OT: Oklahoma City

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I will say 1000000% he is not going any where for a long time.
 
OKC play with a swagger of a playoff team.

Durant > Oden

Durant > Horford

What's your point?
 
Durant, the reigning "No-Defense Rookie of the Year":

* No-Defense Rookie of the Year: KEVIN DURANT, Seattle.
-Not a huge shock, though I strongly considered the Clippers’ Al Thornton, who, in limited time, was just awful on defense. But Durant gets the nod because he played so much, because he could play better defense (those long arms) but because it doesn’t look like he’ll do that at any point in his NBA career. Only 75 blocks in almost 3,000 minutes? Bleah.

Seattle was a terrible defensive team all year, but when Durant was off the floor, the Sonics were actually decent–opponents scored only 104.6 per 100 possessions. When Durant was out there, the flood gates were open–113.4 points per 100.
Click to expand...
 
Obviously a lot has changed from his rookie year. He's quickly developing into an all-around player.
 
I guess Durant's irrelevance to a team is not new. I was just looking at the record of the U-Texas basketball team:

2005-6 (with LaMarcus): 30-7, 13-3 in the Big 12 (tied first), made it to the Elite 8.
2006-7 (Durant's year): 25-10, 12-4 (3rd), out in the second round
2007-8 (D.J. Augustin): 31-7, 13-3 (tied first), Elite 8 again

Not quite the effect Oden had on Ohio State, is it?
 
Fez said:
Obviously a lot has changed from his rookie year. He's quickly developing into an all-around player.
Click to expand...

Well, half of one, anyway:

But then why is his +/- an abysmal -6.4 on one of the worst teams in the entire league? Can a player as obviously good as Durant be secretly bad? (If you’re wondering if any other team’s best player has a negative +/-, the answer is no, unless you count Derrick Rose.) The issue here is Durant’s defense–he makes the Thunder 2.7 points per 100 possessions better offensively, but Durant costs the Thunder a whopping 9.1 points per 100 possessions on defense. This is consistent with last year, when +/- found him to be the worst defender in the League.
Click to expand...

(And this is from one of his defenders.)
 
His problems lie with defense. Defense can be taught, I think it will come.
 
It's still early to decide whether or not Durant is actually good. When someone puts up a lot of points on a losing team, you don't learn very much. Someone has to score the points. Look at Shareef Abdur-Rahim or Mitch Richmond. Scored a lot on a loser. Durant may be the same.
 
KingSpeed said:
It's still early to decide whether or not Durant is actually good. When someone puts up a lot of points on a losing team, you don't learn very much. Someone has to score the points. Look at Shareef Abdur-Rahim or Mitch Richmond. Scored a lot on a loser. Durant may be the same.
Click to expand...

We've evolved in the way that we evaluate players with the creation of TS%.

Kevin Durant is scoring 26.0 PPG on 58.7 TS%. He is scoring both very high in volume, at a very high efficiency. He is a legitimate top scorer in the league.

Compare this to say Jalen Rose with the Bulls in 02-03, he averaged 22.1 PPG but on 50.8 TS%. That's no good, that's just scoring a lot because you're taking a lot of shots, not because you're a good scorer. That doesn't describe Durant.

Or Zach Randolph in Portland. His last year, when he was averaging 23.6 PPG, he got his TS% up to an "okay" 53.7 TS%. Nothing special, just scoring because you're taking quite a lot of shots. His other years in Portland? He was bad in scoring efficiency. And they wonder why his teams suck...because in addition to his bad defense, he was never a good offensive player.

Or Al Jefferson in Minnesota, yes, he is averaging over 20 points a game, but his TS% has just been in the 53's TS%. That's just "okay", that doesn't make him an allstar level scorer. No mystery why Minnesota sucks despite having a big man who scores 23 points and grabs 11 rebounds, because that guy is only an average scorer efficiency wise.

Kevin Durant on the otherhand is a very special scorer. The jury's not out, he has proven he's a really good basketball player, at least on the offensive end.
 
Personally, I think Durant will be good. I doubt he'll ever win a 'ship w/o a dominant big man though.
 
Денг Гордон said:
We've evolved in the way that we evaluate players with the creation of TS%.

Kevin Durant is scoring 26.0 PPG on 58.7 TS%. He is scoring both very high in volume, at a very high efficiency. He is a legitimate top scorer in the league.

Compare this to say Jalen Rose with the Bulls in 02-03, he averaged 22.1 PPG but on 50.8 TS%. That's no good, that's just scoring a lot because you're taking a lot of shots, not because you're a good scorer. That doesn't describe Durant.

Or Zach Randolph in Portland. His last year, when he was averaging 23.6 PPG, he got his TS% up to an "okay" 53.7 TS%. Nothing special, just scoring because you're taking quite a lot of shots. His other years in Portland? He was bad in scoring efficiency. And they wonder why his teams suck...because in addition to his bad defense, he was never a good offensive player.

