RealGM

What could I possibly mean by this seemingly insane at first glance statement? A super team that was assembled organically at a young age with a lot of key role players, that has a very, very long title window. With a top 3 MVP level guy, but with two players surrounding him that can easily randomly go off and win finals MVP some day (Parker, Ginobili and Chet, Williams).

Their stars are 25, 23 and 21 years old. All 3 have high skill, not athleticism based games. Their high upside role players still in development range from 20-24 years old. My official prediction for them is 2-4 rings over a 12 year run of being a top 3 team in the league. They aren’t a Warriors, Lakers or Bulls dynasty where they overpower teams for several years in a row. They won’t threepeat or even repeat most likely.

They are going to be more like a team that’s just always in the hunt for 10+ years and the years where health, talent, matchup breaks their way they win rings.

I’ve already had to bump 4 prediction threads this week. Maybe you guys won’t let me bump this one in 10 years.

so many things can just go wrong

All of your players outside of Gordon Hayward who's 75 years old have zero playoff series wins, slow down.

About to be 1 playoff series win, but you haven't gone through Luka Jokic Tatum Ant etc... yet.

Presti does come from the Spurs braintrust but a lot of the Spurs success was related to drafting a generational talent like Duncan. I don't think either SGA or Chet are Duncan level talents.

Patches Perry wrote:Presti does come from the Spurs braintrust but a lot of the Spurs success was related to drafting a generational talent like Duncan. I don't think either SGA or Chet are Duncan level talents.

Sure, but I think Chet and Williams both could be better than Tony Parker was and similar impact to Manu. So while Duncan>SGA, Williams and Chet have the upside to surpass the second two.

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

Patches Perry wrote:Presti does come from the Spurs braintrust but a lot of the Spurs success was related to drafting a generational talent like Duncan. I don't think either SGA or Chet are Duncan level talents.

Sure, but I think Chet and Williams both should be better than Tony Parker was and similar impact to Manu. So while Duncan>SGA, Williams and Chet have the upside to surpass the second two.

But under the cap 3 elite players will cost you a lot, which limits your ability to fill out the roster.

Thunder are in an incredible spot but I voted that a lottttt has to go right still to get 5 titles in 15 years.

It is much closer to 2010 lakers, with SGA-Kobe, Chet-Gasol levels of impact.

Patches Perry wrote:Presti does come from the Spurs braintrust but a lot of the Spurs success was related to drafting a generational talent like Duncan. I don't think either SGA or Chet are Duncan level talents.

yet back in 2012 i thought they had it with durant being the duncan, westbrook being elite as parker never was and harden very ginobili-like

harden bolted/traded. westbrook and durant had season damaging injuries. there was a revenue spike that allowed some teams a huge financial window while the thunder was bound to huge contracts. and then durant bolted,

window closed.

being good leaves you at the door. once you get there it's more luck than anything.

A lot of people predicted OKC to win not 1, but 2, but 3 etc... the last time they were the #1 seed. They had 3 of the biggest stars in the NBA that all won MVPs. They won 1 trip to the Finals and nothing else. They were all around the same age as these guys too.

Patches Perry wrote:

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

Patches Perry wrote:Presti does come from the Spurs braintrust but a lot of the Spurs success was related to drafting a generational talent like Duncan. I don't think either SGA or Chet are Duncan level talents.

Sure, but I think Chet and Williams both should be better than Tony Parker was and similar impact to Manu. So while Duncan>SGA, Williams and Chet have the upside to surpass the second two.

But under the cap 3 elite players will cost you a lot, which limits your ability to fill out the roster.

Thunder are in an incredible spot but I voted that a lottttt has to go right still to get 5 titles in 15 years.

I gave 2-4 rings in my post. I don’t think for a second they will MATCH their ring count or even be AS good/long lasting. I just think they are going to have a very long window, with a couple or few rings spread out as far as 5-10 years apart. So a less dominant peak dynasty and more of a lengthy, always in the mix dynasty.

ChipotleWest wrote:A lot of people predicted OKC to win not 1, but 2, but 3 etc... the last time they were the #1 seed. They had 3 of the biggest stars in the NBA that all won MVPs. They won 1 trip to the Finals and nothing else. They were all around the same age as these guys too.

In all fairness they left in their primes to ring chase etc. They literally had the Dynasty Warriors beat and choked.

The Spurs had a win % of 58+ during Duncan's 19 year career and won 5 titles. Maybe OKC should try winning 58 games once and getting out of the West before we put them in the same paragraph as the Spurs.

The thing that sucks for OKC is how they will pay for all these players in a small market that never pays the tax.

One_and_Done wrote:The Spurs had a win % of 58+ during Duncan's 19 year career and won 5 titles. Maybe OKC should try winning 58 games once and getting out of the West before we put them in the same paragraph as the Spurs.

