Daily Thunder.com

with 11 wins already only getting 34 wins would be a big slump 23-39 the rest of the season

I tend to be optimistic when it comes to the Thunder, but I can hardly allow myself to even utter the P-word. It's like the sword of Damocles is hanging over my head and I have the feeling someone's going to be cutting the thread. I really thought that the Thunder would top out somewhere around 34-35 wins.

Of course, a 48-34 record would give the Thunder the same record the Jazz had last year when they grabbed the eighth seed. I ask myself, "Are the Thunder this year as good as Utah was last year?" I think the answer may be yes.

We always knew that for the Thunder to make a jump, someone was going to have to come back to use. We're still in the first quarter of the season, but look at how many other teams - teams we thought were locks for the playoffs - are under-performing. And I don't think any of us could have expected Oklahoma City to turn into one of the league's top defensive teams, especially without a dominating center.

I just don't know, fellas...

agree with those who say we are getting ahead of ourselves . . .

we have a shot to make the playoffs, but we still have a bottom ten offense that needs work - I think starting Harden would be a nice beginning . . .

if we win 41 games, then I would be pleased . . .

Royce just because you are a Traber fan, here's a quote from today.
"Jim Traber just doesnt do that. I hate talking about my self in the third person, but it is usually all about me."

Hollinger's power rankings, indeed any power rankings, should be taken with a grain of salt. Hollinger's recieve a bit more skeptism because they are based purely off statistics and numbers. I would agree with everyone here that its only December and we all need to calm down. I would also agree with Royce from last night on ESPN that the Thunder is probably a .500 team and we'll make the playoffs assuming the Hornets remain bad and the Rockets come back down to Earth. (seriously Rick Adelman is coach of the year)

However, would you rather look and see the Thunder as an 80% lock for the playoffs or sitting where Minnesota is and we were last year, playing for the highest number of pinballs in the hopper.

@Joe
I don't know if I feel comfortable busting out an article that's a giant, "I told you so," to everyone who said, "I don't see any similarities between the Thunder and the Blazers no matter how many comparisons you have so clearly and eloquently given us as evidence."

Okay, so they didn't say that last part, but they'd have to now, right?

Hmm...well if Royce and you want to revisit it, I'd be happy to acquiesce to your request (go ahead and bust it out, Royce!).

@Royce
So you're saying I can make that article my "lock" of the week even though I have givien like 5 other articles, too? :)

His numbers are skewed due to the nice game against GSW, but James Harden really has to either start games or play 30+ minutes consistently. Thanks to all those free throws, Harden now has a higher TS% than Brandon Jennings, Tyreke Evans, Stephen Curry, and all the other guards aside from Ty Lawson. His assist percentage is over 20.0% (excellent), he's getting tons of steals.. and really, his defense has been getting a lot better as the year goes on.

He'd be right up there with Brandon Jennings and Tyreke Evans for ROY if he were getting the minutes.

@Brett
Nice find.

ESPN now has Brooks as #1 for Coach of the Year. Thabo, KD, and Harden stay at 2, 10, and 3 respectively.

http://espn.go.com/nba/notebook/_/page/Awards-091208/awards-watch

@Joe
Agreed. Make sure to "Give it up to yourself" too.

@J.G.
Isn't it about time to bust out the nice article you wrote last year comparing year's 1-3 of the Thunder and Portland?

Portland was right at .500 in year 3 and just missed the playoffs, but were dominant last year in year 4.

We have been hovering just above .500 in year 3. Dust it off J.G...

@f5alcon
Really? Wow.

@justin
I'd say Ibaka has more offensive potential. He has the athleticism to be every bit the enforcer Anderson is, but Ibaka could have some post moves and a 15-foot jumper to go with it. Anderson scores primarily off putbacks and dunks.

This article was sent out by my thunder account rep, they are trying to get people to buy into we can make the playoffs mentality

Is anyone else watching Greg Monroe on ESPN right now? He's playing really well and I'd like to see him in a Thunder uniform next year

Way more potential at doing what? Chris Anderson was the best shot blocker in the league last year and a TS% over .600. It'd be hard for Serge to do much better than that, don't you think?

