share

When Can We Give OKC the face?

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
When Can We Give OKC the face?

Right now, I'm still in shock that OKC is being called this great franchise when they should have been a better team. Honestly, the Thunder made 2 mistakes that could have costed them a title.

1. James Harden over Stephen Curry and Ricky Rubio?

Take Evans out of that mix because he'd NEVER would have worked in OKC. Coming out of ASU, Harden was good, but people forget he slumped a bit near the end of the season AND he had a terrible tourney ( knocked out by SU) while Curry didn't make it, he had 8-12 good games vs big schools (off the top: Duke, UNC, Wisconsin, Kansas, Gonzaga, West Virgina, Virgina Tech to name a few) or Rubio ( who wanted to go to OKC and even expressed playing with KD at the time).

I just don't understand how OKC thought Harden was ever gonna be a better player then Curry.

2. Not moving the 3 1st round picks to get DeMarcus Cousins

I'm not bragging: But I said the entire draft time: If your OKC, you move up to get DeMarcus Cousins. I'd argue if we redid the draft today, he'd be the 2nd pick. Oklahoma City was under the cap and sat there with 2 late 1st round picks. I said the best idea was James Harden and both those picks to Minnesota for the 4th pick and Corey Brewer. Now, Cousins is looking like a superstar in Sacramento, while OKC moved up to get...Cole Aldrich.

I was super critical of Portland for having boatloads of talent but not making the risky move. Now, I have to rip OKC because even though they are a playoff team, they still missed on two of the NBA's top 60 players today in the draft. Just imagine: Westbrook-Curry-Durant-Ibaka-Cousins? That would have been the best team in the NBA today when you consider Green, Thabo, Maynor and Collison as your 6-9 guys.

Thoughts?


Too cool
Registered User
Joined: 09/26/2010
Posts: 53
Points: 13
Offline
I agree with you 100%.

I agree with you 100%. Imagine having westbrook and curry playing next to each other. that would be simply sensational. And you are right about the need for a center. Demarcus Cousins would fit perfectly in the Thunder organization. Jeff Green is better off being the 6th man a la Lamar Odom.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
I highly doubt Ricky Rubio

I highly doubt Ricky Rubio would want to play in OKC.. Dude doesn't even wanna come to the NBA unless it's for the right price.

Stephen Curry or James Harden.. They already had a point guard.. Why have 2 point guards? They would have the smallest back court, not the mention that Stephen Curry isn't much of a defender. That's why having Harden helps them, he's 6'5-6'6 and a pretty decent defender, better than Curry.

I agree with your 2nd reason though, they could have put together a package to pick up Cousins or atleast Monroe. BUT there's a mistake.. How are they going to trade away Harden in a package deal for Cousins and then when you look at their line-up, you still insert Curry? If they had Harden to trade away, they wouldn't have had Curry.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
Rubio did wanna play for OKC.

Rubio did wanna play for OKC. He didn't wanna play in Memphis because of thier past with Euro players and Minnesota because it was too cold for him. He knew OKC was a up and coming ball club and wanted to play with them.

Westbrook was a 2 all of college, he could have been the attacking guard to Curry's shooting. Curry isn't a defender but Westbrook is a very good defender. Curry would take the weaker defender of the two.

ilike.panochas
ilike.panochas's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/18/2010
Posts: 1985
Points: 5074
Offline
Stephen Curry would be their

Stephen Curry would be their 6th man playing behind Thabo Safalosha, while James Harden would be unleashed on a different team, and we would be talking about the same thing; why did they choose Curry over Harden ?

Anton123
Anton123's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/21/2009
Posts: 1966
Points: 5780
Offline
Harden is fitting very well

Harden is fitting very well for the OKC team, I think OKC is trying to draft good character guys that fit well. Harden is by far superior defender to Curry and is a pure 2 guard.

I like Cole Aldrich a lot, I think he should be seeing at least some PT.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
Stephen Curry would be their

Stephen Curry would be their 6th man playing behind Thabo Safalosha, while James Harden would be unleashed on a different team, and we would be talking about the same thing; why did they choose Curry over Harden ?

