Daily Thunder.com

@ATH
PS... I completely agree on people giving Westbrook time and as a whole being WAY too hard on him.

@ATH
Well written, and I understand that your experience can't be wrong, but I completely disagree with your assessment of the Ford Center fans and their affect on the game.

What were fans supposed to do to carry the Thunder when the team comes down the floor and CONTINUOUSLY puts up contested jump shots and never attacks the basket forcing the refs to make some calls. Is everyone supposed to clap and cheer as if they're doing the right thing? No, we knee jerk react; some passionately (I would fall into this category) some in a whining manner (sounds like that's what you sat next too). And although whining fans/and or booing fans bother me; part of what makes proffesional basketball great is the experience of seeing it live and reacting to it. For those paying money for season tickets and thus have alot invested in this team, they will be passionate about what they think about the team and it's players. Fans will react to what is on the floor, home court advantage is something PLAYERS have take advantage of. Is Denver the epicenter of basketball where it's always been impossible to win? No, before Melo came they were a joke for years, and perennial push over. They are a beast at home right now because they TAKE ADVANTAGE of their home court. They play in a way that takes advantage of the energy the home crowd can provide.

This team has yet to play consistently strong home court basketball, as they begin to the crowd will have a larger affect.

@Vince
I hope you're right that it will improve, and it's true the team hasn't earned the complete trust of its fans. But a lot like that kid who moves to New York to make movies instead of going to law school, I think Westbrook may take some time to be appreciated. He'll probably never be like that older sibling that did everything right (then moved to New Orleans).

@ATH
It is a good post, but I don't think those emotions you describe in the couple nearby are all that rare. I joked with a friend last week that the Ford Center crowd -- all of it -- always sounds like overprotective parents. We don't quite trust the team, and instead of really getting into the flow of the game you can feel -- particularly against teams like the Cavs and Lakers -- the crowd tightening up, almost waiting for the team to blow the lead or something to go wrong. (A lot of OSU fans have a bit of the same streak in them, albeit for different reasons. Go Pokes!)

I think the crowd will improve as the team does and we grow more confident together, but let's be honest -- the whole crowd stunk on Sunday night. I wouldn't just blame it on that couple (though I heard similar stuff in my section and I agree it's rather annoying).

Steve Blake would be a better backup than we have, but considering he's their starter I don't know exactly what they expect to get for him.

Also, to everyone feeling like the discussion was something of a downer, realize that no one said get rid of Westbrook. All of us see immense talent. The thing is, talent can only take you so far in the NBA. Everyone in the NBA is talented. Some moreso than others, but no matter who you are, you have to work to be your best. Ultimately, it's a downer because there are a lot of faults you can point out in Westbrook's game. But, we have all offered many ideas on how he can improve and turn all that talent from "not again," to "holy crap, did you just see that!?"

I think that OKC and POR are unlikely trade partners.

Truehoop reporting that the Blazers might be looking to move Steve Blake. What do we think about that idea?

@justin@ATH
was referring to, was the overreaction that needs to be kept in check. I think one of the many causes of this overreaction is the nature of 24 hour sports coverage and its need for constant story lines. It has a created a knee jerk culture regarding a very acute view of a much larger story.

@ATH

Nice post.. I agree with what you're saying but we all react differently to our team's performance. People who are downers at the games and boo the home team frustrate me, too.

The game threads have positive things in them all the time. Check out the Washington game thread or the thread from the first Orlando game. It's natural that when the team performs well people react positively, when they don't people react negatively.

@ATH
Dang, that was an excellent read. And well put.

Some thoughts on attitude and the impact of words...

My girlfriend and I made it to our first ever Thunder/NBA game Sunday night, and we had a great time. Fun environment, good game, pretty disgusting finish. LeBron had an effect on the crowd that's hard to describe, and I really think it kept the Ford Center from helping the Thunder rally after that three-point barrage. His simple presence is demoralizing, and there was never much fight in the crowd. My morale was impaled by Mo Williams' half-court swish. Come on.

But the real downer of the evening was the attitudes of a middle-aged couple sitting next to us. They seemed a little tight and life-stressed from the start, as if skeptical of the game's ability to entertain their serious lives. Surprisingly, they proved knowledgeable and supportive of the entire Thunder bench--save the starting point guard. After some of his early ball control and shot choice issues (to which they come-on'd in disgust), they remarked upon his every touch: "Hold on to the ball, Russell!" "What is he doing?" "Here we go again," etc. My girlfriend whispered that maybe they were his parents and just really hard on him. It sounded like that; it was totally bizarre that fans could be so negative toward a player. How can people yell "Chewbaccaaaaa" and applaud Ibaka (whom I love) for a layup immediately after he gave up four consecutive offensive rebounds to Anderson Varejao but display literally zero emotion when Russ scores? It's like it bothered them when he succeeded.

