Nice article on how the OKC Thunder were built

[BballTim]

It's not a bad article; however, the only reason that the OK Thunder C are contenders and not just a good team is that they happened to get a very high pick in a very good draft and got top 5 NBA talent in Kevin Durant. 

Had they picked in another draft or even drafted one slot later, none of the other stuff matters at all. 

And that's why luck is a very, very big part of NBA success. 

Luck and prolonged putridity: top 5 draft picks in 3 consecutive years.  They could have just as easily had Kevin Love and Steph Curry to pair with KD as Westbrook and Harden.

So much easier to build a great young core when you are picking at the very top.

Bingo.

Easiest way to rebuild is to be very bad for at least a couple seasons and pick well.

  If that's the route, you have to be bad until you have a high enough pick in a good enough draft that you can pick up a superstar.

[Lucky17]

That article made just one passing mention of Presti's ability to use cap space to gather assets and draft picks.

IIRC, he turned cap space into three 1st round picks. One of those picks was used to draft Serge Ibaka.

http://www.prosportstransactions.com/basketball/Search/SearchResults.php??Player=&Team=Thunder&PlayerMovementChkBx=yes&BeginDate=2007-6-7&submit=Search&start=0

[birdbrady]

The Thabeet pick was just plain awful.  Even at the time it was considered bad.  You have to make good decisions when you draft high.

You have to make good decisions when you draft anywhere.  That's why the Spurs are still sporting one of the elite teams in the league.  And to add insult to injury, had we drafted DeAndre Jordan instead of JR Giddens with the last pick in the first round in 2008, there's a very good chance the 18th flag is hanging above the parquet right now.

And even if the Grizz drafted the two best guys who had NBA careers with those picks (Harden or Steph Curry), they aren't much better than what they are now.

[Boris Badenov]

It's not a bad article; however, the only reason that the OK Thunder C are contenders and not just a good team is that they happened to get a very high pick in a very good draft and got top 5 NBA talent in Kevin Durant.  

Had they picked in another draft or even drafted one slot later, none of the other stuff matters at all.  

And that's why luck is a very, very big part of NBA success.  

They'd actually be much worse off if they'd picked one slot higher, as opposed to one slot lower.

[Moranis]

It's not a bad article; however, the only reason that the OK Thunder C are contenders and not just a good team is that they happened to get a very high pick in a very good draft and got top 5 NBA talent in Kevin Durant. 

Had they picked in another draft or even drafted one slot later, none of the other stuff matters at all. 

And that's why luck is a very, very big part of NBA success. 

Luck and prolonged putridity: top 5 draft picks in 3 consecutive years.  They could have just as easily had Kevin Love and Steph Curry to pair with KD as Westbrook and Harden.

So much easier to build a great young core when you are picking at the very top.

Bingo.

Easiest way to rebuild is to be very bad for at least a couple seasons and pick well.

But you also have to draft in at least one great draft. 

Look at the 2008 draft, really only 1 transcendent player in that draft, Derrick Rose. 

Had OKC had the #5 pick in '07 and the #2 pick in '08 (Michael Beasley), they wouldn't be where they are now. 

So it's partially tanking, but also getting the high pick in great drafts. 

they did have the 5th pick in 2007 and still could have had Westbrook or Love in 2008.

[Moranis]

It's not a bad article; however, the only reason that the OK Thunder C are contenders and not just a good team is that they happened to get a very high pick in a very good draft and got top 5 NBA talent in Kevin Durant. 

Had they picked in another draft or even drafted one slot later, none of the other stuff matters at all. 

And that's why luck is a very, very big part of NBA success. 

Honestly, I'm not really sure Durant is a top 5 NBA talent.  He is a great scorer without question, but a sub-par defender, rebounder, and passer.  I mean they were still bad enough the next two years after adding Durant to get top 4 picks, which led to Westbrook and Harden.  And frankly I don't really think they would be much worse with Al Horford (the pick after Durant) and everything else on the team remaining the same.  I mean seriously is a lineup of Westbrook, Harden, Sefolosa, Horford, Perkins with Ibaka, Cook, Collison, etc. not a favorite in the West right now.

No, it isn't.  KD is an MVP candidate.  Period.

who do you choose over durant for mvp? 
lebron
rose
hey for giggles we'll add in dirk & chris paul
any other names? dwight howard?
Kevin Durant has to be considered #2 mvp right now behind.....  sorry just threw up in my mouth, second to lebron

My top 5 MVP ballot: Lebron, Paul, Kobe, Rose, Love

[chambers]

It's not a bad article; however, the only reason that the OK Thunder C are contenders and not just a good team is that they happened to get a very high pick in a very good draft and got top 5 NBA talent in Kevin Durant. 

Had they picked in another draft or even drafted one slot later, none of the other stuff matters at all. 

