How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contender?

[PrettyT11]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

Man I am with you. I would say NEVER to be honest. Not anytime in the NEAR future

I'm with you as well on this one. I mean the question was asked when would they become a CHAMPIONSHIP CONTENDER?? With they players they have now more than likely it will NEVER happen. I mean they have some good young talent but I don't see any of them them outside Durant developing into a top tier player. And let's face it free agents are NOT going to Oklahoma City. That just isn't happening. So unless they get real lucky in the draft or pull off some miracles trades like Boston did it just ain't going to happen.

The best outcome for this team would be to be a bottom seed in the playoffs in a couple of years at best. I just don't see anyway possible for them to be a playoff team next year unless Kobe,Duncan,Parker,Williams,Paul,Dirk,Yao,Melo,Bil lups,and Roy all suffer season ending injuries.

[PrettyT11]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

Well...you're assuming I value, or thought Rashard Lewis could defend the 4.

I understand the remarks in terms of the help D from Big D, but I was speaking more/less from an offensive standpoint because I honestly rarely see Shard holding his own in the post.

To man up on LA, ORL was running Battie and Howard out there for the Bynum/Gasol matchup.

Both are lanky and are out of position at the 4 anyways, but Durant would AT LEAST be as effective on offense and even moreso IMO.

I feel ya but you also have to look at the effect the pounding on Durant on the defensive end would effect his offense. That type of pounding would take a toll on his body which is not anywhere close to being developed enough to contend with the bigs. I don't ever see him becoming a muscle man or nothing like that but right now he is weak physically compared to those guys. He needs to pack on some more strenth before trying to play a 4 man.

As far as the offensive end goes though Orlando's sysytem and players allow Shard to play the 4. With Turk on the floor at the same time the opponent has no choice but to put the 4 on Shard cause Turk would go around them all day. Then they run that pick and roll to free him up and do other things.

With OKC's roster and lineup they don't have anybody to force the opponent to keep the 4 man on Durant. They would kep thier four on Green or Mason and let the 3 man guard Durant. So Durant will be facing the same defenders he has been facing and then would have to turn around and defend the post. That just isn't a winning formula.

That's the main reason why I said even if the draft Thabeet Durant will remain the 3 with Green playing the 4. That way they avoid Durant defending the post and allow him to do his thing on the offensive end. Plus Green is a better defender in the paint and on the outside. Even if they trade Green Durant will still not be a four man. He will stay at the SF spot and they will bring in a PF.

[JBH3]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

T11 - I hear ya. And I agree...they don't have the personnel to allow Durant to do the same things; Thabeet would prove no differently.

It would be a bad move, and Durant should stay a 3.

[JBH3]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

What ever happened to Dice?

[tehova]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

So ya'll would start Thabeet over Kristic?

I see Thabeet as a nice backup

[Dice]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

What ever happened to Dice?

Dice is still here. But everytime I prove my point you come up with some illogical explanation and try to prove that mines is illogical.

So instead of just arguing with a brick wall, I'm just going to state my points and I'll just let you have the thread.

Hopefully, your right and Durant becomes the player you think he can be.

And when you gave your reasoning of him being responsible for 18 of the Thunder's 23 wins really blew my mind. You stated the following:

and his splits show if he scored 25 then OKC won

Just to let you know, the Thunder was 14-29 when he scored 25 and more. Not a good way to prove your point. Could we make him responsible for the 56 losses he's played in? See that's where your logic is flawed. If you'd used something like Win Shares I would have probably believed your argument.

And speaking of Win Shares, here's something about Durant. He has put him some good numbers his first two seasons. 22.7 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 2.6 APG. And just to let you know, in the last 30 years only six guys has produced those types of numbers. Here is the list(including Durant) and their Win Share totals for those seasons.
Walter Davis - 20.2
Lebron James - 19.2
Vince Carter - 16.7
Michael Jordan - 15.1
Bernad King - 12.8
Kevin Durant - 10.5

So looking at these numbers. The only HOF in this group is Jordan and the only potential HOF is James(sorry Vince). Along with Jordan and James, King and Durant round up of the people in this list who's teams had under .500 records for their first two years. Now I'll tell you this, Jordan and James had as much marginal talent around them their first two season as Durant and Durant can only muster 10.5 Win Share? I know it's not the 'tell all, be all' stat BUT I'm more inclinded to believe this than 'when he scores 25, we win'.

So yeah, if he's a potential franchise player, his teams win total should not be -7 from the season before he got there.

But I'm done. I'll let you have the floor and let you rant.

[Cebby]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

So yeah, if he's a potential franchise player, his teams win total should not be -7 from the season before he got there.

