OKC is a disgrace

[HeartBreakKid]

No point in tanking anyways unless there is a consensus international guy available in the top 4. Hasn't it become obvious that if you draft a consensus top 4 guy who is home grown you are probably never going to see him in your uniform through the peek of his prime.
He'll be somewhere else by then.

The only guys who stick around with their incumbent franchise are international guys or guys who were drafted later as they are actually grateful for being drafted there and being invested in.

Are any of the top guys actually going to give OKC much of a chance? They got the same agents as the rest of the NBA telling them stuff like how they wasted having 3 mvp's on the roster or didn't have a strong enough culture to trade the guy they should have (Westbrook).

If your small market you have to bide your time, have quality scouts and then draft guys like Lillard, Mitchell, Butler, Curry who weren't consensus top prospects coming into the draft and are therefore more positive towards the team that used a pick on them, saw something in them that others hadn't and weren't just drafted there because if was the obvious decision.

Young might last in Atlanta just because they traded Luka for him.

I dont really know if OKC is the best example? I mean Durant left yeah - but

Westbrook - he re-signed. He was traded

Harden - he was traded, he didn't really leave because OKC is a small market

George - he actually re-signed to everyone's surprise (it was assumed he would be a Laker after a one year stop in OKC). Westbrook's decline is what pushed him to continue his journey to LA.

CP3 - OKC traded him


In OKC's short history they've had a lot of franchise players but only one of them chose not to re-sign with them. George was the only one who really forced a trade and it was after he played for them an extra year then he was expected to (basically if Westbrook's prime had stayed in tact he probably would not have left).

[Monky15]

No point in tanking anyways unless there is a consensus international guy available in the top 4. Hasn't it become obvious that if you draft a consensus top 4 guy who is home grown you are probably never going to see him in your uniform through the peek of his prime.
He'll be somewhere else by then.

The only guys who stick around with their incumbent franchise are international guys or guys who were drafted later as they are actually grateful for being drafted there and being invested in.

Are any of the top guys actually going to give OKC much of a chance? They got the same agents as the rest of the NBA telling them stuff like how they wasted having 3 mvp's on the roster or didn't have a strong enough culture to trade the guy they should have (Westbrook).

If your small market you have to bide your time, have quality scouts and then draft guys like Lillard, Mitchell, Butler, Curry who weren't consensus top prospects coming into the draft and are therefore more positive towards the team that used a pick on them, saw something in them that others hadn't and weren't just drafted there because if was the obvious decision.

Young might last in Atlanta just because they traded Luka for him.

I dont really know if OKC is the best example? I mean Durant left yeah - but

Westbrook - he re-signed. He was traded

Harden - he was traded, he didn't really leave because OKC is a small market

George - he actually re-signed to everyone's surprise (it was assumed he would be a Laker after a one year stop in OKC). Westbrook's decline is what pushed him to continue his journey to LA.

CP3 - OKC traded him


In OKC's short history they've had a lot of franchise players but only one of them chose not to re-sign with them. George was the only one who really forced a trade and it was after he played for them an extra year then he was expected to (basically if Westbrook's prime had stayed in tact he probably would not have left).

My point was more that they had really good guys buy in and they still couldn't win and when they decided they had to move one of them for cheap reasons they picked the wrong guy to move (Harden v Westbrook maybe because it would be an easier sell to the fans as opposed to the best move for winning).

[Big J]

No point in tanking anyways unless there is a consensus international guy available in the top 4. Hasn't it become obvious that if you draft a consensus top 4 guy who is home grown you are probably never going to see him in your uniform through the peek of his prime.
He'll be somewhere else by then.

The only guys who stick around with their incumbent franchise are international guys or guys who were drafted later as they are actually grateful for being drafted there and being invested in.

Are any of the top guys actually going to give OKC much of a chance? They got the same agents as the rest of the NBA telling them stuff like how they wasted having 3 mvp's on the roster or didn't have a strong enough culture to trade the guy they should have (Westbrook).

