Home > Bolts > Wednesday Bolts – 2.9.11

Wednesday Bolts – 2.9.11

Kelly Dwyer of BDL on the 3-point contest: “With that said, I say it’s Durant’s contest to lose. Because of his range and athleticism, he’s the perfect candidate for an exhibition like this. There are other shooters who I’d want spotting up behind the 3-point arc, wide open, with the game on the line, but for a competition where you have to fire off 25 shots in a limited amount of time, from sideline to sideline? My money’s on Durant.”

Henry Abbott of TrueHoop on the contest: “Know who shoots the most 3s in the NBA this year? Jason Richardson, who has made 40 percent of his 305 3-pointers. Somewhere he’s tossing his tear-streaked stat sheet into a mud puddle and screaming “Kevin Durant?” Durant shot far less, and didn’t hit at nearly the same rate.

Shoals and Eric Freeman of FanHouse draft the league’s best scorers and KD is No. 1: “EF: Name one way he can’t score. The man can do it all. BS: He really can. He can touch the sky. I think what impresses me most about Durant is that not only can he score without you realizing it — he can score without the defender catching wind of what’s happened, either. Look at how often Durant gets the ball late in the shot clock, or way up at the top of the key, and then in an instant, he’s engineered a move, or launched off a shot, that’s just what the doctored ordered. It’s like what Mogwai said: something, the best is just the best.

Ethan Jaynes of Stacheketball giving it up to KD’s mom: “Somehow, even though Kevin Durant grew up during all of that, he has small town values. Was he born in French Lick Indiana? No, he was born in Washington DC. Kevin Durant was born in DC and had every excuse to be like every other super star, so why is he different? He was a basketball prodigy that was told from a very young age that he was more than the game, and he had every reason to believe it. With everyone pumping him up, and with Kevin being an impressionable young man, how did he come through it all to be different? Wanda Pratt.”

Reggie Miller, sticking up for small markets.

Who would you rather have as a teammate, LeBron or KD? 58 percent picked LeBron.

Ben Golliver on KD in the 3-point contest: “I, for one, am glad that Kevin Durant made the three-point contest even if he is the only one of the contestants to shoot below league-average from deep. Given his competitive desire, overall talent level and ability to rise to the occasion, Durant not only makes a great candidate, he serves as an excellent foil for the field. He gets to take on a Larry Bird role here, the intimidating all-NBA gunner who the specialists can try to take down. I love it. What better script is there for a three-point contest?”

Here’s the thing about KD’s low percentage, which everyone seems to be harping on. It’s the kind of 3-pointers he takes. They’re way different than James Jones or Daniel Gibson’s looks. KD doesn’t have the luxury of just hovering around the perimeter waiting for a kickout. Almost every 3 KD takes is contested or he’s curling off a screen. He’s not a spot-up shooter, but he is in fact, a very good shooter.

This Melo to LA talk is complete bull, but if it’s real, does it open the door for a Jeff Green for Nene trade?

Darnell Mayberry on last night’s game: “A few people asked me after the game (and some during when the outcome looked in doubt) whether this could be classified as a bad loss. I say yes. But only on the surface. The Grizzlies were shorthanded. They were on the second night of a back-to-back. And, quite frankly, they’re mediocre. The Thunder, meanwhile, had its full complement of players, had not laced them up since Saturday and is a top four team in the West. For all those reasons, this was a bad loss. But the Grizzlies played terrific basketball in the second half and earned this win. It’s not like the Thunder lost to a team going through the motions.”

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Fark
  • StumbleUpon

Bolts

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

@Keith
The Heat really don't have lots of opportunities to improve their team though during the off-season... they can't really sign free agents, and won't have good draft picks, so they aren't exactly going to get a ton better, unless you see some veterans that want to win a ring sign on for the minimum to play on that team.

I don't necessarily agree that a team like Orlando or Chicago couldn't beat them in a series... it could go either way, but yes the Heat do have flaws, and they won't necessarily be put on full display over the course of an 82 game season... there are lots of teams that make the playoffs that don't win titles (just ask the Mavs, Suns, Jazz, Hawks, Nuggets, and Blazers during the past 10 years).

