BS Report W/ Billy Hunter

[StartOrien]

for anyone mentioning OKC, its worth noting that most of their players are still on their rookie deals so right now it looks like they are being smart with their $$...but wait until those deals expire, they will have to pay/overpay ALOT of those guys to keep them.....

While that's true, OKC has done a pretty good job at understanding this. They haven't really gone out and overspent in free agency, and they waited a long time to make a "big" acquisition (perkins) that fits their team well.

[Fafnir]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

In other words, get lucky in the lottery and hope your year has true franchise building blocks coming out.

They recognize this and are setting themselves up to ride those players through their next contracts but that's really the only way to succeed as a small market team.

Honestly the reason competitive balance is all out of wack in the NBA is their are a very limited number of true franchise players.

[StartOrien]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

[Fafnir]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

[StartOrien]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

He's had tremendous success with Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. "Luck and randomness" can't take you that far.

Even a "failed opportunity" reminds me that OKC is running a smart business. Clearly, they were mistaken in not accepting Tyson Chandler in their trade - but it backs up their business. There was enough concern with his health that they didn't think they could afford the risk.

[Fafnir]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

He's had tremendous success with Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. "Luck and randomness" can't take you that far.

What if they had gotten the second pick in 2010 instead of 2007? Evan Turner, Favors, Cousins, Wes Johnson don't look to be the caliber of Durant even at their best.

What if they'd gotten the first pick and gotten Oden? What if Durant had knee issues instead?

People like to pretend that their choices matter more than they do. Drafts are a crapshoot, you never know when elite athleticism is going to turn into an elite basketball player or when injury will take it all away.

Sometimes small markets get lucky and hit it big with a guy like Durant and they can build around him. Other times their isn't that franchise guy there, or worse he's there and he gets hurt.

[StartOrien]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

He's had tremendous success with Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. "Luck and randomness" can't take you that far.

What if they had gotten the second pick in 2010 instead of 2007? Evan Turner, Favors, Cousins, Wes Johnson don't look to be the caliber of Durant even at their best.

What if they'd gotten the first pick and gotten Oden? What if Durant had knee issues instead?

People like to pretend that their choices matter more than they do. Drafts are a crapshoot, you never know when elite athleticism is going to turn into an elite basketball player or when injury will take it all away.

But you're playing a game of hypothetical as opposed to looking at the actual results.

He's hit the nail on the head with 4 core players, and outside of Durant, none of those other 3 were the "consensus" pick

[Fafnir]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

He's had tremendous success with Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. "Luck and randomness" can't take you that far.

What if they had gotten the second pick in 2010 instead of 2007? Evan Turner, Favors, Cousins, Wes Johnson don't look to be the caliber of Durant even at their best.

What if they'd gotten the first pick and gotten Oden? What if Durant had knee issues instead?

People like to pretend that their choices matter more than they do. Drafts are a crapshoot, you never know when elite athleticism is going to turn into an elite basketball player or when injury will take it all away.

But you're playing a game of hypothetical as opposed to looking at the actual results.

He's hit the nail on the head with 4 core players.

We're talking about a league wide system to allow small markets to be competitive. You're failing to acknowledge that OKC basically gambled and got lucky by landing a healthy franchise player to build around. Plenty of other franchises try the same model and it doesn't work. Take a look at Minnesota, they are still terrible and lack the elite talent to build around. Look at the Kings, look at the GSW, look at the Clippers until they finally hit on Griffin (even he had an injury that cost him a season, imagine if it becomes a chronic issue)

How many small markets have played the be terrible for four years and draft a franchise player and it hasn't worked? Far more than have successfully gotten a guy like Kevin Durant. That's because their just aren't that many elite players out there and getting one requires a lot of luck in the end.

[bdm860]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

He's had tremendous success with Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. "Luck and randomness" can't take you that far.

I also don't think it's luck with a guy like Presti in OKC.

He didn't resign Rashard Lewis (but was Lewis leaving anyway?), and he traded away a good player in Jeff Green.

Alot of other GM's out there probably would have given both big extensions and kept them on the team.  This is part of what makes a good GM.  Same thing the Bulls did with Ben Gordon, the Bulls felt Gordon wasn't worth the money he wanted and so they didn't give him the contract he wanted.  A lot of other GM's would have just paid Ben Gordon, hey he's a young-and-up-and-coming star.  Keeping the right guys, and not giving money to the wrong ones definitely has something to do with it.

[Fafnir]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

He's had tremendous success with Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. "Luck and randomness" can't take you that far.

I also don't think it's luck with a guy like Presti in OKC.

