PDA

View Full Version : For every OKC...



NYSpirit1
05-22-2012, 12:42 AM
There's 10 teams that fail at the model they tried.

I always hear analysts talk about how other teams should follow OKC's model, but the truth is, they got lucky enough to draft Durant, Westbrook and Harden is successive drafts and pick up Ibaka in the late 1st round and have all of them play at an All-Star caliber level.

But look at seven teams that failed in the past decade. The Clippers (Olowokandi, Miles, Odom, Wilcox, Kaman, Livingston), the Bulls (early 2000s - Chandler, Curry, Crawford, Fizer, Hinrich), the Blazers (Roy retired, Oden never developed, Webster, Aldridge), the Kings (Evans and Cousins haven't panned out together), the Bobcats (Felton, Okafor, Sean May), the Warriors (Dunleavy, Jason Richardson, Troy Murphy, etc.) and the Grizzlies (Stromile Swift, Pau Gasol, Drew Gooden, Shane Battier).

The Bulls eventually recovered and got Rose in the draft, but they tried at will to do what the Thunder eventually did and never could do it. The Clippers drafted 5, 6 guys in high picks and nothing panned out. The Blazers were thought to be what the Thunder ended up being and they never panned out. The Kings got two major cornerstones and it hasn't worked. The Warriors and Grizzlies constantly had chances in the early 00s to build a championship team through the draft but never ended up being more than mediocre. And the Bobcats constantly had the chance at high picks too and it didn't work.

The truth is for every Durant or Westbrook, there's many more Tyrus Thomas's. As hard as it is to trade for a star, it's much easier to do that and get players like the Heat, Clips, Nets, Lakers (Gasol) or Knicks than it is to draft flawlessly.

True, the Thunder drafted very well. And they deserve credit. But it's not easy to draft and draft well, that's where the luck lies for the Thunder. All of their picks panned out well, while most picks don't.

boolish
05-22-2012, 12:44 AM
give them some credit. it wasn't all luck. far from it. they drafted lights out.

gatkins11
05-22-2012, 12:50 AM
Presti's a great GM.

JoeyBoy718
05-22-2012, 12:50 AM
I wouldn't call it luck. Everybody thought the Blazers lucked out when they got the #1 pick to get Oden. The following year, people were shocked when they "reached" to get Westbrook. Harden took a lot of heat early on. They were smart.

PurpleJesus
05-22-2012, 12:58 AM
I will say that Durant was lucky, as he was the obvious choice at #2, but Harden at #3 was actually highly scrutinized, and debated amongst analysts...the thought amongst a lot of people was that Rubio and Tyreke were the better talent. Westbrook at #4 was thought to be a reach by a lot of people, yet OKC noticed the talent...and finding a player like Ibaka late in a draft, is just excellent scouting.
The only luck they had, was Durant being the obvious choice at #2...after that, none of their current corner stones were considered obvious choices, some even considered them reaches.

BKLYNpigeon
05-22-2012, 01:02 AM
OKC has some great talent, but the playoffs are not over.

Draco
05-22-2012, 01:03 AM
There's luck in the draft order, luck in which players declare for the draft, luck in how the team might have been effected by rule changes (minimum age req).. there's bag fulls of luck to along with the skill it takes to do the best with the hand you're dealt.

kozelkid
05-22-2012, 01:12 AM
There's luck in the draft order, luck in which players declare for the draft, luck in how the team might have been effected by rule changes (minimum age req).. there's bag fulls of luck to along with the skill it takes to do the best with the hand you're dealt.

Exactly.

Dare I say it, good thread?

I've been telling this to people for AWHILE. So much about the NBA is luck and having the ability to have high picks in great drafts. You look at the Chicago Bulls of the early 2000s and they had high picks in some of the worst drafts this decade (1999, 2000, 2001, 2006) or else not a high enough pick to score on a franchise player (2003 obviously...). Similar with LAC and Charlotte. There is a ton of luck with the draft as far as having the opportunity to get a franchise player.

LongWayFromHome
05-22-2012, 01:56 AM
SA and OKC draft good year in and year out. Not just a couple of lucky picks.