@walker
They can be beat this year. For all their offensive firepower, they are actually a defensive team. If someone had a strong enough defense themselves and a bruising frontcourt with size, they could beat the Heat. I think the Celtics matchup well if they are all healthy by the playoffs. Specifically, Rondo and Shaq could kill the Heat and they have the defense to hold the score down. Neither Orlando or Chicago would win (though Rose would tear them up), but it would at least be a good series. LA, with a healthy Bynum, should be able to beat them.

The real test will be a year from now and later, whether the Heat can get a true center to defend the rim and whether they can keep the defense strong against PG-centric teams. The Celtics and Lakers are trending down, so someone else needs to make a serious push (cough*Presti*cough) if they want to keep the Heat from winning several straight in the future.

I don't think any team can beat the Heat 4out of 7.If you know Bball and be honest with yourself. Im not saying it can't happen but the chances are slim that someone beats them.

nick :Hahaha, it almost sounds like justin wrote that Hollinger article. One of the big points – development isn’t linear.

There goes my cover.

Anyway like you said, nothing new from Hollinger. The cap space and assets are there, of course, but I find it disturbing how much support there is in the Thunder media and fanbase for the team to not use it.

@nick
I liked the article because it appealed to both sides of the Thunder fanbase. If you were one that thought all we need is patience, Hollinger says maybe we just have too high of expectations and really the team is still positioned well. If you were one that thought we need another piece, Hollinger admits our defense is bad (and may have been worse than we thought last year), our role players haven't been developing, and Jeff Green shouldn't be our starting PF.

The real gist comes down to that we aren't there yet, we don't put our best foot forward, but that we should have the cap space and assets to get there.

@Thomas
I don't think there is any way that small markets will ever be on truly equal footing with the LAs, NYs, and Miamis of the world. The salary cap makes it so all the best players can't play together, but there are certain levels of desire that can never be overcome. Wade, Bosh, and Lebron all took less money to play together. No amount of CBA-ing can change something like that.

Ultimately, the only thing that could really be offered is a franchise tag. But, given the significantly fewer players on each team, plus how the league prefers player movement (it incites interest), it would be hard to implement fairly.

From @ESPN. I just read the Hollinger piece.

Just for YOU, here's a FREE, month-long subscription to ESPN Insider at no obligation: http://es.pn/fsRnHC

"What's Jeff Green's trade value around the league right now? He's a Lamar Odom like player with a great skill set but he doesn't always produce. Chad Ford: He's got a lot of value. A number of teams are interested. The Thunder are going to need a big man though ... that's what they're hunting for. There aren't a lot of them available right now." ESPN.com

Lamar Odom type!!!! Lamar Odom passes and rebounds far better than Jeff Green. Lordy. However, if his value league wide is really that high, lets trade.

Basically, Hollinger says everything that's been said here a bunch of time. Development isn't linear, so it was unrealistic to expect someone like KD to make the same kind of jump this year that he did last year. Thus, the expectations that people had on this team were unrealistic given that we came in with the same roster that we did last year. Our offense has been pretty great despite essentially being a two man show, and if other people hit shots we'd be terrifying. Our defense has really fallen off since last year, which could in part be due to the departure of Ron Adams and could be a regression to the mean since last year's numbers may have been unrealistic. Jeff Green really struggles guarding people in the post. Ibaka should eventually be our PF. Despite not meeting the unrealistic expectations that people place on us this year, we're still in a good place with cap space going into this summer and a bunch of good young players, headlined by KD and Russ.

Hahaha, it almost sounds like justin wrote that Hollinger article. One of the big points - development isn't linear.

@Keith
I feel like we're getting a bit sidetracked on this question of parity. I don't think the NBA will ever have parity no matter how evenly the all-star caliber players are spread (there are too many variables at play and all all-stars are not equal). I just want small market teams to be on equal footing to the fullest extent possible. If we end up with a league where all the superstars just want to play in a handful of markets and the CBA's structure essentially allows for that, I think that's bad.

Anjellic :@Thomas

I forthwith bequeath the moniker of Thomas to thee. I’ll go with this name now to prevent confusion. ‘Other Thomas’ sucked anyways and was too gradual of a name change from the one I maintained for a year or so.
Thunder UP!

Ha, Thanks! Love the new handle.

The Hollinger article final point says, "In the big picture, perhaps it says all you need to know that we're all disappointed because the Thunder are "only" on course for 52 wins. They are still firmly on the track they established when Durant arrived four years ago. We're the ones who went off the rails."