He didn't resign Rashard Lewis (but was Lewis leaving anyway?), and he traded away a good player in Jeff Green.

Alot of other GM's out there probably would have given both big extensions and kept them on the team.  This is part of what makes a good GM.  Same thing the Bulls did with Ben Gordon, the Bulls felt Gordon wasn't worth the money he wanted and so they didn't give him the contract he wanted.  A lot of other GM's would have just paid Ben Gordon, hey he's a young-and-up-and-coming star.  Keeping the right guys, and not giving money to the wrong ones definitely has something to do with it.

Good GMs can definitely avoid over paying players or putting themselves in salary cap hell.

But OKC isn't a title contender without Kevin Durant for all the smart moves that came afterwards. Their franchise is built around him and his talents.

All the smart moves in the world don't make the Bulls contenders if they don't win the lottery and get Rose when they had around a 2% chance to do so.

Other teams try the same thing but also clear out space in FA, and even that can't land them elite talent most of the time...

[Chris]

OKC isn't a blueprint for success in anyway shape or form. Their entire success is built on getting multiple top 3 picks and hitting on players who have stayed healthy.

That's a task that plenty of teams have failed.

Because their high draft picks blow out a knee in many cases. Or because the best player in the draft doesn't end up being a star in the NBA.

That's luck and randomness more than a plan.

He's had tremendous success with Durant, Westbrook, Harden and Ibaka. "Luck and randomness" can't take you that far.

I also don't think it's luck with a guy like Presti in OKC.

He didn't resign Rashard Lewis (but was Lewis leaving anyway?), and he traded away a good player in Jeff Green.

Alot of other GM's out there probably would have given both big extensions and kept them on the team.  This is part of what makes a good GM.  Same thing the Bulls did with Ben Gordon, the Bulls felt Gordon wasn't worth the money he wanted and so they didn't give him the contract he wanted.  A lot of other GM's would have just paid Ben Gordon, hey he's a young-and-up-and-coming star.  Keeping the right guys, and not giving money to the wrong ones definitely has something to do with it.

Presti has done a very good job (so far) of managing the cap (we will see how the Perk deal works for them, as they try to sign some of their other young guys), but had he not lucked into the #2 pick, and had Durant fall into his lap, OKC would not be used a positive example for much of anything.  

[StartOrien]

We're talking about a league wide system to allow small markets to be competitive. You're failing to acknowledge that OKC basically gambled and got lucky by landing a healthy franchise player to build around. Plenty of other franchises try the same model and it doesn't work. Take a look at Minnesota, they are still terrible and lack the elite talent to build around. Look at the Kings, look at the GSW, look at the Clippers until they finally hit on Griffin (even he had an injury that cost him a season, imagine if it becomes a chronic issue)

How many small markets have played the be terrible for four years and draft a franchise player and it hasn't worked? Far more than have successfully gotten a guy like Kevin Durant. That's because their just aren't that many elite players out there and getting one requires a lot of luck in the end.

I'm not dismissing an issue as much as I'm giving credit where credits due. Yes, they're not a contender without Durant, but they don't achieve what they've done without great management.

[StartOrien]

Presti has done a very good job (so far) of managing the cap (we will see how the Perk deal works for them, as they try to sign some of their other young guys), but had he not lucked into the #2 pick, and had Durant fall into his lap, OKC would not be used a positive example for much of anything. 

I think its hard to say. Durant allows them to be a little more conservative, but they've done a great job on not 'reaching' on free agents.

[BballTim]

Presti has done a very good job (so far) of managing the cap (we will see how the Perk deal works for them, as they try to sign some of their other young guys), but had he not lucked into the #2 pick, and had Durant fall into his lap, OKC would not be used a positive example for much of anything. 

I think its hard to say. Durant allows them to be a little more conservative, but they've done a great job on not 'reaching' on free agents.

  They didn't really have a reason to reach on free agent signings until Durant matured for a few years.

[Chris]

Presti has done a very good job (so far) of managing the cap (we will see how the Perk deal works for them, as they try to sign some of their other young guys), but had he not lucked into the #2 pick, and had Durant fall into his lap, OKC would not be used a positive example for much of anything. 

I think its hard to say. Durant allows them to be a little more conservative, but they've done a great job on not 'reaching' on free agents.

Regardless of whether they would "reach" for FA's or not without Durant there, my point is, if they didn't get Durant there, then they are looking at a team who is at best struggling to get the 8th seed, and likely on the outside looking in out West.  They likely would not have been able to build the fanbase they have around their superstar.  And they may be another examples of a team that can't afford to get any better, rather than a team that was cost conscious.