is the OKC team one starting SG away?

[Endless Paradise]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

[Csfan1984]

Uhh, yeah, substantiative blog posts with actual information and examples are a hell of a lot better to use as sources than simply saying "Pau is as good a defender as Adams and Avery Bradley is more important a defender than Ibaka because I say so."

Blogs of Gasol hate and claims of being overrated tell you Adams is better  And any body who watches the NBA will tell you the league is way different today that AB as a defender is more impactful than Ibaka's D this year. Just look at the Defensive player of the year votes. 

[Moranis]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

[Csfan1984]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

No use in some people's minds Role players equal championships. If only that was true C's would dominate.

[Endless Paradise]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

... of course they're role players. They are quite literally the issue here.

"If Pop took over that team when Brooks did" is nonsense. When Pop lacked talent to support his Big 3, his Spurs teams were perennial first round exits. It was only once he got Kawhi and Danny Green to complement the Big 3 that he started seeing success again. Surprise, you need talented role players around your stars to actually make deep runs.

Uhh, yeah, substantiative blog posts with actual information and examples are a hell of a lot better to use as sources than simply saying "Pau is as good a defender as Adams and Avery Bradley is more important a defender than Ibaka because I say so."

Blogs of Gasol hate and claims of being overrated tell you Adams is better  And any body who watches the NBA will tell you the league is way different today that AB as a defender is more impactful than Ibaka's D this year. Just look at the Defensive player of the year votes.

No, the eye test tells me Adams is a better defender because he actually boxes out and can guard the pick and roll, these blogs just confirm that. Stop conflating the issue. I never said anything about Adams being a better player, he's a better defender. Pau Gasol can be a better player overall while being a worse defender... which he is.

And for whatever reason, you keep acting as though I'm saying Ibaka's defense against other bigs is more important. Today being a "guard's league" or not, teams first look to get the easiest shots at the rim. Whether you do this by penetration, pick and rolls, post-ups, or whatever, how you guard those shots on the interior - thus interior defense - is most important to a team's overall defense. It doesn't matter if it's a guard taking the shot at the rim or a big, your most important defensive concern is guarding that shot at the rim. No one's perfect along the perimeter; you will get beat off the dribble. What is your backline of defense, aka your interior defense when your perimeter defense inevitably fails?

[Csfan1984]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

... of course they're role players. They are quite literally the issue here.

"If Pop took over that team when Brooks did" is nonsense. When Pop lacked talent to support his Big 3, his Spurs teams were perennial first round exits. It was only once he got Kawhi and Danny Green to complement the Big 3 that he started seeing success again. Surprise, you need talented role players around your stars to actually make deep runs.

Uhh, yeah, substantiative blog posts with actual information and examples are a hell of a lot better to use as sources than simply saying "Pau is as good a defender as Adams and Avery Bradley is more important a defender than Ibaka because I say so."

Blogs of Gasol hate and claims of being overrated tell you Adams is better  And any body who watches the NBA will tell you the league is way different today that AB as a defender is more impactful than Ibaka's D this year. Just look at the Defensive player of the year votes.

No, the eye test tells me Adams is a better defender because he actually boxes out and can guard the pick and roll, these blogs just confirm that. Stop conflating the issue. I never said anything about Adams being a better player, he's a better defender. Pau Gasol can be a better player overall while being a worse defender... which he is.

And for whatever reason, you keep acting as though I'm saying Ibaka's defense against other bigs is more important. Today being a "guard's league" or not, teams first look to get the easiest shots at the rim. Whether you do this by penetration, pick and rolls, post-ups, or whatever, how you guard those shots on the interior - thus interior defense - is most important to a team's overall defense. It doesn't matter if it's a guard taking the shot at the rim or a big, your most important defensive concern is guarding that shot at the rim. No one's perfect along the perimeter; you will get beat off the dribble. What is your backline of defense, aka your interior defense when your perimeter defense inevitably fails?

Pau is better you admit so doesn't he therefore make up for Adams loss like I stated? You went out your way for absolutely nothing just to come to the same final result which is my point, Pau is better than Adams.

And you suggested interior defense of Ibaka trumped  AB's perimeter D which is not the case given today's NBA. As for team defense with Westbrook, AB, KD, KO and Pau wouldn't they rate superior to that of current C's? The C's which have a woefull interior defense but team defense is very highly rated? I mean after all KD and Westbrook are much better than IT and Crowder.

[Endless Paradise]

Pau is better you admit so doesn't he therefore make up for Adams loss like I stated? You went out your way for absolutely nothing just to come to the same final result which is my point, Pau is better than Adams.

No, he doesn't. That's as silly as saying "well, Kanter scores more points and gets more rebounds that Adams, so he should make up for Adams' loss." Defense is the important part of a center's game in the modern NBA.

And you suggested interior defense of Ibaka trumped  AB's perimeter D which is not the case given today's NBA.