And I know it bothers some of his detractors here; they see every good play Russell makes as one step away from Presti unloading him. Some fans don't think he's the long-term solution at PG. Whatever. The thing is, during the game, that doesn't really matter. There are plenty of venues, such as this one, for open discussion about the team's personnel and people's gripes and hopes for future changes. This is some of the most interesting stuff to think about throughout the week. I happen to really like Westbrook, but I understand why he's a divisive player. This is such a great place for discussion because most posters are fair and willing to be objective. What doesn't help anything is bringing negative language to a game (or a game thread). The game is a chance to cheer and be encouraging, energetic, and positive, especially when the team is struggling. It isn't a time to deride your least-favorite player when he messes us. And the game thread shouldn't be dominated by a few overly-opinionated posters cursing and dropping told-ya-so's every time Russell turns the ball over or Jeff Green misses a three. Save that stuff for after the game.

What I witnessed Sunday was a pretty amazing player beat our pretty good team. I also saw a crowd let it happen. The Thunder are only 6-6 at home. I don't know if there were other fans as negative as the ones sitting by me, but too much of that and they'll never be a great home team.

Go Thunder, you know?

@Brett
Davis hasn't come on, looks like it was just Traber being a blow hard and nothing will materialize. Much like when he refused to talk to Royce after talking a bunch of crap.

@Aaron
I couldn't even begin to tell you what the majority of NBA radio guys are like and whether or not they have color guys. I've only followed the Vancouver Grizzlies, Sonics, and now Thunder. With the Grizzlies I was too young to even think about listening to the radio call of the games or worry about what the commentators on TV were saying. With the Sonics it was the KC show. He would have people on he would talk to about the game. During the last couple years before Bennett bought the team KC would bring on this squirelly little stat guy who would do the post game show and they would banter. I feel stupid, but I can't remotely remember if he had a regular color guy. He was so good you just didn't notice.

@Brad
When Calabero did the ESPN broadcast for the game against the Bucks I was immediately jealous we don't have him in OKC.

Is it common for radio to not have a color guy for basketball or is it just Pinto doesn't like working with one?

I'm stuck at work without the ability to listen to the blowhard on the SA. Can anyone give a recap of the interview with Regular Jim Trabor?

@Royce
I'd agree with that. I think Brian Davis has the most amazing ability to make everyone and everything around him less likeable while you still want to like him. After spending nearly a decade listening to Kevin Calabero, I'll likely never be totally sold on Davis.

@Brad
I do too. But mainly during interviews.

I feel like when he's in an interview, he makes me smarter. He needs to bring that same mentality to the booth.

I LOVE grant long, course he always talks so highly of vancouver so I'm a little biased.

@Aaron
I know Davis and Long were "extended" before this season, but I don't know if that means it was just for this year.

The thing about Grant Long is if you hear him in an interview or something, he's REALLY smart. He knows his stuff and gives great insight. It's just when he's broadcasting he tries to be so energetic and match Davis's enthusiasm. If Long would just be himself, I think we'd have a really good team.

@Royce
Do you know how long Davis, Pinto, and Long are under contract?

@Aaron

Not sure where you might want to go to listen to NBA games as a new fulltime fan of the NBA.... even the natinonal broadcasts don't seem to cover most of what is actually going on (fundamentally)

@Aaron
Haha. He definitely needs a color man.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention another that bothers me about Pinto. I feel like he is constantly trying to set a record for words spoken per minute. Every time I'm listening to a game on the radio I worry that I'm gonna flip my car cause I'm concentrating on the radio so intensely.

@J.G.

I'd probably have to agree on Lopez at #1. Just thought it was worth pointing out that a "draft scouting expert" still sees enough talent in Rose and RW to take them over Lopez, who is a sure thing at this point.

@dork

Portland dropped from #1 to being out of the top 5 and Orlando moved up to #1 because of its strong start, promising play by Ryan Anderson, and good trade assets in Gortat and Bass.

LA moved up to #2. OKC moved up to #3, and its "Players" ranking also moved up to #3 due to the strong start by Harden and improvement by Durant, Green, Westbrook. However, they said the Thunder's "Draft" score might go down in the next set of rankings as both our own, and Phoenix's picks look like they will fall out of the lottery. Miami moved up to #4, and Utah moved up to #5 because the Knicks pick that they are owed is still looking pretty good.