Baller1
05-22-2012, 02:02 AM
There is definitely a lot of luck in the whole process, but credit must go to Presti.

Both Westbrook and Harden were scrutinized picks, yet now they're arguably the best picks in their respectable drafts. Presti is a genius.

LAOwnsAll15
05-22-2012, 02:21 AM
The only reason the OKC model works is because they havent reached their max earning potential. Most of their top talent was drafted so they had the luxury of playing with rookie contracts.

davids22
05-22-2012, 04:01 AM
The only reason the OKC model works is because they havent reached their max earning potential. Most of their top talent was drafted so they had the luxury of playing with rookie contracts.

Exactly this. They're fun to watch now, but they won't be the same team in 2 years time. There's absolutely no way they keep Harden AND Ibaka if they're committed to Durant and Westbrook.

The OKC model worked on having 3 solid years of drafting, with 3 high picks in 3 high drafts. The Ibaka pick was a great pick as well. But luck has a lot to do with it, especially when the draft is done with a lottery. Even if "the OKC model" could be done by every small market, they only have a 4-6 year window of being a top seed. How they build around OKC and Westbrook in the future is yet to be seen.

Personally I feel that Harden will be too much for OKC. He could start on a LOT of teams in the NBA and make max money doing it. No way he passes that up. As much as some fans want to believe a player will take a discount, the reality of that is too far fetched. Even as far fetched as thinking your team will get a #2 pick, a #4 pick, and a #3 pick in 3 consectutive years.

Six-8-TheWizard
05-22-2012, 06:17 AM
Exactly.

Dare I say it, good thread?

I've been telling this to people for AWHILE. So much about the NBA is luck and having the ability to have high picks in great drafts. You look at the Chicago Bulls of the early 2000s and they had high picks in some of the worst drafts this decade (1999, 2000, 2001, 2006) or else not a high enough pick to score on a franchise player (2003 obviously...). Similar with LAC and Charlotte. There is a ton of luck with the draft as far as having the opportunity to get a franchise player.

Ya a lot of it is dependent on what draft ur bad in, (depth, strength at top etc)

One year you end up with Lebron, another Kenyon Martin, no matter how good you draft.

Six-8-TheWizard
05-22-2012, 06:18 AM
SA and OKC draft good year in and year out. Not just a couple of lucky picks.

True, but getting Tim Duncan was hella lucky though lol

The_Pharouh
05-22-2012, 08:37 AM
SA and OKC draft good year in and year out. Not just a couple of lucky picks.

It isn't "Just Luck" ,but to be that good you need "Some Luck" in the draft
No body can deny that Presti is a gr8 GM ,but he needed that luck to get a guy like Durant for example
It is just not realistic to ask bad teams to do like OKC,there isn't even a player like Durant in every draft

tht_one_guy
05-22-2012, 08:57 AM
This is ten percent luck, twenty percent skill
Fifteen percent concentrated power of will
Five percent pleasure, fifty percent pain
And a hundred percent reason to remember the name!

yaswaggin
05-22-2012, 09:17 AM
Kevin Durant- Was the obvious #2 in that draft like someone else said. But many scouts thought Durant was not strong enough to play in the NBA because he only benched 140 pounds.

Now Durant is the clear best player from that draft.

Russel Westbrook-

This was the mock draft the year he was drafted:

http://www.mynbadraft.com/2008-NBA-Mock-Draft

He was projected to go 8th in this draft, and many people had him going anywhere from 6 to 12.

It was looked as a reach to grab him, and here were the results:

1. Derrick Rose- Lived up to hype, became MVP, top player in draft, top 5 PG.

2. Beasley- Became solid role player, bust for where he was drafted.

3. Mayo- Bust, never panned out as the elite scorer he was projected to be.

4. Westbrook- Supposed to be reach, ended up being 2nd/3rd best player in draft, top 5 PG.

5. Love- Became monster, 2nd/3rd best player in draft, top 3 PF.

6. Gallinari- Solid role player, semi-bust.

7. Gordon- Top 10 SG, great value, top 5 player in draft.

8. Alexander- huge bust

9. Augustin- bust

10. Lopez- Horrible rebounding center, but good scoring C, reached value of pick.

11. Bayless- shows potential of becoming future starter, but overall bust

12. Thompson- role player

13. Rush- role player

....