It should be when you lose your teams top 2 players.

You expect a 19 year old to take over and replace 2 All Stars? No player in the history of the NBA could have done that with that team in that conference.

And I'm not sure the company you put him in is all that bad. Of the 5 other players, you have the GOAT, a player who will be in the conversation, pre-injury VC, and 4 and 6 time All Stars.

And Durant had much, much, much worse talent around him than either Jordan or Lebron.

[sportyguyfl31]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

They'll be picking in the mid to high lottery for the next couple of years, and they dont have any toxic, cap killing contracts on their roster right now, so thye have a shot of being a playoff team in 3 years or so.

Cap flexibility is the key..make some smart trades with the pieces that you have without nuking your cap, so you can build around your superstar, and hope you draft well.

[JBH3]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

It should be when you lose your teams top 2 players.

You expect a 19 year old to take over and replace 2 All Stars? No player in the history of the NBA could have done that with that team in that conference.

And I'm not sure the company you put him in is all that bad. Of the 5 other players, you have the GOAT, a player who will be in the conversation, pre-injury VC, and 4 and 6 time All Stars.

And Durant had much, much, much worse talent around him than either Jordan or Lebron.

Thank You.

Dice is still here. But everytime I prove my point you come up with some illogical explanation and try to prove that mines is illogical.

So instead of just arguing with a brick wall, I'm just going to state my points and I'll just let you have the thread.

Hopefully, your right and Durant becomes the player you think he can be.

And when you gave your reasoning of him being responsible for 18 of the Thunder's 23 wins really blew my mind. You stated the following:

Just to let you know, the Thunder was 14-29 when he scored 25 and more. Not a good way to prove your point. Could we make him responsible for the 56 losses he's played in? See that's where your logic is flawed. If you'd used something like Win Shares I would have probably believed your argument.

And speaking of Win Shares, here's something about Durant. He has put him some good numbers his first two seasons. 22.7 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 2.6 APG. And just to let you know, in the last 30 years only six guys has produced those types of numbers. Here is the list(including Durant) and their Win Share totals for those seasons.
Walter Davis - 20.2
Lebron James - 19.2
Vince Carter - 16.7
Michael Jordan - 15.1
Bernad King - 12.8
Kevin Durant - 10.5

So looking at these numbers. The only HOF in this group is Jordan and the only potential HOF is James(sorry Vince). Along with Jordan and James, King and Durant round up of the people in this list who's teams had under .500 records for their first two years. Now I'll tell you this, Jordan and James had as much marginal talent around them their first two season as Durant and Durant can only muster 10.5 Win Share? I know it's not the 'tell all, be all' stat BUT I'm more inclinded to believe this than 'when he scores 25, we win'.

So yeah, if he's a potential franchise player, his teams win total should not be -7 from the season before he got there.

But I'm done. I'll let you have the floor and let you rant.

W/ the "25 and they won" post I was trying to illustrate the need for help.

You "ranted" about Paul's success, but are comparing apples and oranges since OKCs supporting cast around Durant doesn't even remotely stack up to NOR.

You were ranting and raving about playoff success, and increasing the win total by ONE.

All the while, negating the fact that in the 30 wins by the Sonics in 07-08 they had Sczerbiak, Luke Ridnour, and Delonte West all contributing prior to the deadline when 2 of the 3 were moved; while Ridnour was moved in the offseason.

They then began the 08-09 campaign w/ less of a roster than 07-08, and Durant was entering his 2nd season.

You expect them to maintain another 30 wins or 1 better?

How bout you come down your high horse too.

F---, they won more than Washington, Sac, LAC, and had 1 less win than Minny and Mem., and IMO a lesser OVERALL roster than all of those teams. With the ONLY reason OKC had more wins was because they had the BEST player...Durant.

Since we're on the topic of YOU ranting...Mentioning Kobe's all-star appearances, and having made an all-star appearance so early in his career AGAIN negating the fact he NEVER started but ONE game that year AND played along side THREE other all-stars.

One who happens to be arguably the best Center ever.

Yet, I'm the one ranting and raving, and talking crazy talk.

Ok.

[Dice]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

It should be when you lose your teams top 2 players.

You expect a 19 year old to take over and replace 2 All Stars? No player in the history of the NBA could have done that with that team in that conference.

And I'm not sure the company you put him in is all that bad. Of the 5 other players, you have the GOAT, a player who will be in the conversation, pre-injury VC, and 4 and 6 time All Stars.

And Durant had much, much, much worse talent around him than either Jordan or Lebron.

This is true and you bring up a good point. But look I'd still say that Jordan and Lebron had as bad of a cast to work with as with Durant.