And that's why luck is a very, very big part of NBA success. 

Honestly, I'm not really sure Durant is a top 5 NBA talent.  He is a great scorer without question, but a sub-par defender, rebounder, and passer.  I mean they were still bad enough the next two years after adding Durant to get top 4 picks, which led to Westbrook and Harden.  And frankly I don't really think they would be much worse with Al Horford (the pick after Durant) and everything else on the team remaining the same.  I mean seriously is a lineup of Westbrook, Harden, Sefolosa, Horford, Perkins with Ibaka, Cook, Collison, etc. not a favorite in the West right now.

No, it isn't.  KD is an MVP candidate.  Period.

lol Durant is EASILY number two in the MVP race.
This guy is the best pure scorer we've seen in the NBA for a long time, he's better than Kobe at scoring.
His size, leaping ability combined with his speed, footwork and  coordination with such an immaculate jumpshot are things that come around once every 10-15 years in the NBA.

He is like a perfect version of Carmelo Anthony, except taller, smarter, works harder and has half the ego.
He is everything the Knicks wish Melo would be.

He'll be one of the GOAT's when all is said and done.
God knows how many titles the Thunder will win.
They are the luckiest $(%U&*! for drafting so well, so many years in a row.

If you think he isn't top 3 MVP race this year I can't imagine you've watched many Thunder games and compared him to everyone else.

[Roy H.]

Honestly, I'm not really sure Durant is a top 5 NBA talent.  He is a great scorer without question, but a sub-par defender, rebounder, and passer.  I mean they were still bad enough the next two years after adding Durant to get top 4 picks, which led to Westbrook and Harden.  And frankly I don't really think they would be much worse with Al Horford (the pick after Durant) and everything else on the team remaining the same.  I mean seriously is a lineup of Westbrook, Harden, Sefolosa, Horford, Perkins with Ibaka, Cook, Collison, etc. not a favorite in the West right now.

Is this satire?

I would like to know the five NBA players you rank above Durant.  I consider KD the third best player in the league, after LeBron and Kobe, and on the same level as Rose.  

As far as KD being a sub par rebounder, he leads the team in rpg and is the leading rebounder at the SF position in the league with 8.2, a hair better than LeBron.  

Defensively, he looks much improved this season to me.  He's not a big assist guy, but his job is to be a big time scorer, not a passer.  He isn't afraid to move the ball, but his role is to be a scorer, not passer.    

Not only is Durant's defense much improved, it's been excellent.  He's holding opposing SFs and PFs to a PER of around 11, out-scoring, out-shooting, and out-rebounding his opponents by large margins on a nightly basis. Link.  If 82games.com isn't your thing, Synergy (http://mysynergysports.com) has Durant among the league leaders in points allowed per possession, giving up only 0.73 points per possession.  When defending guys in isolation, coming off screens, or as the P&R ball-handler, he's top-15 among all players.

Durant has become close to a lock-down defender, if he's not there yet.  His defensive reputation hasn't caught up to the facts yet, but it will. 

[PosImpos]

The Thabeet pick was just plain awful.  Even at the time it was considered bad.  You have to make good decisions when you draft high.

You have to make good decisions when you draft anywhere.  That's why the Spurs are still sporting one of the elite teams in the league.  And to add insult to injury, had we drafted DeAndre Jordan instead of JR Giddens with the last pick in the first round in 2008, there's a very good chance the 18th flag is hanging above the parquet right now.

And even if the Grizz drafted the two best guys who had NBA careers with those picks (Harden or Steph Curry), they aren't much better than what they are now.

On the contrary, I think a team with Curry / Rubio and Marc Gasol as its best players, with Rudy Gay as the wing scorer, would be in really good shape.

[PosImpos]

It's not a bad article; however, the only reason that the OK Thunder C are contenders and not just a good team is that they happened to get a very high pick in a very good draft and got top 5 NBA talent in Kevin Durant. 

Had they picked in another draft or even drafted one slot later, none of the other stuff matters at all. 

And that's why luck is a very, very big part of NBA success. 

Luck and prolonged putridity: top 5 draft picks in 3 consecutive years.  They could have just as easily had Kevin Love and Steph Curry to pair with KD as Westbrook and Harden.

So much easier to build a great young core when you are picking at the very top.

Bingo.

Easiest way to rebuild is to be very bad for at least a couple seasons and pick well.

  If that's the route, you have to be bad until you have a high enough pick in a good enough draft that you can pick up a superstar.

Yes, timing and luck play a role. 

I think you can still rebuild by picking high multiple times and coming away with highly valuable contributors (i.e. potential All-Stars) and make moves from there.  The idea, I think, is to put together a core of very good young players and then use all the tools at your disposal (trade, free agency, etc) to turn them into the best team possible. 

One way or another, though, getting a superstar is the primary goal.