What are you talking about? I gave you a link to the official NBA website showing that teams attempt far more shots at the rim than the perimeter. How in the world can you look at that and say, "well, teams generally take at least 65% of their shots at the rim compared to about 28% from 3, but it's more important to guard those 3 point attempts?" Interior defense is quite obviously more important.

teams are As for team defense with Westbrook, AB, KD, KO and Pau wouldn't they rate superior to that of current C's?

No, because Westbrook isn't actually a good defender, Pau is a bad defender, Olynyk's a capable defender, but not a stopper by any means,and KD is a good defender when he focuses on it, but his primary concern is offense.

The C's which have a woefull interior defense but team defense is very highly rated? I mean after all KD and Westbrook are much better than IT and Crowder.

The Celtics have Amir Johnson, a decent rim protector but not amazing by any means, being supported by several strong perimeter defenders. Most teams don't have the luxury of stockpiling defense-first guards and wings like Bradley, Smart, and Crowder who are disciplined both on and off the ball and great at generating turnovers while playing at a high pace.

The Celtics are an exception much like the Warriors are an exception. The only other team ranking in the top 10 for defensive efficiency that lacks a strong interior defender is Charlotte.

[Csfan1984]

Pau is better you admit so doesn't he therefore make up for Adams loss like I stated? You went out your way for absolutely nothing just to come to the same final result which is my point, Pau is better than Adams.

No, he doesn't. That's as silly as saying "well, Kanter scores more points and gets more rebounds that Adams, so he should make up for Adams' loss." Defense is the important part of a center's game in the modern NBA.

And you suggested interior defense of Ibaka trumped  AB's perimeter D which is not the case given today's NBA.

What are you talking about? I gave you a link to the official NBA website showing that teams attempt far more shots at the rim than the perimeter. How in the world can you look at that and say, "well, teams generally take at least 65% of their shots at the rim compared to about 28% from 3, but it's more important to guard those 3 point attempts?" Interior defense is quite obviously more important.

teams are As for team defense with Westbrook, AB, KD, KO and Pau wouldn't they rate superior to that of current C's?

No, because Westbrook isn't actually a good defender, Pau is a bad defender, and KD is a good defender when he focuses on it, but his primary concern is offense.

The C's which have a woefull interior defense but team defense is very highly rated? I mean after all KD and Westbrook are much better than IT and Crowder.

The Celtics have Amir Johnson, a decent rim protector but not amazing by any means, being supported by several strong perimeter defenders. Most teams don't have the luxury of stockpiling defense-first guards and wings like Bradley, Smart, and Crowder who are disciplined both on and off the ball and great at generating turnovers while playing at a high pace.

The Celtics are an exception much like the Warriors are an exception. The only other team ranking in the top 10 for defensive efficiency that lacks a strong interior defender is Charlotte.

Again you are going around in circles you will end up agreeing with me in some degree then back on a tangent based off opinions. No point on doing this a third time. Pau and AB are better than Ibaka and Adams end of story.

[pearljammer10]

OKC has been one starting SG away for many seasons now.

[Moranis]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

... of course they're role players. They are quite literally the issue here.

"If Pop took over that team when Brooks did" is nonsense. When Pop lacked talent to support his Big 3, his Spurs teams were perennial first round exits. It was only once he got Kawhi and Danny Green to complement the Big 3 that he started seeing success again. Surprise, you need talented role players around your stars to actually make deep runs.

perennial 1st round exits?  Since Duncan arrived, the Spurs have lost in the 1st round 4 times, and one of those was two years ago (with those players you talk of) and another they were a 61 win team and the 1st round lost was one of the biggest upsets in playoff history (and Danny Green was on that team).  The Spurs have never lost back to back 1st rounds. 

The 06/07 title team had 3 playoff starters average ~20 ppg, ~10 rpg, < 4 apg (TOTAL) in the regular season (obviously Manu wasn't a starter and was their 3rd best player). 

I firmly maintain, OKC's problem is not the lack of a SG or anything other than its the lack of a top level coach.  Period. 

[Csfan1984]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

... of course they're role players. They are quite literally the issue here.

"If Pop took over that team when Brooks did" is nonsense. When Pop lacked talent to support his Big 3, his Spurs teams were perennial first round exits. It was only once he got Kawhi and Danny Green to complement the Big 3 that he started seeing success again. Surprise, you need talented role players around your stars to actually make deep runs.

perennial 1st round exits?  Since Duncan arrived, the Spurs have lost in the 1st round 4 times, and one of those was two years ago (with those players you talk of) and another they were a 61 win team and the 1st round lost was one of the biggest upsets in playoff history (and Danny Green was on that team).  The Spurs have never lost back to back 1st rounds. 

The 06/07 title team had 3 playoff starters average ~20 ppg, ~10 rpg, < 4 apg (TOTAL) in the regular season (obviously Manu wasn't a starter and was their 3rd best player). 

I firmly maintain, OKC's problem is not the lack of a SG or anything other than its the lack of a top level coach.  Period.