The Bulls in 1983 had a bunch of coke heads in Orlando Woolridge, Quntin Dailey and Mitchell Wiggins and won only 27 games before Jordan got there. The year Jordan got there he played with these same coke-heads and won 38 games.

Cleveland only won 17 games the year before Lebron got there. And with the same group he won 35 games in his first year.

What I'm saying is, maybe the talent might be either more or less than what Durant has to work with. Regardless, the differences aren't that much. BUT I still say if he was the franchise player that people thinks he is wouldn't his team at least squeeze out at least 25 wins?

[KG]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

This is true and you bring up a good point. But look I'd still say that Jordan and Lebron had as bad of a cast to work with as with Durant.

The Bulls in 1983 had a bunch of coke heads in Orlando Woolridge, Quntin Dailey and Mitchell Wiggins and won only 27 games before Jordan got there. The year Jordan got there he played with these same coke-heads and won 38 games.

Cleveland only won 17 games the year before Lebron got there. And with the same group he won 35 games in his first year.

What I'm saying is, maybe the talent might be either more or less than what Durant has to work with. Regardless, the differences aren't that much. BUT I still say if he was the franchise player that people thinks he is wouldn't his team at least squeeze out at least 25 wins?

The difference is that the talent level dropped after KD got there. The Sonics the year before they got KD were more talented than his rookie year so you can't expect the team's win total to go up.

I don't generally believe in the Win Share %. There are too many unmeasurables for me to give the stat legitimacy.

[Dice]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

Thank You.



W/ the "25 and they won" post I was trying to illustrate the need for help.

You "ranted" about Paul's success, but are comparing apples and oranges since OKCs supporting cast around Durant doesn't even remotely stack up to NOR.

You were ranting and raving about playoff success, and increasing the win total by ONE.

All the while, negating the fact that in the 30 wins by the Sonics in 07-08 they had Sczerbiak, Luke Ridnour, and Delonte West all contributing prior to the deadline when 2 of the 3 were moved; while Ridnour was moved in the offseason.

They then began the 08-09 campaign w/ less of a roster than 07-08, and Durant was entering his 2nd season.

You expect them to maintain another 30 wins or 1 better?

How bout you come down your high horse too.

F---, they won more than Washington, Sac, LAC, and had 1 less win than Minny and Mem., and IMO a lesser OVERALL roster than all of those teams. With the ONLY reason OKC had more wins was because they had the BEST player...Durant.

Since we're on the topic of YOU ranting...Mentioning Kobe's all-star appearances, and having made an all-star appearance so early in his career AGAIN negating the fact he NEVER started but ONE game that year AND played along side THREE other all-stars.

One who happens to be arguably the best Center ever.

Yet, I'm the one ranting and raving, and talking crazy talk.

Ok.

WOW. [SARCASM] I'm just totally dazed by your logical points. You know what, this is too much for me. I cannot stand up to the logical points your making. This might be too much for me [/SARCASM]

Have fun with this thread!

[Dice]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

I don't generally believe in the Win Share %. There are too many unmeasurables for me to give the stat legitimacy.

I agree. But it's much better than going by the, 'if he scores 25, then we win'.

I'm pretty sure I can find more issues with that than I can with the Win Shares.

Sorry. Someone with an intelligent point so I had to response. I'm out.

[OSUFan_88]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

At least 5 years.

[JBH3]

Re: How Many Years You Think It'll Take For The Thunder To Be A Championship Contende

This is true and you bring up a good point. But look I'd still say that Jordan and Lebron had as bad of a cast to work with as with Durant.

Cleveland only won 17 games the year before Lebron got there. And with the same group he won 35 games in his first year.

What I'm saying is, maybe the talent might be either more or less than what Durant has to work with. Regardless, the differences aren't that much. BUT I still say if he was the franchise player that people thinks he is wouldn't his team at least squeeze out at least 25 wins?

The help you're touting that Durant has are Westbrook and Jeff Green.

A rookie and another 2nd yr player.

Lebron had a healthy 30 something Zydrunas, Carlos Boozer, and a Drew Gooden w/ at least 4 yrs under his belt.

Yet I'm the one not using any logic?

And now we're talking about 2 more wins. If he had an arbitrary two more wins you'd then consider him a franchise player.



EDIT: Not to mention Zydrunas was a top5 center in 04-05, and 3rd among centers in scoring.

Ugh.

WOW. [SARCASM] I'm just totally dazed by your logical points. You know what, this is too much for me. I cannot stand up to the logical points your making. This might be too much for me [/SARCASM]

Have fun with this thread!

Copt out.