No he wouldn't. Curry would start opposite of Russell Westbrook ( who you guys are forgetting is 6-4 and can defend SG and actually does at times). Curry and Westbrook would be a great backcourt pairing. Harden is good, I actually think he's underrated, but he's nowhere near the level Curry is.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
How are they going to trade

How are they going to trade away Harden in a package deal for Cousins and then when you look at their line-up, you still insert Curry? If they had Harden to trade away, they wouldn't have had Curry.

Westbrook played SG in college because of Darren Collison, not because he wasn't a PG.

Westbrook doesn't guard SGs very much, that's why they've got Sefolosha, one of the leagues better defenders at his position.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
How are they going to trade

How are they going to trade away Harden in a package deal for Cousins and then when you look at their line-up, you still insert Curry? If they had Harden to trade away, they wouldn't have had Curry.

Because I instead gave Minnesota 3 1st round picks for the 4th overall pick. Minnesota wanted to move down but wanted something good for it. The 18th pick and 26th pick plus a unprotected 1st rounder down the road would have probably got it done.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
Oh ok, I get it now.

Oh ok, I get it now.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
You can argue that Collison

You can argue that Collison prevented Westbrook from being a PG, but he played SG in college and high school and actually did fantastic defense on SG's. I think he could have been good and even then, they could have used Thabo-Westbrook-Curry as a 3 head combo at times. They could have thrown out

Curry-Westbrook-Thabo-Durant-Ibaka out at times IMO

lowryfoyeray
lowryfoyeray's picture
Registered User
Joined: 01/10/2010
Posts: 35
Points: 28
Offline
westbrook and curry

I like Curry alot but if you started him and westbrook together it would make westbrook's job alot more difficult. Even if Russ was stilling running the point, then he would be guarded by the other team's 2 guard since other point guards would be able to guard the shorter and smaller curry. Westbrook's best advantage is his size and athleticism compared to other PG's. Putting him in the same backcourt as Curry takes away that advantage.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
I see where you're going with

I see where you're going with the Curry Westbrook and Thabo as your guards.. But one of the Thunder's biggest strengths is their perimeter defense with Westbrook and Sefolosha starting. You lost one or your biggest strengths if Sefolosha comes off the bench, Curry isn't much of a defender, and Westbrook has to now guard bigger guards. You lose a strength and it quite possibily becomes a weakness. It's like the Lakers trading Bynum because they have Odom. They lose size regardless of what they already have. You can't lose your biggest strengths and expect to improve.

IndianaBasketball
IndianaBasketball's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 13481
Points: 27563
Offline
Had they drafted Rubio,

Had they drafted Rubio, Westbrook would've been VERY unhappy.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
Had they drafted Rubio,

Had they drafted Rubio, Westbrook would've been VERY unhappy.

He said that, but he would have gotten over it. Just like Monta did when Curry came to GS.

IndianaBasketball
IndianaBasketball's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 13481
Points: 27563
Offline
Two different

Two different situations.

Monta was unhappy with Curry mainly because the team told him they wasn't going to draft another guard and he was concerned about how it'd work defensively.

Westbrook on the other hand didn't want Rubio because he wanted to be the point guard of the future.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
Like I said.. Why turn one of

Like I said.. Why turn one of your biggest strengths (perimeter defense) into one of your weaknesses? You go from Westbrook and Thabo to Westbrook guarding bigger guys, Thabo off the bench, and Curry/Rubio (below average defenders).

Platypus
Platypus's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/30/2009
Posts: 2494
Points: 3396
Offline
so if they had that then who

so if they had that then who is there Kobe stopper?

ilike.panochas
ilike.panochas's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/18/2010
Posts: 1985
Points: 5074
Offline
I dont even understand how

I dont even understand how Stephen Curry would help this team take it to the next level, the Thunders don't need more offense, they have plenty of that. Their weakness is their interior defense and interior scoring. Westbrook and Safalosha together makes the best defensive backcourt tandem in the NBA, why would you mess with that?

lakano
lakano's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/30/2009
Posts: 169
Points: 188
Offline
I think the Thunder are

I think the Thunder are better off w/o Cousins because hes always in foul trouble, and why risk drafting someone w/ character issues to a young team

And Durant playing the 4??

fastdan
Registered User
Joined: 06/10/2009
Posts: 752
Points: 905
Offline
You have to understand at the

You have to understand at the time of the draft NO ONE thought Curry was a better prospect then Harden.