Which basically summarizes the whole article about how much was expected of these guys, and yet people are disappointed that they're "only" on course to win 52 games. It talks about how Westbrook and Ibaka have surged a few others haven't progressed as much as normal, how the defense is worse, and just some things like that, but that at the end of the day the Thunder are still being patient and still a good team, just people may have over-estimated the potential of this team to immediately be better.

Green has value to teams that don't have a great SF or PF or that are rebuilding and want younger cheaper talent, that they won't be able to outright sign in a FA war, because there aren't tons of players who line-up to rebuild a franchise. So if Thunder management wanted to trade Green they could, but as Chad Ford points out the Thunder want a big man and there aren't many available.

Side note: I love how Miami is considered some super team even though they haven't won a title yet, and match up very poorly against the Celtics and Orlando, similar to how the Thunder don't match-up well with the current Lakers or some other Western contenders. PS I love that the reason the Lakers are hesitating on a Bynum for Melo swap is because the executive who drafted Bynum doesn't want to see his prized find leave the organization and just happens to be a member of the Buss family.

@JJJ
Yeah, I'd love to see this.

What did Hollinger's article say about OKC?

ATH :
According to Chad Ford, Green has a lot of trade value and “a number of teams are interested.”
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/36925

This would be Christmas in February if it happened. Please take Jeff Green away from Scott Brooks.

Apparently Bynum's agent told him the Melo trade is a "possibility."

As much as Miami 2.0 sounds scary, I think a Bynum-less Lakers are more beatable for the Thunder, especially if it means less Artest on Durant. ESPECIALLY if it means Nene in OKC.

Denver would be a great place for Green, in that system. Sucks they're in our division but I'd route for him to do well there.

Anjellic :@Thomas
I forthwith bequeath the moniker of Thomas to thee. I’ll go with this name now to prevent confusion. ‘Other Thomas’ sucked anyways and was too gradual of a name change from the one I maintained for a year or so.
Thunder UP!

Like.

@andrew
Dwyer is absolutely right about this, though. Poeple throw the word gay around like it's a bad thing (and, yeah, I know some people believe it is), and for a high-profile professional athlete like KD, it's not something he needs to be throwing out there. Dwyer's just trying to help him out.

According to Chad Ford, Green has a lot of trade value and "a number of teams are interested."

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/36925

Can anyone give an update on Tibor Pleiss?

@Thomas

I forthwith bequeath the moniker of Thomas to thee. I'll go with this name now to prevent confusion. 'Other Thomas' sucked anyways and was too gradual of a name change from the one I maintained for a year or so.

Thunder UP!

I was a longtime Pacers fan before OKC got a team. It's extremely tough to be competitive longterm in a small market. The Pacers had a good run, but now look at them over the last decade. Right now, the Thunder are having a good run, but I am wondering how we will be 10 years from now.

Allow me to put on my tin-foil hat and say no matter how good we get, the NBA will never allow OKC to make the finals. The Lakers will sign the ghost of Larry Johnson in the 2019 Western Conference Finals and he'll hit a phantom four-point play to deny OKC.

There will always be a tiering system just because that's the way sports are setup. In a given year players are going to perform better or worse than other years which changes certain things, players will get hurt, etc... this changes the balance within the league. For example, this year Portland was predicted to be a contender in the west but injuries to pretty much their whole team has left them a shell of what their potential was. So every year there is a tier due to certain uncontrollable circumstances or even controllable ones like a team getting old and players retiring, and needing to be replaced, but how do you replace a Tim Duncan?. So the balance of the league is in constant flux, so while a team might be elite for a few years they don't always stay that way for long... unless they have a smart management system. Even the Yankees have years when they're bad and they have all the money in the world apparently to buy the best players every year so you'd think they'd win every year.

Man I really dislike Dwyer. I am pretty sure Kevin Durant could cure cancer and he would find fault with it.

KDonhoops@KDthunderup
. A lot of people who have dealt with some stuff get hurt by that. Pro-tip, my man

Personal preference, but I like have a top tier of elite teams and parity for everyone else. I prefer having a team to root for and teams to root against. If everyone's equal, I'm not going to feel one way or the other when two random teams are in the Finals. If it's XXX v. the Heat, I'll be rooting for the not-Heat. If it's the Nuggets v. the Hawks, who cares. I probably wouldn't even watch most of that. I despise the Heat, but I'd watch every game if they were in the Finals.