If your small market you have to bide your time, have quality scouts and then draft guys like Lillard, Mitchell, Butler, Curry who weren't consensus top prospects coming into the draft and are therefore more positive towards the team that used a pick on them, saw something in them that others hadn't and weren't just drafted there because if was the obvious decision.

Young might last in Atlanta just because they traded Luka for him.

I dont really know if OKC is the best example? I mean Durant left yeah - but

Westbrook - he re-signed. He was traded

Harden - he was traded, he didn't really leave because OKC is a small market

George - he actually re-signed to everyone's surprise (it was assumed he would be a Laker after a one year stop in OKC). Westbrook's decline is what pushed him to continue his journey to LA.

CP3 - OKC traded him


In OKC's short history they've had a lot of franchise players but only one of them chose not to re-sign with them. George was the only one who really forced a trade and it was after he played for them an extra year then he was expected to (basically if Westbrook's prime had stayed in tact he probably would not have left).

My point was more that they had really good guys buy in and they still couldn't win and when they decided they had to move one of them for cheap reasons they picked the wrong guy to move (Harden v Westbrook maybe because it would be an easier sell to the fans as opposed to the best move for winning).

The right guy to move would have been Perkins. They could have amnestied him and kept Harden. People blame cheap ownership, but Presti deserves a lot of blame with losing Harden.

[LloydFree]

Welcome to the analytics/teamup era. Embrace it

Titles are won on phones and spreadsheets instead of the court

This is classic tanking and its been going on a long time. Blaming this on analytics or players finally gaining some power is rich. And wrong.

And what is the cause of blatant tanking. It's the advent of superteams that leaves the middle of the pack literally helpless. In that it is worse to be a 8 seed than the worst team in the league.

Hinkies and Prestis didn't exist in the 90s when more than 1-2 teams felt like they had a shot at a title

This is nonsense. As far back as the '80s, only 2-3 teams in the league at any given time, thought they had a realistic chance at the title and those teams won 60 games a year, every year. In the early '80s the Celtics, Lakers and 76ers were the only contenders. And there was blatant tanking in 1984, by both Houston and Chicago to get in position for the top picks. Neither Houston or Chicago was as bad as the in Mavericks, Clippers or Cleveland that year, but they tanked hard and got themselves Olajuwon and Jordan.

[JN61]

I thought medical technologies were advanced. How is LeBron injured?!?

[XtremeDunkz]

Where's the outrage from the owners and Adam Silver? Where's the Jerry Colangelo appointment? Oh that's only the sixers? Okay.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Raps in 4]

Welcome to the analytics/teamup era. Embrace it

Titles are won on phones and spreadsheets instead of the court

Small market teams have no choice but to tank. It's the only way they can hope to be competitive when all their players keep leaving for bigger markets.

[Mickey8]

I think the next season they will contend for the tournament play in, or the play off spot , actually they had chance to contend for play in tournament this season too, until all of their main guys were shut down. I think they are doing the good things, they are playing young guys who are getting much needed experience and they will have good position to choose at this upcoming NBA Draft, OKC is in the good place going forward.

[Mickey8]

Last year's Lakers was most definitely not a superteam. It was a normal contending team with 2 superstars + elite role players.

They are super team , they have two superstars playing together.

[baldur]

I thought medical technologies were advanced. How is LeBron injured?!?

he is 36 years old, comes with one of the highest mileages ever in history.

don't compare it with resting 20 year old guys.

what an age. 20 year old guys are being rested. lol.

[JediMasterRevan]

I dont get how they can straight up admit to tanking by announcing they will sit their 2nd best player on the roster.

[The Rebel]

Lol at you chuck lecturing me about the history.of the game when you cant even get Robinson/Duncan right

Lots of teams intentionally fielded bad teams to gain high draft picks. But since you just need one, look at the 92-93 Dallas Mavericks intentionally as bad as possible including not working hard to sign Jim Jackson to his rookie deal.