Or just read my explanation of Spurs type or CLOSEST comp in title? I didn’t say they will match or surpass those Spurs. I wrote in the post what areas it could be a similar, although lesser run.

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

Patches Perry wrote:

OkcSinceSGA wrote:
Sure, but I think Chet and Williams both should be better than Tony Parker was and similar impact to Manu. So while Duncan>SGA, Williams and Chet have the upside to surpass the second two.

But under the cap 3 elite players will cost you a lot, which limits your ability to fill out the roster.

Thunder are in an incredible spot but I voted that a lottttt has to go right still to get 5 titles in 15 years.

I gave 2-4 rings in my post. I don’t think for a second they will MATCH their ring count or even be AS good/long lasting. I just think they are going to have a very long window, with a couple or few rings spread out as far as 5-10 years apart. So a less dominant peak dynasty and more of a lengthy, always in the mix dynasty.

From your lips to God's ears my friend

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

ChipotleWest wrote:A lot of people predicted OKC to win not 1, but 2, but 3 etc... the last time they were the #1 seed. They had 3 of the biggest stars in the NBA that all won MVPs. They won 1 trip to the Finals and nothing else. They were all around the same age as these guys too.

In all fairness they left in their primes to ring chase etc. They literally had the Dynasty Warriors beat and choked.

Harden didn't leave to ring chase. He left because the OKC cheap ass owner wouldn't cough up another $1.1M a year to extend him.

The Thunder offered Harden $55.5 million over four years -- $4.5 million less than the max deal Harden coveted and will get from the Rockets, sources told ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/8562868/oklahoma-city-thunder-trade-james-harden-houston-rockets


Expect history to repeat itself.

stillgotgame wrote:

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

ChipotleWest wrote:A lot of people predicted OKC to win not 1, but 2, but 3 etc... the last time they were the #1 seed. They had 3 of the biggest stars in the NBA that all won MVPs. They won 1 trip to the Finals and nothing else. They were all around the same age as these guys too.

In all fairness they left in their primes to ring chase etc. They literally had the Dynasty Warriors beat and choked.

Harden didn't leave to ring chase. He left because the OKC cheap ass owner wouldn't cough up another $1.1M a year to extend him.

The Thunder offered Harden $55.5 million over four years -- $4.5 million less than the max deal Harden coveted and will get from the Rockets, sources told ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/8562868/oklahoma-city-thunder-trade-james-harden-houston-rockets


Expect history to repeat itself.

on the other hand, curry took 44/4 to extend with a worse gsw. good for him as he won so much more lifetime because of that decision. lucky gsw fans for drafting a legend. nobody calls gsw cheap.

thunder is very vew years removed from being the biggest luxury tax spender in the league so i don't think that'll be a problem.

stillgotgame wrote:

OkcSinceSGA wrote:

ChipotleWest wrote:A lot of people predicted OKC to win not 1, but 2, but 3 etc... the last time they were the #1 seed. They had 3 of the biggest stars in the NBA that all won MVPs. They won 1 trip to the Finals and nothing else. They were all around the same age as these guys too.

In all fairness they left in their primes to ring chase etc. They literally had the Dynasty Warriors beat and choked.

Harden didn't leave to ring chase. He left because the OKC cheap ass owner wouldn't cough up another $1.1M a year to extend him.

The Thunder offered Harden $55.5 million over four years -- $4.5 million less than the max deal Harden coveted and will get from the Rockets, sources told ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/8562868/oklahoma-city-thunder-trade-james-harden-houston-rockets


Expect history to repeat itself.

In fairness I think it's now clear that:
1) Westbrook and Harden wouldn't have worked together, and
2) Harden would have forced his way out sooner or later (likely sooner).

If OKC does win a ring, it'll be the closest Paul George will ever get to being a contributor to an NBA championship.

One_and_Done wrote:

stillgotgame wrote:

OkcSinceSGA wrote:
In all fairness they left in their primes to ring chase etc. They literally had the Dynasty Warriors beat and choked.

Harden didn't leave to ring chase. He left because the OKC cheap ass owner wouldn't cough up another $1.1M a year to extend him.

The Thunder offered Harden $55.5 million over four years -- $4.5 million less than the max deal Harden coveted and will get from the Rockets, sources told ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/8562868/oklahoma-city-thunder-trade-james-harden-houston-rockets


Expect history to repeat itself.

In fairness I think it's now clear that:
1) Westbrook and Harden wouldn't have worked together, and
2) Harden would have forced his way out sooner or later (likely sooner).

1) westbrook and harden worked together really well for three different franchises now, so I doubt they wouldn't work together in the best part of their development curves and physical primes
2) maybe

and 3) thunder was better in 2013 than it was in 2012