@Thomas
Well I personally don't think the Nuggets would trade Melo to the Lakers if they were smart... simply because I don't think trading your team's superstar within the conference is a good idea. But I don't think Melo would turn down a trade to the Laker's his big deal is that he wants to play for a team that wants to win a championship. The Nuggets as an organization would be smart to get whoever offers the best package, regardless of where it comes from. But their leverage of trying to hold the Knicks against the Nets backfired on them already. So some people think this whole Melo to the Lakers is just to leverage against the Knicks. But the for the Nuggets if you're trading Melo sure you could try to send him to the team that he wants to go but the smart organization is the one that gets the most out of the trade...

I just want to throw this point out, but during all the biggest booms of the NBA, it was littered with a handful of elite teams that beat up on the rest. Certain teams are just never going to be a huge draw (Memphis, Atlanta, Charlotte). What the NBA as a whole desires is the random viewer, the guy or girl who is flipping through the channels because their favorite show isn't on. The way you get fans like that is with a handful of truly elite teams that can be stories unto themselves. How many viewers only watched the NBA for MJ's Bulls or Magic/Bird's champions? How many people loved the enemy that the Bad Boy Pistons presented?

I don't think complete parity is truly viable (you'll never get 30 smart people to run each organization) or financially responsible for the league. If every team truly can win or lose every game, then the games lose their meaning. There's no should-wins or underdog victories, there's just the same game in every arena, just with different color schemes. True parity means that the best teams are the best through luck, and we don't watch a skill-based sport to see if our team gets lucky.

@prye05
Given your view on this I'm curious as to what your take is on Carmelo Anthony. Is Denver not a decently managed organization? He's brought up wanting to be in New York because it was his childhood home but if that's the case do we really expect him to attempt to sabotage a trade to the Lakers?

@prye05
Or as Mark Cuban said recently the worst place to be is a 40 win team. You either want to be really good or really bad.

While stars change the fortune of franchises... every market can have a star, regardless of the size of the market. If you suck for enough years unless your management trades away every single top pick you have or is completely incompetent... you will get a good player eventually (granted Minnesota didn't draft K-Love but they did trade for him).

The thing that really determines franchises is what you pay for mid-level talent, bench players, supporting pieces. Note **This is what the Thunder are facing in the upcoming years** IF Jeff Green, Ibaka, Harden, Maynor, Aldridge all asked for more money then they were worth this team would have some problems. But if they all sign reasonable contracts... this team has a very bright future, or at least one that they can be flexible and make changes. There are very few teams regardless of market size that can afford to take consistently make bad contracts... and normally end up paying for it with losses or giving up some important pieces to a team that can take the contract off their book (See the Knicks the past few years). Small market teams afraid they'll lose their star can trade him (See Nuggets) so as to keep their team full on talent as opposed to losing him for nothing. Plus teams that are smart financially regardless of market can benefit from exploiting dumb financial teams like what Houston did to the Knicks, what we did in the Maynor trade, etc. Or you can be a team like the Bobcats, Bucks, Det, Hawks and while competitive not really put yourself in a situation to really go anywhere because you aren't bad enough to get good picks, your aren't good enough to really compete, and you have no financial leeway to make any moves, and you would have to really blow up your team to do anything.

@justin
Yeah but they couldn't have had Bosh, Lebron, and Wade in Chicago. The point was that Miami was the only place ALL 3 could go. In doing so they still technically haven't won anything, where a lot of people think if one or two of them would have gone to Chicago, NJ, or NY they would have actually had a better shot at winning a title then all 3 joining forces.

@prye05

Wade and LeBron could have both went to Chicago.

The reason all 3 ended up in Miami was because all 3 could end up in Miami and that was the only place that was true, unless there were some really really fun S&T deals. IF the most money = the most wins then you'd see teams like Dallas, Orlando, NYK, winning titles just as often as the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs, Det, Chi. But the fact is that only 1 team can win a title every year, so 29 teams don't win and how you approach that fact is one of the differences. If you were the Cavs during Lebron's era you sold out every game, you were nationally televised, people wanted to sign with you so they could play with Lebron, but instead of being smart and surrounding him with a quality core over the process of a few years, you paid mid-level players lots of money and screwed yourself over both financially and talent wise. Compared to the Spurs who built a core first around Duncan and Robinson, then after Robinson built a core around Duncan with Parker and Manu... and have been willing to not pay players like Udrih, Hedo, etc and instead paid for quality role players and veterans who understand their role and the importance of winning.

