is the OKC team one starting SG away?

[Moranis]

Again, OKC's problem is the same it has had the entire time, its coach just isn't good enough.

That's a shallow assessment. No coach in the league is improving Waiters' BBIQ, Roberson's inability to shoot, Morrow's inability to defend, Kanter's inability to defend, Payne's rookie ignorance, and Singler's inability to be an NBA player. At least not in a single season.

Those are role players.

Brooks was a terrible coach.  His terrible coaching led to a bunch of terrible GM moves.  Donovan doesn't look much better than Brooks in the coaching department.  It is obviously one year, but I have not been impressed at all by Donovan's coaching. 

Put it this way, if Pop took over that team when Brooks did, OKC would have multiple titles right now.

... of course they're role players. They are quite literally the issue here.

"If Pop took over that team when Brooks did" is nonsense. When Pop lacked talent to support his Big 3, his Spurs teams were perennial first round exits. It was only once he got Kawhi and Danny Green to complement the Big 3 that he started seeing success again. Surprise, you need talented role players around your stars to actually make deep runs.

perennial 1st round exits?  Since Duncan arrived, the Spurs have lost in the 1st round 4 times, and one of those was two years ago (with those players you talk of) and another they were a 61 win team and the 1st round lost was one of the biggest upsets in playoff history (and Danny Green was on that team).  The Spurs have never lost back to back 1st rounds. 

The 06/07 title team had 3 playoff starters average ~20 ppg, ~10 rpg, < 4 apg (TOTAL) in the regular season (obviously Manu wasn't a starter and was their 3rd best player). 

I firmly maintain, OKC's problem is not the lack of a SG or anything other than its the lack of a top level coach.  Period.

Fine, would you accept "perennial also-rans?" They had one conference finals appearance between their last title in 2007 and their WCF run in 2012 and it was a gentleman's sweep. They were not seriously contending for years after their 2007 title until they added Kawhi Leonard to the mix with Danny Green.

The primary issue holding OKC back has been three straight years of injury, unless you think just any coach is supposed to be able to win a title while missing Westbrook and/or Durant.

There were 4 seasons between the 07 Title and the WCF appearance in 12.  San Antonio was in the WCF one of those years (yes the Lakers beat them in 5) and in another season won 61 games and was the 1 seed in the West (yes they flamed out against Memphis in the 1st round that year).  If you don't think that those teams are serious contenders, I'm not sure what to tell you.  The other two years they lost to Dallas in the 1st round (Manu missed about half the season and the entire playoffs) and Phoenix in the 2nd round (Parker missed half the season and was still banged up in the playoffs and only started 2 of the 10 games).  So, to recap, in those 4 seasons, San Antonio was in the WCF Finals, was the 1 seed in the West, and had injuries to 1 of the big 3 in the other 2 seasons. 

[loco_91]

They might be a new owner and a good coach away.

This. But soon, they will also be two superstars away...

[Endless Paradise]

It doesn't matter how many games you win in the regular season if you're losing in the first or second round consistently. No, they were not seriously contending during that period.

[Moranis]

It doesn't matter how many games you win in the regular season if you're losing in the first or second round consistently. No, they were not seriously contending during that period.

consistently?  You see that is the problem, you use words like that, but don't have the support for the statement, unless you think injuries don't give you a pass. 

Dallas won 67 games and lost in the 1st round the year after making the NBA Finals, I guess they weren't a contender because the next three seasons, despite being a 50+ win team didn't make it past the 2nd round.  Never mind they won the title the 5th season. 

Sounds like the Spurs, but nope teams that make the WCF and also end up as the #1 seed in the toughest conference, aren't real contenders. 

This is an utterly ridiculous position you are taking.  When healthy, the Spurs have been a legitimate contender since the 97/98 season (only the 99 season when there were just 50 games has San Antonio not won at least 50 during that stretch, including 5 of over 60 and the two shortened seasons were on pace for 60 as well).  During that span, San Antonio has never gone 4 seasons without making at least the WCF and has been to 6 Finals, winning 5.  The only two consistencies are Greg Popovich and Tim Duncan.  Duncan is far from the player he once was, but yet the Spurs just keep right on trucking along, because Greg Popovich is the greatest coach of his generation and a top 3 coach all time (along with Phil and Red). 

[Endless Paradise]

Dallas won 67 games and lost in the 1st round the year after making the NBA Finals, I guess they weren't a contender because the next three seasons, despite being a 50+ win team didn't make it past the 2nd round.  Never mind they won the title the 5th season.

They weren't. Why do you think the whole "can't win a title with Dirk" stuff started popping up around the same time as the "Spurs are finished" talk?

If you aren't putting yourself in realistic position to win a title, I don't consider you a contender. The Grizzlies have made a single WCF in the past six years, yet they've made the playoffs that entire span. They aren't true contenders, either.

[Who]

Agreed = Spurs were not a contender again until Kawhi and Danny Green arrived. Their role players got too old after winning in 2007 and they had large structural flaws after they left until Kawhi and Danny Green arrived. They lacked size & athleticism and defense & rebounding on the wings. And Duncan did not have enough on the interior (defense & rebounding) until Splitter came and then was given a larger role. In that in-between period, the Spurs were your typical regular season titan playoff dwarf. They were just not built well enough to succeed in the playoffs against the best of the best.

[Moranis]

Agreed = Spurs were not a contender again until Kawhi and Danny Green arrived. Their role players got too old after winning in 2007 and they had large structural flaws after they left until Kawhi and Danny Green arrived. They lacked size & athleticism and defense & rebounding on the wings. And Duncan did not have enough on the interior (defense & rebounding) until Splitter came and then was given a larger role. In that in-between period, the Spurs were your typical regular season titan playoff dwarf. They were just not built well enough to succeed in the playoffs against the best of the best.

a 61 win team that is the 1 seed in the West is not a contender.  Seems like an odd position to take.  BTW, that team had Danny Green on it, he barely played.  The year before that, Parker was banged up all year and still ailing in the playoffs but they still won 50 games and a playoff series.  Parker isn't injured that season probably works out a bit differently for the Spurs.