It's easy to say they should have moved up and taken Cousins, and maybe they tried, but how often do you see teams trading out of a top 5 pick? It just doesn't happen. I think all the teams in the top 5 were pretty set on the players that they chose, and wern't looking for something else.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
Thanks for the comments. I

Thanks for the comments. I understand where many of you are coming from.

JMO, I just feel that the rotation of Westbrook-Curry-Durant-Ibaka-Cousins (Green-Collison-Maynor-Thabo) would have been able to win it all next season. On offense, that lineup is unstoppable. Westbrook is a monster slasher who can get to the basket and with having Durant and Curry as shooters (Durant can do both) would be crazy. Cousins would also be inside with Ibaka? Crazy

I understand your concerns on defense but to be honest, I feel Westbrook can guard SG's. He's 6-4 and is long enough to do it. Curry would take the opposite guard in the backcourt. How many teams have monsterous guards like that where Curry would be struggling all the time? Similar to Ray Allen, I think Curry could be a potential strong TEAM defender. Also, OKC is a average defensive team now (16th in defensive efficeny according to ESPN) so I don't think it would KILL them to have Curry and Westbrook together IMO.

BigD
Registered User
Joined: 12/08/2010
Posts: 579
Points: 843
Offline
Westbrook and Curry would be

Westbrook and Curry would be terrible. Westbrook is so good beause of the stength and length advantage he has over other point guards, having Curry would just take the advantage away.

SwatLakeCity
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2009
Posts: 3033
Points: 585
Offline
Here's why this didn't

Here's why this didn't happen. The Thunder don't really need offense like Indybasketball said. They have a great defensive backcourt with Westbrook and Thabo, so why ruin that by adding Curry? Also the Thunder drafted Westbrook to be their PG of the future. He likes that roll and does not want to be taken away from him. And why would you want to, he is a great point guard. A future Gary Payton. Curry is not that great of a passer. He is great shooter, but shooting is not the most important thing for a point guard, passing and leading the team are. Westbrook fits that bill very well. Curry would mess up some of the chemistry because he would want to take most of the shooting away from Durant and Westbrook who are the true leaders of this team. They selected Harden because that he could play within the team and most importantly not mess up their chemistry.

Chemistry is very important especially for such a young team like the Thunder are. When Cousins was coming into the draft every team feared him not for what he could do but for his attitude. Every team was afraid of taking him because they didn't how that bad attitude would turn out. The Thunde were especially afraid of this because as I said before they are a young team. Bad attitudes can affect any team, but most importantly the young ones. They can be so easily influenced. Cousins bad attitude could have had a bad effect on Westbrook, Durant and the rest of the team. The Thunder did not want to take the risk, so they went for the safe pick with Aldrich.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
D-Will, you might have not

D-Will, you might have not watch Curry play recently, he's a great passer. If the Golden State Warriors move Curry, he will be a SUPERSTAR player. Take that to the bank. He's gonna be a star once he, or Monta is moved. As for the defense, I'll bold it: Oklahoma City is 16th in defensive efficency. They are a average defensive team with a solid defensive backcourt that would still have the components there because even if they did what I said, Westbrook and Thabo would still be on the roster.

As for Chemistry, they are a tight bunch...but all these guys played AAU together and probably knew each other since age 15. They would have brought him in and surrounded him with support. You take a risk: You get a 20-10 player. You don't: You get Cole Aldrich.

BigD
Registered User
Joined: 12/08/2010
Posts: 579
Points: 843
Offline
Curry would make the Thunder

Curry would make the Thunder a lot easier to guard on offense. PG's can't defend Westbrook when he is running the point, Harden is that SG threat that keeps the SG's defending him because of his strength. Thabo starts because he is a Kobe stopper. There lacking interior defense and interior scoring. Ibaka can't defend the paint alone, Jeff Green provides nothing defensively. DeMarcus Cousins is sure not leaving Sacramento and i couldn't see him being traded at all to any team on draft night. but Curry would be a bad fit, Westbrook is a PG, a very difficult one to guard, you move him to the SG, and offensively it will be tougher for him to score, defensively the backcourt would struggle to contain any elite teams with a decent PG, because Curry is terrible defensively.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
@BigD You keep preaching

@BigD

You keep preaching defense and I understand, but you do know they are a average defensive team right now right?

