Western Conference Finals: (1) San Antonio vs. (2) Oklahoma City

they're completely confused on defense without ibaka.

their whole defensive system is reliant on ibaka. without him they just don't know how to play without him.

with him the thunder are a solid defensive team. which is more than you can say about the opponents san antonio has played up to this point.

people are going goo-goo-ga-ga over SA offense but they've been playing bad defensive teams.

 

And Durant/WB should start taking a bigger role on the defensive end. If Miami can make it work, OKC should be able to.

 

Absolutely it matters. He's their BEST defensive player. He literally can force the Spurs to be just a jump shooting team by his shot blocking presence in the middle. He's also their Stretch 4 or 5 who can force Duncan or whoever to leave the middle open for Westbrook + Durant's drives. Without him Spurs can just clog up the middle with whoever guards Adams or Perkins.

 

true but miami is playing in a defensive system that has been taught to them since lebron/wade both teamed up.

it would be difficult to replicate that on the fly when you've been playing with a player like ibaka for so long and then BAM, he's out right before the series.

 

You're right. But the Heat were good right from the first year (they struggled offensively). And you can argue they are better defensively their first year than this year (their worst year defensively together).

When you play small ball, everyone must fly around. Like literally. Your effort level basically has to go up like 2-3 notches.

I understand probably on Westbrook and Adams can probably turn that type of intensity up consistently, but they just need to do it for like 3-4 minute stretches several times a game to curb the Spurs' offense.

But they gotta do something or their season is a wrap.

 

The Celtics won 3 championships in the 80s with no back to back. Are the Bird-led Celtics a dynasty?

I'd say they were as dominant as the Jordan-led Bulls and the Shaq-Kobe Lakers. They just happened to play at the same time as the Showtime Lakers.

And BTW, the Showtime Lakers lost to the Rockets twice during their "dynasty" period.

 

I don't disagree with your qualitative assertions, but to say that that is the difference between losing by 35 pts, as they did yesterday, and having a chance to win the game, is ludicrous. It's not like the thunder is literally playing 4v5 out there without Ibaka. He is replaced by another professional basketball player - collison/adams in this case. Is it a downgrade defensively and spacing wise? Absolutely. But do those factors go to zero? Not even close. Plus you have to remember, he only averages 33 minutes out of a possible 48.

If Ibaka is really the factor behind a 35+ point swing in an NBA game, then what is KD, the MVP of the league? Sounds like KD shouldn't even be the MVP of his own team then!

 

One of the best jumping shooting athletic bigs, that also led the league in number of blocks for 4 consecutive years, and forces SA to shoot 33% from 3 and 42.3% fg?

Nahhhhhhh

 

kd so beta man.

you're the mvp. you can't have your teammate talking to you like that. stand up for yourself man and be the dominate leader.

 

Durant is probly ignoring WestBrook because he was playing worse than him.

 

Westbrook was blaming his own brain, trying to galvanize the team against a common enemy.

 

I think a lot of people here don't have a solid grasp of points as it relates to an NBA game. Top 4 teams like the pacers struggle to put up 80 points in any given game, and Serge Ibaka, in the 33 mpg he plays, is single-handedly responsible for a 20-30 point swing per game?

OKC had a point differential of +6 in the regular season, which was one of the best. Does that number go anywhere near -15 without Serge?

I understand it's an extremely small sample size of 2 games at the Spurs' homecourt. But just from watching the games so far, the thunder don't even belong in the same gym. I think most people would attribute the results so far to the following:

- The coaching differential. Pop is one of the best, if not the best coach in the history of the game, and Scotty is a below average coach at best.

- The systems. Spurs have honed their system for a long long time, and thunder appear to play a free flowing rockets-like system with few set plays, which work well in the regular season but not when a team is game planning to stop you over 7 agmes.

- The relative depth of the two teams. Spurs are obviously one of the deepest teams in the league, while the thunder are playing on a very short rotation (regardless of whether it's because players like Lamb and Perry Jones aren't good enough, or merely Scott Brooks thinks they aren't good enough). This is evident in how gassed durant/westbrook look toward the end of games as the Spurs pull away on their runs.

- The absolute zero on offense that Thabo and Perkins provide, consistent with what they have shown over the past 2-3 seasons. The zero on defense that Perkins provides. The limited defensive impact of Thabo due to the Spurs' system - screens and ball movement, etc.

- Kwahi and Danny green being very good individual defenders capable of guarding KD and Westbrook, but the Spurs as a whole playing very good team defense (this goes back to their system).

- The fact that the Spurs have been at home.

- Ibaka's injury.

I think we can agree that ALL of the factors above are contributing to the 20-30 point losses so far in the series. A lot of you are implying that had Ibaka been here, the Thunder would magically be competitive and even win one or both of the games. That is putting way too much weight on the last point and not enough on all the other factors.

 

- The relative depth of the two teams. Spurs are obviously one of the deepest teams in the league, while the thunder are playing on a very short rotation (regardless of whether it's because players like Lamb and Perry Jones aren't good enough, or merely Scott Brooks thinks they aren't good enough). This is evident in how gassed durant/westbrook look toward the end of games as the Spurs pull away on their runs.

That is exactly right. Depth is an issue. And it isn't just the 37 minutes (what he averaged against the Spurs this year) it his backup and backup's backup - completely ruining the rotation.

There is a reason Thunder have had a staggering level of success against the Spurs over the last 3 years.

 

By modern standards, no. The Bird-led Celtics were not a dynasty. Especially since 2 of their 3 titles came against overachieving Rockets teams.

The Showtime Lakers got to the Finals 9 times in a span of 12 years. So I'll cut them a little slack for losing to the Rockets twice and Blazers once in that timeframe.

 

Consecutive championships do matter in the NBA. Even not-so-great teams like the Kobe-Pau Lakers and Rockets won back-to-back titles. Shoot, the Pistons came within a quarter of repeating a decade ago and that was one of the weakest NBA champions in recent memory.

 

No order, but all are better than Spurs (trio) by far:

Magic/Kareem/Worthy or Magic/Worthy/Scott
Russell/Cousy/Jones
Russell/Jones/Havlicek
Wilt/West/Baylor
Bird/Parish/McHale
MJ/Pippen/Grant or Rodman
Shaq/Kobe/Rice or Fox
Malone/Dr.J/Cheeks
LeBron/Wade/Bosh (People will argue they've benefited from being in a weak, yet the Spurs don't)
Thomas/Dumars/Laimbeeer or Rodman


Arguable:
KG/Allen/Pierce
Frazier/Reed or Monroe/DeBusschere

 

Because Mavs, like Spurs is a well coached team. Give the same Rocket roster to Rick Carlisle and you will see western conference final

 

Best post in the entire thread. Talent will win you regular season games but PlayOffs is when coaching is crucial.

 

If he dies, he dies.