.....

24. Ibaka- Top shot blocking player in the NBA, top 7 player in draft.


So with the 4th and 24th pick, the Thunder got the 2nd/3rd best player and top 7 player in this draft.

Overall, this was a great draft imo, and the Thunder capitalized on it.

Hellcrooner
05-22-2012, 09:20 AM
the problem to all those teams ( and ock will eventually have it) is when players end their rookie contracts and start needing to get paid.

Soonerule
05-22-2012, 10:10 AM
Exactly this. They're fun to watch now, but they won't be the same team in 2 years time. There's absolutely no way they keep Harden AND Ibaka if they're committed to Durant and Westbrook.

The OKC model worked on having 3 solid years of drafting, with 3 high picks in 3 high drafts. The Ibaka pick was a great pick as well. But luck has a lot to do with it, especially when the draft is done with a lottery. Even if "the OKC model" could be done by every small market, they only have a 4-6 year window of being a top seed. How they build around OKC and Westbrook in the future is yet to be seen.

Personally I feel that Harden will be too much for OKC. He could start on a LOT of teams in the NBA and make max money doing it. No way he passes that up. As much as some fans want to believe a player will take a discount, the reality of that is too far fetched. Even as far fetched as thinking your team will get a #2 pick, a #4 pick, and a #3 pick in 3 consectutive years.

After looking at the logos on your post I find it ironic that a fan of the ultimate "small market" team doesn't recognize and appreciate a genius at work. Golden State is a habitual lottery team and can't get over the hump.

sep11ie
05-22-2012, 10:44 AM
Yea, but I agree with the whole committing to starting from the draft. Not only did they draft smart, they also made a few smart trades and brought in/kept around great glue guys and players that compliment Durant/Westy/Harden. They didn't go with the whole "let's see the biggest name we can get with the MLE" model.

GSW Hoops
05-22-2012, 12:53 PM
It's a mix of luck and talent.

Pierzynski4Prez
05-22-2012, 01:01 PM
They have Portland to thank for everything actually. Not sure how far a Westbrook-Harden-Oden combo would have taken them.

samanjerry
05-22-2012, 01:08 PM
you cant draft 4 great players and call it luck.
all those teams you listed have picked maybe one good-great player after all the ****, now thats luck.
sonics have 4.

davids22
05-22-2012, 03:00 PM
After looking at the logos on your post I find it ironic that a fan of the ultimate "small market" team doesn't recognize and appreciate a genius at work. Golden State is a habitual lottery team and can't get over the hump.

I'm not knocking OKC's GM at all... he's great at what he does. But looking at the Packers with football, it's a combination of good drafting and LUCK. I'll admit it. We got LUCKY that Favre turned into the QB he ended up being, and we got LUCKY that Aaron Rodgers slipped so far in the draft that we could get him. Now obviously, when situations like that occur, you need a good GM to scoop them up, which is what Ted Thompson does. He has a track record of building teams in the draft and not signing free agents because we're in a small market.

Compared to OKC, the sample size is too small to see if OKC's GM can overcome losing his players in free agency (when some of these players decide to leave for greener [$$$] pastures). So when Harden DOES leave, or when Ibaka DOES leave, will OKC rebound with good draft picks to replace them? Only time will tell.

Woodrow
05-22-2012, 03:43 PM
No disrespect to OKC, they're the team I'm hoping can win it all this year, but would Ibaka be as good or as hyped if he wasn't playing around a bunch of scoring machines and was actually expected to perform offensively?

Perkins wasn't drafted by OKC, and he deserves a lot of credit for where they are.

There are a lot of players who never get into the right situation to develope or be the right fit, and they end up getting lost. Basically, it all boils down to the GM in my opinion. Not a lot of luck involved once the lottery balls are picked. Its just as much about having the right guy for your system as it is having the most tallented guy. Just my oppinion.

NoahH
05-22-2012, 06:40 PM
this is ten percent luck, twenty percent skill
fifteen percent concentrated power of will
five percent pleasure, fifty percent pain
and a hundred percent reason to remember the name!

k.