoffs. Just looking at this year, the Lakers were the only team in the top half of the league that went into the year not looking to make the playoffs.

How many small market teams deliberately tank?

[Dadouv47]

I think okc should rebuild, most do not. I think that Presti is going to do everything to keep Russ because the NBA is a business. Russ sells tickets and get okc on tv. If you can't compete for a title, that's the next best thing.

Trade 1- i don't really want crowder. I would rather have Jaylen Brown. Crowder will need a payday soon and that doesn't fit the time frame with a rebuild.

Trade 2- having your young core set and getting allstar horny is a classic mistake. Denver has a good start and should probably stay where they are at now.

Trade 3- LA needs to do better than that. Ingram and number 2 are where that trade starts. I don't think Presti would really like Deangelo because he seems very immature. Also he sucked as a pg.

That's exactly the reason why we should keep Russ and not rebuild. Russ has millions of fans and being relevant while watching Westbrook greatness will allow OKC to have more fans (or keep their current fans) for a few years, winning money and hoping to improve our team for the next decade.
Of course I'm saying this if Westbrook is planning to stay. If he's not, it's better to trade him and tank even if it's heartbreaking

[spearsy23]

If OKC misses the playoffs with Russ on the roster ticket sales drop and nationally televised games decrease. Fans realize how hopeless the situation is. Right now some are still burying their heads in the sand and not accepting where OKC is. If OKC rebuilds, assuming they move Russ for a top 5 pick, they keep hope by giving fans a new young talent along with, most likely, more high picks next year. Fans embrace the new faces of the franchise and hope Presti can continue to dominate the top of the draft. Even if there is a minor drop off in attendance from a rebuild it will be less of a drop then if the team misses the playoffs with Russ. Fans will always rally behind a young team with a chance to improve more than they will a declining team that has no chance at the playoffs.

Yeah, reality doesn't agree with this assessment. If I remember correctly rebuilding teams generally do pretty poorly in attendance until the year after they make the playoffs. Just looking at this year, the Lakers were the only team in the top half of the league that went into the year not looking to make the playoffs.

How many small market teams deliberately tank?

That's a good question, I don't think any of them believe they could go through a sustained tank on the level of Philly. The magic went/are going through a multi year tank, Sacramento is beginning theirs, and we had ours, outside of that I don't think it's happened in recent history.

[Pillendreher]

Sacramento is beginning theirs

When did they stop tanking?

[bondom34]

Sacramento is beginning theirs

When did they stop tanking?

2006

[kdthunderup]

I'm only ok with this if Russel is ok with it.

[Thundershock88]

Nope. Rather ride or die with what we have. Rather be 1 superstar away from being a contender, than having no superstar. This team is fixable, we just need to move a few bad contracts. We can't have all of that money tied up in big men.

[ThunderBolt]

Nope. Rather ride or die with what we have. Rather be 1 superstar away from being a contender, than having no superstar. This team is fixable, we just need to move a few bad contracts. We can't have all of that money tied up in big men.

We're not one superstar away. We need a minimum of three. Golden State has four all stars.

[slick_watts]

of course they should. nothing they can do to improve the team in the next 1-2 years will realistically propel them to contention. they have several pieces that could probably be swapped for attractive long term assets (westbrook, adams maybe, oladipo maybe). the whole thing should be torn down and rebuilt the same way the decent thunder teams were built in the first place. is that a guaranteed path to contention? nope. but it's a better path than the one we'd otherwise be on.

some people's priorities have winning a championship below other things. those people won't agree with this idea. not because we have a better shot at winning a title by staying the course (this is an absurd position), but because they don't want to root for a tanking team.

[spearsy23]

not because we have a better shot at winning a title by staying the course (this is an absurd position), but because they don't want to root for a tanking team.

I'm fine rooting for a tanking team. In fact it would be a lot less stressful. I don't want to tear it down because
A) Prolonged tanking doesn't (or rarely) work.
B) winning championships isn't the only way to be successful.
C) it's not the best course of strategy for the team financially.
D) I believe competition is at the heart of the game. How is anyone going to fault cupcake for tucking tail and running to join golden state then advocating for giving up because we can't beat them?

[slick_watts]

not because we have a better shot at winning a title by staying the course (this is an absurd position), but because they don't want to root for a tanking team.

I'm fine rooting for a tanking team. In fact it would be a lot less stressful. I don't want to tear it down because
A) Prolonged tanking doesn't (or rarely) work.
B) winning championships isn't the only way to be successful.
C) it's not the best course of strategy for the team financially.
D) I believe competition is at the heart of the game. How is anyone going to fault cupcake for tucking tail and running to join golden state then advocating for giving up because we can't beat them?

i don't care about B or C or D. you obviously do. i want the teams i follow to win championships. other stuff matters but to a lesser extent. if the team isn't contending or building towards contention i don't think there's even a point for it to exist. but that may be a difference of opinion. i couldn't give a crap about the team's finances.

what isn't a difference of opinion- and correct me if you think i'm off base here- is that the odds of winning a title in the foreseeable future are lower if we stay the course with RW vs. tanking for long term contention when the warriors are over the hill. i don't see the argument the other way. both scenarios are probably low odds to contend. tanking odds are better. especially given the team's history.

[spearsy23]

not because we have a better shot at winning a title by staying the course (this is an absurd position), but because they don't want to root for a tanking team.

I'm fine rooting for a tanking team. In fact it would be a lot less stressful. I don't want to tear it down because
A) Prolonged tanking doesn't (or rarely) work.
B) winning championships isn't the only way to be successful.
C) it's not the best course of strategy for the team financially.
D) I believe competition is at the heart of the game. How is anyone going to fault cupcake for tucking tail and running to join golden state then advocating for giving up because we can't beat them?

i don't care about B or C or D. you obviously do. i want the teams i follow to win championships. other stuff matters but to a lesser extent. if the team isn't contending or building towards contention i don't think there's even a point for it to exist. but that may be a difference of opinion. i couldn't give a crap about the team's finances.

what isn't a difference of opinion- and correct me if you think i'm off base here- is that the odds of winning a title in the foreseeable future are lower if we stay the course with RW vs. tanking for long term contention when the warriors are over the hill. i don't see the argument the other way. both scenarios are probably low odds to contend. tanking odds are better. especially given the team's history.

That depends on your definition of foreseeable future. I think the best (and only, to be frank) chance we have at winning in what I'd consider the foreseeable future is if Russ stays and cupcake comes back in 2 years when gsw can't afford to keep everyone. And by best chance I mean like less than 2 percent. Otherwise i think we're looking at a minimum of 10 years.

[ThunderBolt]

not because we have a better shot at winning a title by staying the course (this is an absurd position), but because they don't want to root for a tanking team.

I'm fine rooting for a tanking team. In fact it would be a lot less stressful. I don't want to tear it down because
A) Prolonged tanking doesn't (or rarely) work.
B) winning championships isn't the only way to be successful.
C) it's not the best course of strategy for the team financially.
D) I believe competition is at the heart of the game. How is anyone going to fault cupcake for tucking tail and running to join golden state then advocating for giving up because we can't beat them?

I don't think it would be prolonged tanking. If Presti dealt the right guys appropriately, we could potential he have our core in place by Thursday night.
Tanking involves deibrately trying to lose. Our picks in the future would be 2018 Brooklyn and maybe LA. Our record wouldn't matter and with a core in place we would try to win from day one.