Or Al Jefferson in Minnesota, yes, he is averaging over 20 points a game, but his TS% has just been in the 53's TS%. That's just "okay", that doesn't make him an allstar level scorer. No mystery why Minnesota sucks despite having a big man who scores 23 points and grabs 11 rebounds, because that guy is only an average scorer efficiency wise.

Kevin Durant on the otherhand is a very special scorer. The jury's not out, he has proven he's a really good basketball player, at least on the offensive end.
Click to expand...

+1

I haven't given up hope on Oden for the Blazers sake, but I do think that Durant is going to be a very special player on this league. He's already shown his ability to score with the best of the players in the league. Let's not forget that LeBron James, for all of his ability, was not considered a particularly strong defender until he decided to put effort into it recently. Durant is long and could become a very good defender, like we all project Batum to be.

To be honest, at this point I am disappointed that we did not draft Durant. Putting him on one side of the floor and Roy on the other would be devastating and I think that offensively the Blazers would have so much flexibility that it would be ridiculous. Durant is the real deal, not just a good player on a bad team.
 
OKC will soon pass Minnesota. Their odds are slipping for someone good. I hope they keep on winning.
 
The thing about Durant is that he hasn't made his team better. LeBron immediately made his team better. Durant has had no impact. None. In fact, they've played better without him.
 
KingSpeed said:
The thing about Durant is that he hasn't made his team better. LeBron immediately made his team better. Durant has had no impact. None. In fact, they've played better without him.
Click to expand...

Dude, give it up on this pointless bullshit. You try to hate on other players in defense of Oden. So lame.


edit: I mean what I say, but Im not as pissed as how it sounds
 
Last edited:
Ummm... my post had nothing to do with Oden.

Durant has had zero impact on the Thunder. None. Oden hasn't had much impact on his team either, but he hasn't played enough for us to know. Durant has played nearly 2 full seasons and his team hasn't gotten better. LeBron joined a 15-67 team and immediately made it better. Durant is a just high scorer on a bad team.
 
DaRizzle said:
Dude, give it up on this pointless bullshit. You try to hate on other players in defense of Oden. So lame.
Click to expand...

Good use of statistics to show that his point was wrong! Oh wait a minute, that's what someone who knows what he's saying would have done.
 
KingSpeed said:
Durant has had zero impact on the Thunder. None.
Click to expand...

That's not true:

Kevin Durant averaged 30.6 points per game in February, when the Thunder lost nine of 12 games. But with Durant sidelined with a sprained ankle, Oklahoma City has posted a 4-1 record, including Sunday's 89-74 win over the 76ers, and that score suggests the reason: The Thunder allowed an average of 104.8 points per 48 minutes with Durant on the floor, 9.0 points more than their average without him (95.8 per 48).
Click to expand...

See? Durant is definitely a game-changer.
 
Денг Гордон said:
We've evolved in the way that we evaluate players with the creation of TS%.
Click to expand...

Oh have we? It's worth remembering that "evolved" doesn't mean "got better".

Kevin Durant is scoring 26.0 PPG on 58.7 TS%. He is scoring both very high in volume, at a very high efficiency. He is a legitimate top scorer in the league.
Click to expand...

That is indeed good. Good for 42nd in the league (behind a lot of big men, who of course take shots closer in). However, there are a few shooters who are better:

6. Ray Allen (63.5%)
8. Matt Bonner (62.9%)
13. Jose Calderon (61.4%)
15. Jameer Nelson (61.2%)
17. Mehmet Okur (60.9%)
18. Steve Nash (60.7%)
19. Troy Murphy (60.7%)
25. Greg Oden (60.0%) (Not a shooter, but someone who could do with getting more shots, perhaps.)
27. Manu Ginobili (59.9%)
29. Brent Barry (59.7%)
30. Steve Novak (59.7%)
31. Mo Williams (59.7%)
36. Kevin Martin (59.5%)
37. Eric Gordon (59.5%)
38. Chris Paul (59.4%)
40. Mike Miller (59.1%)

So Durant isn't SO super-duper special, is he? I keep hearing this stat with the suggestion that Durant is like leading the league in it or something, but Nash, Ginobili, Williams, Martin, and even the rookie Eric Gordon are much more impressive, particularly as they're short, and in the case of people like Calderon, Nash, Williams and Chris Paul, are controlling the ball rather than being given it in a position to shoot (like someone like Steve Novak).
 
Damn - Oklahoma City finally win one with Durant - and against a good team too.

However, in my defense, Durant was still a -6. This game was won by the OKC bench over the San Antonio bench.

And further in my defense, their best player recently has been Kyle Weaver, whom I wanted us to draft. (I'd link to the post, but it's at That Other Place, and last time I went there it wouldn't let me do searches.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top