@King Gondo

Yeah, RW is a conundrum but I'm glad we have him. I bet the people in Chicago are having similar debates regarding Rose and what kind of PG he will be.

@dork
No I didn't catch any of the summer league action. All the dorky banter is one of my favorite things about watching guys like Tag and Josh call the Rangers baseball games. But I don't fell like it fits here. I am relatively new to being a fully committed basketball fan. I don't know as much as I would like to about the game so I prefer listening to guys that give me insight on how the game should be played. So far my favorite has been Hubie Brown on ESPN. I always feel like I learn something about basketball when he's on the air. I feel like Brian Davis and Matt Pinto have confused themselves with needing to be the PA guy a little too much.

@dork
I'm almost looking forward to next year's Orlando summer league because of them.

I said almost.

@KingGondo

Yea I keep thinking when I see a rebound... "And the rebound pulled down by..that guy."

@Royce
Ha, I haven't listened for 2 weeks either. Only reason I did today was because I knew he'd talk about the tweeting business from last night.

@dork
Dante and Galante were fantastic, agreed. I still call Roy Hibbert "Hungry Hungry Hibbert."

@Aaron

Too much time talking about him being bald? I am assuming you were not here during the summer leagues were you? It is my belief that all games should be called in the same style as the Orlando summer league :)

Classic Traber exchange going on right now. I haven't listened to him for two weeks and here is what I have been missing. Ahhh...

@Brad
I'm excited. I generally like Davis, but he annoys me sometimes. I think he's going to handle himself extremely well and really embarrass the radio idiot.

As a former team broadcaster for the Dbacks shouldn't he realize their job is to be homers? I'm not defending Brian Davis, or Matt Pinto because I don't enjoy listening to either one of them. Davis spent several minutes of last night's game talking about him being bald. There is too much action in an NBA game to talk about stuff like that. I could understand if it was a baseball game since there is so much down time. But don't talk about your baldness while plays are going on. And, Matt Pinto has way too many catch phrases. I look forward to the day we have better broadcasters in OKC.

@Royce
He was supposed to come on 10 min ago but Brian was finishing a meeting, so they're going to try and get him on as soon as possible.

I think some of the fears around Westbook not caring about how he does are a little overblown. Even if Westbrook isn't punishing himself and Brooks is letting him off the hook too,(something I doubt.) this is one of the many places where the tight-knit relationship between the thunder kids will play in our favor. If the rest of the team doesn't feel like Westbrook is pulling his weight or pushing to better himself, I have no doubt they'll let him know. I also have no doubt that peer pressure from the likes of the Broingtons would push Westbrook to keep pushing himself.

Most of the misses of 40% FG or 2/1 A/TO weren't by much.

Of course eFG% or TS% would be far better than raw FG% for your comparison justin.

Most improved as shooters and reduced turnovers over time only a few get much better as an assist man.

It is a pretty good group on talent. Most of them moved around. Hard to get better but if you can you go for it and sometimes you just need different. It is team results that matter in the end.

nyone read the insiders article on the future rankings 2.0?

@Brad
Oooh. Any idea when? I'm excited.

Brian Davis is likely coming on the Sports animal to discuss Traber's tweet.

Josh :
Here’s who Chad Ford listed in his chat today as his top 5 if the 2008 draft was redrafted right now:
“1. Derrick Rose 2. Russell Westbrook 3. Brook Lopez 4. O.J. Mayo 5. Kevin Love”

Seems reasonable, although the Bulls have really plummeted much more than anyone expected them to after they lost Gordon.

I think the reason we have these intense debates about RW is that he's such a hard player to classify... PG or SG? Better at creating or scoring? And people who watch every game see these glimpses of brilliance, followed by moments of "NO!"

Whatever he turns out to be, I'm sure he'll be special. And I'm glad he's on our team.

anyone read the insiders article on the future rankings 2.0?

@Josh
Those things always make me wonder how many games of each of those names listed do these guys really watch. Cause "right now," it's Lopez #1, hands down.

Here's who Chad Ford listed in his chat today as his top 5 if the 2008 draft was redrafted right now:

"1. Derrick Rose 2. Russell Westbrook 3. Brook Lopez 4. O.J. Mayo 5. Kevin Love"

http://freedarko.blogspot.com/2009/04/youve-been-s...

There's that article.

@justin

I didn't mention Rondo and Parker because of any assist to turnover ratio, but because they didn't start out as players that the fan base believed in, but eventually their games developed into something everyone could appreciate.