@Patrick
Ibaka has WAY more potential than Birdman. And I think Andersen is fantastic in Denver.

This team will be SCARY if he realizes his potential.

although he might be a nice energy guy off the bench. See Birdman for Denver for more details.

I would like to see "The Mighty Ibaka" start at center by the end of the year.

Scott Brooks deserves a lot credit, if this turn around happens.

Not only did the Spurs draft Duncan, but David Robinson only played six games in 1996-1997. He played 73 the next year.

@dork

yeah big leads are not as exciting, but i just want to win, thunder games i dont care about exciting, thats what other teams games are for.

yes tim duncan was drafted by the spurs.

@Mully Mulls
The thing is Timmy wasn't around the for 20 win season, so he was a pickup. Durant was here last year and the year before that.

@dork
I love blowouts. I prefer all games to end that way. But I probably don't represent the majority of the population. I like numbers, and blowouts usually give me more/higher numbers than close games.

@Mully Mulls

Even though we drafted KD we didn't Draft him last year ;)

@Mully Mulls
Here's a link...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpRepQqRT-g

@J.G.
Wasn't Timmy drafted by the Spurs? That would definately be the same way that we acquired KD.

Hearing the thought of finals makes me go from six to midnight. I'm still stickin to my 42 win projection but I'm definately excited about even further potential.

Royce, could you please remind everyone to vote on the MAPS proposal? Afterall, if we win the finals, it'd be nice to have a big ole park to celebrate it in! ;)

@f5alcon

Not me. Big early leads are not as exciting. Who sticks around to watch a blowout? However if the lead gets blown up in the 3rd then at least you got a half of exciting basketball and a half of "OH YEA!" plus if the big lead happens at the start then we might be asleep when the other team makes a run. -enter this phrase... "its the NBA everybody makes a run.."

@dork

we do play better in the 2nd half then last year, but id rather be we are up be x amount going into the 2nd half, id like bigger early leads take the heart out of the other team

@J.G.

Well thats what I ment to post but sloth got the best of me and a lazy post ensued.

On a side note does anyone else here get that "oh were only down by x going into half?" and then get totally excied knowing the 3rd quarter is about to start?

@dork
Unless the Thunder are going to be adding one or two Hall of Famers this year via free agency, then we can not, in good conscience, compare this team to Boston, Miami or San Antonio's amazing turn arounds.

KG - Hall of Famer, Top 5 PF of all time.
Ray Allen - Hall of Famer, Top 15 SG of all time
Dwayne Wade - Hall of Famer, Top 5 player in the NBA
Tim Duncan - Hall of Famer, Best "PF" to play the game
David Robinson - Hall of Famer, All-Star, Top 5 Centers during his time

And before anyone posts, Kevin Durant - Hall of Famer...we didn't acquire him. This would be a completely unique situation because of maturation, instead of acquisitions or injured Hall of Famers returning to health.

@justin

Might be the first team without a Major player either being back from injury or added to the roster.

Boston - KG and Allen
Miami - Wade back from injury the previous year
Spurs - Duncan (and injured Robinson from the previous year)

@James

Boston went 24-58 in 2006-2007 and won the title in 2007-2008.

Miami went 15-67 in 2007-2008 and made the playoffs the next year.

Spurs went 20-62 in in 1996-1997 and made the playoffs the next year.

I think part of our strength in our projections is we beat the magic and only lost by 3 to the lakers at home, so he sees series against them as winnable, We have played the majority of our really tough opponents already, we dont play orlando again, we have 1 of our 2 times playing boston done, by the end of the week we are halfway done with the cavs, 3 out of our 4 games with the lakers are done by the end of the month.

We still play most of the teams with losing records, 2 games against the knicks, 2 against the nets, 4 against the twolves, 3 more against golden state, another chance and the kings, clippers,bucks and wizards.

By month based on current records win %
oct: .437
nov: .586
dec: .521
jan: .468
feb: .447
mar: .521
apr: .523

so our toughest month is past and we have a couple easy months coming up

While we're on the topic of playoff chances. IF we do make the 7th or 8th seed this year, would we be the only team in history to make the playoffs the following year from a disaster year? If not, how many teams have?