I admit this could be right. Not 100% on the idea as I think they need better starters (not bench) to match Spurs and Warriors. Yet we know that having two top 10 players a few years usually means a team wins multiple titles. They don't even have one. One could make a argument it's coaching that Jordan and Pippen/ Shaq and Kobe won a few with a similar level cast.

[Endless Paradise]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

... of course they're role players. They are quite literally the issue here.

"If Pop took over that team when Brooks did" is nonsense. When Pop lacked talent to support his Big 3, his Spurs teams were perennial first round exits. It was only once he got Kawhi and Danny Green to complement the Big 3 that he started seeing success again. Surprise, you need talented role players around your stars to actually make deep runs.

perennial 1st round exits?  Since Duncan arrived, the Spurs have lost in the 1st round 4 times, and one of those was two years ago (with those players you talk of) and another they were a 61 win team and the 1st round lost was one of the biggest upsets in playoff history (and Danny Green was on that team).  The Spurs have never lost back to back 1st rounds. 

The 06/07 title team had 3 playoff starters average ~20 ppg, ~10 rpg, < 4 apg (TOTAL) in the regular season (obviously Manu wasn't a starter and was their 3rd best player). 

I firmly maintain, OKC's problem is not the lack of a SG or anything other than its the lack of a top level coach.  Period.

Fine, would you accept "perennial also-rans?" They had one conference finals appearance between their last title in 2007 and their WCF run in 2012 and it was a gentleman's sweep. They were not seriously contending for years after their 2007 title until they added Kawhi Leonard to the mix with Danny Green.

The primary issue holding OKC back has been three straight years of injury, unless you think just any coach is supposed to be able to win a title while missing Westbrook and/or Durant.

Again you are going around in circles you will end up agreeing with me in some degree then back on a tangent based off opinions. No point on doing this a third time. Pau and AB are better than Ibaka and Adams end of story.

Replacing Ibaka and Adams with Pau Gasol and Kelly Olynyk would ruin OKC's defense, end of story.

[Csfan1984]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

... of course they're role players. They are quite literally the issue here.

"If Pop took over that team when Brooks did" is nonsense. When Pop lacked talent to support his Big 3, his Spurs teams were perennial first round exits. It was only once he got Kawhi and Danny Green to complement the Big 3 that he started seeing success again. Surprise, you need talented role players around your stars to actually make deep runs.

perennial 1st round exits?  Since Duncan arrived, the Spurs have lost in the 1st round 4 times, and one of those was two years ago (with those players you talk of) and another they were a 61 win team and the 1st round lost was one of the biggest upsets in playoff history (and Danny Green was on that team).  The Spurs have never lost back to back 1st rounds. 

The 06/07 title team had 3 playoff starters average ~20 ppg, ~10 rpg, < 4 apg (TOTAL) in the regular season (obviously Manu wasn't a starter and was their 3rd best player). 

I firmly maintain, OKC's problem is not the lack of a SG or anything other than its the lack of a top level coach.  Period.

Fine, would you accept "perennial also-rans?" They had one conference finals appearance between their last title in 2007 and their WCF run in 2012 and it was a gentleman's sweep. They were not seriously contending for years after their 2007 title until they added Kawhi Leonard to the mix with Danny Green.

Again you are going around in circles you will end up agreeing with me in some degree then back on a tangent based off opinions. No point on doing this a third time. Pau and AB are better than Ibaka and Adams end of story.

Replacing Ibaka and Adams with Pau Gasol and Kelly Olynyk would ruin OKC's defense, end of story.

See that is exactly what I meant. It's your opinion not reality and C's are evidence interior D isn't needed to have a good defense. What is fact is AB, KO and Pau are better collectively than Ibaka and Adams. OKC would be improving their overall talent.

[Endless Paradise]

James Harden is a better player than Klay Thompson. Am I supposed to believe that he'd make the Warriors a better team as their shooting guard? There is such a thing as playing a role and Klay plays the role of 3-and-D, low-usage shooting guard much better than Harden, who's a far better offensive player, but much worse on defense. Similarly, Adams plays the role of "big who doesn't need many touches on offense but plays great defense" far better than Pau.

[Csfan1984]

James Harden is a better player than Klay Thompson. Am I supposed to believe that he'd make the Warriors a better team as their shooting guard? There is such a thing as playing a role and Klay plays the role of 3-and-D, low-usage shooting guard much better than Harden, who's a far better offensive player, but much worse on defense. Similarly, Adams plays the role of "big who doesn't need many touches on offense but plays great defense" far better than Pau.

More opinion based on your belief of fit. Harden might create a ton of open looks for Barnes, Curry and Green. Harden could be great on Warriors. Pau's overall #s including when counting advanced stats make him a better player. He isn't that bad on defense it's why I sent you links to see both compared numbers. When you factor in the offense Pau is a lot better than Adams. We can't go off of opinion of fit. A lot depends on scheme and coach for fit.