BigD
Registered User
Joined: 12/08/2010
Posts: 579
Points: 843
Offline
They're an average defensive

They're an average defensive team because they have little interior defense, Jeff Green is not a interior defender. Ibaka doesn't have the strength to defend the likes of Howard or Bynum good enough. and they don't rebound the ball well at all.

OhCanada-
OhCanada-'s picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/08/2010
Posts: 9732
Points: 13035
Offline
1st of all dont tell me Curry

1st of all dont tell me Curry is 6'4, I laugh at that.

2nd what does Curry do that would make OKC so much better they dont need perimeter scoring, Harden actaully sticks shots from the perimeter well, Thabo wins close games for OKC with his rugged defense, and they sorta have this guy named Kevin Durant who scores out there enough.

3rd Yes a great post player would have been great for OKC. Acquiring Cousins would have made them legit contenders with some good coaching and conditioning on Cuz. How do you know they didnt try to trade up, and who in the right mind would let them get away with picking up Cousins. I mean if Im Minnesota/Sacramento, Im not trading Cousins to my Conference rivals.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
1st: I said Westbrook is 6-4.

1st: I said Westbrook is 6-4. Curry is a legit 6-3

2nd: Curry is a better overall permeter player then Harden. He's a better player then Harden other then defense IMO

3rd: I never said they didn't do it, I said they didn't get it done. They might have looked to get Cousins, but I dobut they did and they would have been perfect with him

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
Knicksboy1 completely ignored

Knicksboy1 completely ignored BigD's reply on that one.. Hmm... You also ignored my post when I said their defensive on the perimeter is their strength and insertting Curry would make their perimeter defense a weakness.

Hmm... that's odd.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
Knicksboy1 completely ignored

Knicksboy1 completely ignored BigD's reply on that one.. Hmm... You also ignored my post when I said their defensive on the perimeter is their strength and insertting Curry would make their perimeter defense a weakness.

So you won't be upset I didn't reply to you...here I go

Big D: No, I watch Thunder games, the Thunder have a similar problem stopping slashing guards as well as the good offensive post players. I watched perimeter guys score on them. Thabo is a great defender, but he can be beaten so let's stop acting as if he's 2005 Ron Artest out there.

Toungeout: With Thabo, Curry and Westbrook, the Thunder can make adjustments if they need to. Similar to Harden, they can bring him off the bench and be a "great" defensive team

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
You just don't get it. Their

You just don't get it. Their perimeter defense is their strength, why are you going to give up your strength and make it a weakness by adding Stephen Curry? They simply do not need him. You're going to have 2 6'3" guards? You lose size, versitility, and defense. All for what? A shooter with decent passing ability? It's not worth it.. James Harden fits the bill perfectly as a guy that can come off the bench or start the 2 guard and be effective.

BKKnicksfan
BKKnicksfan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 02/11/2010
Posts: 2306
Points: -1139
Offline
You just don't get it. Their

You just don't get it. Their perimeter defense is their strength, why are you going to give up your strength and make it a weakness by adding Stephen Curry? They simply do not need him. You're going to have 2 6'3" guards? You lose size, versitility, and defense. All for what? A shooter with decent passing ability? It's not worth it.. James Harden fits the bill perfectly as a guy that can come off the bench or start the 2 guard and be effective.

I get it, I just disagree. I feel Westbrook could defend 2's and play off the ball. If Westbrook can play off the ball and have Curry as the point guard, I don't see the huge problem there. You disagree with me, that's it. Yes, they lose something on defense, but if they really needed to, they can play Thabo and Westbrook and have Curry on the bench.

Either way, Curry is better then Harden IMO and would have been a interesting piece over Harden. I think he can start with Westbrook, you don't so we disagree. It's cool.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8316
Points: 11893
Offline
Yeah, we can agree to

Yeah, we can agree to disagree. Good topic though.

RSS: Syndicate content