Would you say your Mavs blatantly fielded bad teams or they were just a bad team.

When you blew up your team with the 3 J's did you trade them all for scrubs and draft picks? or you did actually try and get players of use for them. When you traded Jimmy jacksonn to us for Shawn Bradley I don't think that was done with tanking in mind. When you traded JKidd for Mike Finley I don't think that was done with tanking in mind.

Good teams and bad teams will always exist. But systematic tanking including trading any value for future picks instead of players is very much a 2010s phenomenon. The team up era broke up the competitive pride of the league and this is what we have to live with.

It is not a 2010s phenomenon, the Nuggets literally blew up their team in 2001-02 and tanked for 2 years. 2000-2001 they started dumping talent, by 2002 draft they literally had changed over the entire team. They did the salary dump going out, they traded their franchise guys, and gathered 11 1st round picks. They are not the 1st either, but they were the 1st to do it openly.

[Celts17Pride]

OKC tanking? The NBA has never seen this happen before

[dennythedino]

Last year's Lakers was most definitely not a superteam. It was a normal contending team with 2 superstars + elite role players.

2 all NBA first team guys on one team. And they barely even played a team with 1 all NBA first team in their playoff run.

Tell me how that not a superteam.

Literally no one was calling them a superteam last year. In fact, many people were relieved that there weren't any super teams last year. A superteam is generally considered three perennial All-Stars playing together. Last year's Lakers only had two.

Shaq and Kobe were two superstars playing with each other. Durant and Westbrook were two superstars playing with each other. Nobody called them a superteam.

[cjmcallist]

Itt: Hinkie invented tanking.

He didn't invent it obviously but he did start the "multi year bottom of the barrel" tank jobs

Actually, Presti did it first - just drafted much better so the cycle ran shorter. Look at the team in KD's first year in the league, last year in Seattle. hehe.

[LloydFree]

okc tankers is the newest g-league team.

They had at least 4 guys that I recognize from this year's G-league bubble play big minutes in this game (Poku, Brown, Jerome and Robinson). So yeah, that was a G-league lineup last night.

[Castle Black]

The stockpiling OKC is doing bothers me. They could easily cash a bunch of them in for a low end star and a couple of veteran role players and maybe make some noise in the playoffs. Instead they are taking the losers path and tanking for even more picks.

As a Kings fan I wish the Kings were as smart as OKC. Instead they will muddle their way to the 10-12 pick and pray someone drops as usual. OKC is smart enough to know they don’t have a play-off team and are giving their youngsters minutes. Their fans have dreams of a top 5 player with a boatload of other picks.....

The Kings meanwhile.....

Spurs are in the same boat. Too proud to tank (even though that’s how we got Duncan in ‘97) so we’ll win just enough games to not get a top-10 pick and will continue to peddle in mediocrity. It ain’t fun.

[The Rebel]

Itt: Hinkie invented tanking.

He didn't invent it obviously but he did start the "multi year bottom of the barrel" tank jobs

LMAO, in a thread about the Thunder you guys continue to spread misinformation. Kiki had the Nuggets openly tanking in 2001-2002, 2002-2003, and meant to tank 2003-2004 openly complaining that Melo, Nene, and the other young guys were too good and screwed it up. Presti then openly tanked the last 2 years they were in Seattle and the 1st year in OKC. Hinkie didn't invent it, and he damn sure didn't perfect it, if anything he was the biggest failure that used the strategy.

[cjmcallist]

The high horsing, short memories, and flat out fallacies in this thread are hilarious and astounding. Great post OP.

Sincerely,
2027, 2028 NBA Champions

[The Rebel]

Itt: Hinkie invented tanking.

He didn't invent it obviously but he did start the "multi year bottom of the barrel" tank jobs

Actually, Presti did it first - just drafted much better so the cycle ran shorter. Look at the team in KD's first year in the league, last year in Seattle. hehe.

Actually Kiki did it 1st, he tried to do it 3 years but Melo, Nene, and the other young guys were too good the 3rd year.