Another thing I think they need to look at is a way for teams to match another team's offer after taxes are factored in. Toronto literally can't match what Orlando and Miami can offer within the terms of the current structure because of the differences in taxation between Canada and Florida.

@MorganG
Maybe the fact that he didn't go to New York really speaks to the importance of management and the lack there of for New York in past years. Although, I would go to Miami too if those were my choices.

Sorry, that last one was @Thomas

I definitely agree about management being important. i think that the Knicks showed us that over a period of several years. They are finally getting things straightened out, but man they sucked for quite a while. I think something that probably worked against Chicago is the fact that Michael Jordan owns that city. LeBron could never live up to Jordan in their eyes. I don't really fault him for that. I think he could have been special in New York too though. I think that their stock of shooters along with Amare would have been perfect for his game.

Is Miami really considered a big market? I've always thought it to be a mid-sized market. I think the weather and night life make it attractive to FA's, not the size.

@Thomas@prye05
not pyre05

@MorganG
No doubt. I mean to @pyre05's point, the management does matter, clearly San Antonio has been able to attract some of the veteran type free agents over the years that are just looking to get a ring and they have retained their main cadre of stars and they had to have the flexibility to do that. But in cases where all things are equal (equal ability to offer the max, similar opportunities to win) these destination cities have a huge advantage. Winning isn't even enough for some of these guys, I think many people felt Lebron's chance to win a championship would have actually been better in Chicago than Miami and yet look where he ended up.

@MorganG
When I say there, I mean Cleveland.

@justin
I agree. Except for the championship year, Miami has never been very competitive while Wade has been there. There have never been any real feelings that he might leave because he loves the town and the market. He is a superstar on Southbeach where all of the celebrities go on vacation. They all wanted to live in Miami with great weather and huge star appeal. If Cleveland had all that cap space to sign 3 max guys instead of Miami, they would not have all signed there.

@justin
Not only are these markets more attractive to top tier free agents because of off the court stuff, but the large markets are more able to pay the luxury tax if they go over the current soft cap. There's more money from the TV deals and the corporate sponsorships in the large markets.

@prye05

You don't think that Bosh and LeBron signed with Miami because it's Miami? Come on...

Small markets can compete in the NBA, but it's far easier for a team like Miami, NY, or LAL to attract free agents and keep them.

Thomas :
I think the league has to come up with something to make smaller markets more competitive with the larger markets in attracting and retaining free agents or the whole situation is going to degrade into a joke. It isn’t good for competition or the quality of the product to have 3 or 4 superteams blowing everyone else out every night. So long as players are going to be most concerned about the night life in their destination city or the outside media opportunities the possibility exists for talent aggregation like we see in Miami.

The issue really isn't the size of the market, it's the management of the franchise. Star players really have no problem playing for a small market, as long as that team is competitive, or at least trying to be competitive. The problem is when the team overpays for mid-level talent and removes flexibility to make moves and gets "stuck". The reason Lebron and Bosh left was because they felt they had a better chance to win elsewhere as a group yes... but only because their organization wasn't that smart with the talent and contracts they were surrounding them with. This year look at the Bucks, they were a playoff team last year, went out and bought lots of mid-level vets on not the greatest contracts to be in a win now mode, and they're not nearly where they should be, even with the injuries they've had. Yes, the Luxury tax hampers small market teams a bit more than big market teams but that doesn't change the competitive nature of the teams, other small market teams can take advantage of those teams just like the Thunder did when stealing Maynor last year. So it's not all about size of Market, it's about the competence of the franchise... which puts teams like Minnesota, Tor, Cle, and a few others at a disadvantage.

A Mogwai reference on DT? Second-hand, but still. My love of Thunder basketball and indie rock music are both pleased by these bolts.

@justin
You can kind of tell Darnell was pretty disgusted watching the game last night. I think we all were. Hopefully the guys just needed to get this one out of their system.

Darnell spitting some fire. :)