Calm down people. We've had a hot start, I'll still be ECSTATIC if we hit anything over 40. I'll be happy with a 13-15 win improvement. Anything under 35 is a huge disappointment for me.

We need to all settle down. This team could definitely have a rough stretch. I love what I have seen, but I'm trying to keep my expectations in check. Like Sammy said, we have been outclassed several times... I hope we do make the playoffs, but we can't write off teams like the Spurs, Rockets, Jazz, and Trailblazers just yet.

[blockquote]
[The Thunder] have been outclassed only once (an 18-point home whuppin’ by Boston on Dec. 4)
[/blockquote]

Margin of victory is pretty important in Hollinger's (and most stat-heads') projections, but I thought the final score belied just how lopsided the following games were: the first Houston game, the Blazers game, and especially the second Magic game, and the second Lakers game. I think the Thunder are getting too much credit for those games which skews their projection higher than it should be.

I'm still a little cautious of predicting the playoffs. I think i'll have first have to wait and see how they do the rest of this month before i'll be convinced.

The DON AKA The founding father of the “start Harden” movement :If we make the playoffs this season with virtually the same group that went 23-59 last season, the national media will be…..how should I put this….ON OUR SCROTUMULAR REGIONS!!!!
We will be the “hip” and “trendy” up and coming team who everyone will be talking about

Uhh.. just an FYI we are already the hip/trendy team this year.

Like Royce said, "The thing about the Thunder that’s most encouraging is that conventional wisdom says this team is only going to get better as the season goes along."

Right now we are at .550, Hollinger's projections are .585 If we improve as would be natural, that is not too big of stretch. If we have been playing one of the toughest schedules in the league, it makes it more plausible if we have easier stretches down the road. Let see what happens over the next 10 games though!

The playoffs are a strong possibility, but the finals is a pipe dream at the moment.

Colin :
Sorry, that third line should read:
“However, the Cavs have the best odds…”

That's what happens when computers try to factor in some guy named LeBron.

Sorry, that third line should read:

"However, the Cavs have the best odds..."

"The Lakers are his favorite to win it all, in a series with Boston."

Those two teams have the best odds to get to the finals, yes.

However, have the best odds of any team in the East to WIN the finals... interesting....

To be honest, I don't see why OKC can't challenge for a four seed. Utah, Houston, and Portland (now that Oden is out) are all worse, in my opinion. The Suns are going to be hit or miss from here on out. And the Spurs have yet to prove that they can put it together. Right now, I'd say only LA, Denver, and Dallas are clearly better.

If we make the playoffs this season with virtually the same group that went 23-59 last season, the national media will be.....how should I put this....ON OUR SCROTUMULAR REGIONS!!!!

We will be the "hip" and "trendy" up and coming team who everyone will be talking about

Plus just imagine how much that would do for our young players, to get that sort of experience as early as this season. How electrifying will we be in 2-3 years?

Here's what it says in the article for Insiders about the Thunder:

"Is Oklahoma City really that good? The projection for the Thunder is a 48-win season and, quite possibly, a top-4 seed in the loaded Western Conference. For an 11-9 team, that seems optimistic -- until one sifts through the Thunder's first 20 games. They beat the Magic senseless, beat San Antonio and Utah on the road, and have been outclassed only once (an 18-point home whuppin' by Boston on Dec. 4). In contrast, the Thunder own eight double-digit wins.

The Playoff Odds project a 37-25 mark the rest of the way for Oklahoma City because it has played most of the tough teams on its schedule already -- the Thunder are done with Orlando and face the Lakers and Boston just once more each. Oklahoma City's opponents have a .553 winning percentage when not playing the Thunder; by that measure, only four teams have faced a tougher slate. Inevitably, the schedule evens out, and in the Thunder's case it does so with a much cushier docket for their final 62 games."

I like that.

Some of those projections are ridiculous, but not the one about the Thunder... that one makes sense... because I like it.

Well, it's encouraging. That's for sure. There's still a loooooong way to go, though.

I'm with GAP, I think we will make the playoffs but I don't know how realistic the 5 seed is for us at this point. I think that the 8 and maybe even 7 seed is the best bet.

I don't necessarily agree with hollinger's projections, but I do believe we will make the playoffs.