Rajon Rondo and Tony Parker never had A:TO ratios below 2.0 and after their rookie years became fairly efficient scorers, especially Parker.

I'd say Russ has a lot to learn from those two in terms of scoring effectively and picking his spots. Neither Parker or Rondo had a jump shot, Rondo still doesn't, but they both score fairly efficiently without one because they know how to finish.

Freedarko doesn't have a search that I can find, so no link yet.

Keith :@Jax
Raging Bile Duct
Though, an interesting note on your questions. You ask how can we capitalize on his strengths. Inherently, that’s a question of, “How can we be better for him.” I think, being one of five in the starting lineup, and not even close to the most important, the question should never change from, “How can he be better for us.” If you focus on the former, you get AI, and he’s certainly not there yet (nor perhaps will that ever be a viable strategy).

I feel that I've been misunderstood here. As a coach, asking yourself "How can we capitalize on Russell's strengths" is not a "How can we be better for him" question in the least, otherwise the question would read "How can we help Russell capitalize on his strengths".

The coach has to look at Russell's ability to rebound. He has a knack for it that other guys his size and position don't have or haven't learned. So, you know someone has to get back on defense. So do you tell Russell "Hey, don't rebound, get back on D". Or do you look at Thabo and say "Hey, let Russell rebound, you get back on D". That's just a for instance. I've heard the coaching staff say repeatedly that they want all 5 guys to rebound the ball. Sounds like Russell has the green light to me. Just because it's prototypically the point guard's role to get back, doesn't mean that another solution wouldn't work.

I realize Russ isn't efficient, especially compared to the other guys in the list above. Obviously, Russ will be his own case study in years to come. I wonder what Tyreke Evans will be by season's end.

I think it would be a great idea to get a couple of NBA purists who follow the Celtics and the Spurs to answer a few questions about Rondo and Parker. I know those two guys made their purist fans pull their hair out for a good long while before they developed into the players they are today. It would be fun to ask them about the similarities in style, in stats, in systems and in development, and just set an eye-test timeline for Russell.

Keith :Also @VegaI mentioned it in the first post along those same lines. It would be a lot easier to pull Russell if we had a quality backup PG. We don’t, and I’m aware of that. Still, long-term effects aren’t only for the better. Imagine if you had been told since the start of your job that whether you do well or not, you still get paid the same. Maybe there just isn’t anyone else qualified to do what you do, but all the same. If you get paid the same (minutes/shots) not matter how good of a job you do (<40% shooting/high turnovers), can you really say you are learning to do a better job?
And you are right about the offense. In general, we still play a low-percentage style of basketball. It can't be beneficial to a PG's stats to have the majority of the team taking a majority of poor shots. But, those are problems with scoring and assists, not so much with turnovers and out of control play. Maybe his assists are limited by the offensive gameplan, but his decision making is not.

I agree and almost had an identical post in last nights game breakdown.

@justin
"I want to see how Russ does with James Harden in the starting lineup."

You and me both. Or at least more of Russ and Harden instead of Harden, Livingston; Russ, Thabo; Harden, Thabo.

The reason I picked Harden as the perfect fit from my very first Thunder Draft Prospectus last year, is because I thought that they would draft Harden because his skillset would help RW become a better PG and make life a little easier on him when it comes to passing, ball-handling, etc and free up RW to attack a more spaced floor.

@Keith
And it was a great paragraph at illustrating what I hope so many of us want from Russ and Brooks. I don't think any of us want to force Russ into something he's not and thereby negate his natural positive traits, but the ONE thing that he must either force himself into doing or have it forced upon him, is how to run a team. How to orchestrate on offense, how to move the ball and get teammates involved.

I would love for Russ to be a 16 pt, 7 assist, 5 reb player with probably 2.5+ TO's a game (obviously I'd like that to be lower, but I'm a realist). But only if he is making the offense flow and shooting when it is the best available shot, and passing to a teammate who has the best available shot.

Oh, and I'd like the other members of the team to start making more shots and moving without the ball...plus I'd like a big who can post up, because those are all three things that can erase PG mistakes and make it easier on the PG in his quest to orchestrate offense.

Until recently, Chauncey Billups has always played next to another ball handler. In Minnesota it was Terrell Brandon and Anthony Peeler. In Detroit, of course, he had Rip Hamilton who could always make that extra pass. These days he doesn't have, or really need, one.

In our offense, the ball stops after the first pass way too much. We don't have a lot of good passers in the starting lineup. Kevin Durant is improving, but he's still turnover prone. Thabo isn't that great.

I want to see how Russ does with James Harden in the starting lineup.