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

They're not a dynasty. 3 titles in 5 years in any other sport probably is, but in the NBA where back-to-back titles get little respect(see the 94-95 Rockets) and even three-peats have become commonplace, the fact that the Spurs during the Pop-Duncan era have never won 2 in a row knocks them down a notch. Especially considering other teams like the Lakers and Heat have managed to repeat during that same period.

 

Maybe Ibaka is okcs most important player.

 

The Spurs should thank Cliff Paul's assist.

 

They have had 17 straight 50 win seasons. 9 WCF appearances, 5 NBA finals appearances, 4 nba titles - they are a dynasty. True basketball fans should be willing to acknowledge this and want to praise this. Not the star driven teams the NBA pushes down everyone's throat. The Spurs are a real team.

 

To be fair, I'm sure our guys would have a much better 3pt% if they got anywhere near as many wide open 3's as the Spurs generate. Close to half the time the Spurs shoot it's a practice shot (wide open dunk, lay up, or jump shot). That's really not an exaggeration. It really is stunning how many uncontested shots they generate.

Just to give an idea of how much more effective the Spurs are than the Rockets in terms of generating open looks, let's compare the Spurs series vs the Rockets series against the Blazers.

We'll just look at UFGA (uncontested shots, nobody within 4 feet of the shooter per SportsVu/NBA) as a percentage of total FGA (UFGA+CFGA) for both teams.

Spurs vs Blazers (Uncontested FGA/total FGA)
May 6 - 36/87 - 41.37% - win +24
May 8 - 47/90 - 52.22% - win +17
May 10 - 41/89 - 46.06% - win +15
May 12 - 47/88 - 53.41% - loss -11
May 14 - 42/89 - 47.19% - win +22

Total - 213/443 - 48.08%

Rockets vs Blazers (Uncontested FGA/total FGA)
April 20 - 45/105 - 42.85% - lose -2
April 23 - 25/90 - 27.77% - lose -7
April 25 - 42/105 - 40.00% - win +5
April 27 - 27/94 - 28.72% - lose -3
April 30 - 29/91 - 31.87% - win +10
May 2 - 24/75 - 32.00% - lose -1

Total - 192/560 - 34.29%

Think about that. Close to 13.79% more wide open shots... over the Rockets series that would have translated to 77.22 more wide open shots (12.87 per game) if our offense was as good in terms of generating open looks.

For the Spurs, it would be 61.09 more contested shots (12.22 per game) if they were as bad as the Rockets at generating open looks.

Without any improvement in defense or improved FG%, that would have been enough for the Rockets to win the series against the Blazers.

Just some stuff to think about...

 

It's probably been said once or twice before...

...but Oklahoma City is going to have to change their lineups if they want to give this series any sort of competitive look.

Russell Westbrook, for all of his prodigious talent and startling individual progression as a player, has largely the mindset of a Kobe Bryant offensively.

He's masqueraded for a long time as a point guard for the Thunder, because even though he does manage to get a good number of assists, his decision-making is still suspect. Much of that is probably due to the fact that Oklahoma City's offense does rely heavily on both his and Kevin Durant's physical talent. And often times, the Thunder's best (or only) option is to have one of those two take as many shots as possible. Even if its a "bad" shot.

Serge Ibaka does a lot of the offensive and defensive dirty work for them, and his loss is glaring and catastrophic. But the way San Antonio has played for the last six games, it's hard to know if things would have been much different even if Ibaka were healthy.

Right now, my guess would be, if Durant and (in particular) Westbrook are thinking score, then you need to move Westbrook over to the off-guard and play Reggie Jackson. You still have Westbrook's aggression and energy, but perhaps you can start to build a little more consistency in the offensive sets for the Thunder, maybe create a few more scoring options and opportunities.

But of course, that would assume that there's anything resembling an "offense" that OKC is supposed to be running in the first place.

How you stop (or really, just slow down) the Spurs is to become more efficient offensively, if you can. Deliberate.

That is directly counter to what the Thunder want to do, ideally. But the postseason is about adapting. If you want to win, then you have to find ways to get your fifth, six and seventh offensive options involved and contributing offensively. And that has to start with the first and second options being consistent.

Make no mistake. San Antonio wins the series. They might have won even if Ibaka was healthy. But just having a "roll-the-ball-out-there-and-play" mentality about facing them is going to get the Thunder swept.

If they're lucky.

How embarrassing would a FIVE-game sweep be?

 

Not nearly as embarrassing as a 4 game sweep?

 

A dynasty is defined by championships. And 4 titles in 9 years(1999-2007) with no back-to-backs doesn't compare to the Bulls' 6 titles in 8 years in the 90's or the Showtime Lakers with 5 titles in 9 years(including a back-to-back) or even the Shaq-Kobe Lakers with 3 straight titles. Those are dynasties. The Spurs are a notch below those. Shoot, until this year(assuming they close out the Thunder), they'd never even made the Finals in consecutive years much less won 2 straight championships.

 

I think history will look back on it as a Dynasty. Not an all-time great team, but just the consistent high level of play for over a decade.

 

I remember the Lakers getting "swept" in five games back in 2004 by the Detroit Pistons. The one game the Lakers one in that series was on some wild heroics by Kobe Bryant in overtime of game 2.

Looks like Oklahoma City is due to win one game with something like that, because of Kevin Durant. How many impossible shots has he hit in this playoffs?

To me, it's a little more embarrassing because there's the false sense of thinking that you had a chance to win the series because you were able to win one game.

Lot of basketball to be played, no doubt. And all that's really happened (if you're into mind games this time of year) is that San Antonio held serve.

Old playoff saying is that the round doesn't begin until the first road win. :grin:

 

Just shows how important Harden and Ibaka were to that Thunder Finals run. Presti messed up bigtime

 

It will almost be two decades.

 

That's possible, too.

James Harden was personally responsible for at least two of Oklahoma City's wins against the Spurs in the 2012 WCF.

Harden was deliberate offensively, with the way he played pick-and-roll basketball. Not a lot of offensive sophistication, but very deliberate.

I don't know how much of the Thunder losing James Harden is completely on Sam Presti. If management (and that would mean Clay Bennett) was adamant about not going over the luxury tax (even as the new collective bargaining agreement was being implemented), I'm not sure Presti had much choice. He could only keep Ibaka or Harden outright in that scenario.

Everyone was surprised that Kendrick Perkins wasn't amnestied in order to make offers to both Ibaka and Harden, but I thought at the very least, the Thunder would wait out the situation with Harden (who was still under contract for a year) at least until the trade deadline to see if anything changed.

It's what I would have done. Despite Harden's performance (or non-performance) in the championship round in 2012 (understandable, given that he drew the Lebron James assignment), he was as big a reason for Oklahoma City being in the title round as Durant or Westbrook. As young as they were and are, you do what you can to keep that trio together.

But as always in the NBA, big men are held at a premium. You can't teach or coach-up height. Which is why Presti "chose" Ibaka over Harden.

Technically speaking, "James Hardens" on average, are a lot easier to "replace" (average player height in the league is around 6'6" or 6'7") than "Serge Ibakas" (especially ones as good as Ibaka has proven to be).

Presti's hand was forced, unnecessarily and prematurely in my opinion. I think he blinked because he had to.

But you're right, hardenisaboss. That mistake is probably going to cost the Thunder for the next few seasons.

 

This is misleading because the "on" stat only encompasses the regular season where even the rockets looked better than the spurs, whereas the "off" stat mixes in the playoffs where the spurs have taken it to a completely new level.

 

with harden the thunder still get blown out.

if anything it shows ow important ibaka is over harden and why they went with him over harden.

 

You guys really think Ibaka is the difference between these 20-30 point blowouts and the thunder having a chance to win? He's probably help the thunder lose by "only" 10-15 pts at best.

 

The Thunder offense has had moments where shots dont go in...They exclusively rely on Durant and Westbrook to carry them and really got nothing from their starters. I suggested another lineup before, but I totally overlooked Nick Collison.

Start with:
Adams
Collison
Durant
Westbrook
Fisher

Rotation:
Perkins
Perry Jones
Jackson
Butler
Sefolosha


Bottom line is that the Thunder lack the discipline to sustain their defensive effort. They have more than enough scoring, but are completely confused on defense. I predicted this series to end in 6 games with Ibaka...but I honestly dont know how they will even get a win against the Spurs by giving up so many points in the paint. Westbrook's greatest strength is attack the rim, and Durant's greatest strength is his jumper...Having a veteran PG who doesnt have to defer to either of them might just be helpful: Thats why I think starting Fisher could be a good option.

 

You should have stopped at "A dynasty is defined by championships. "

If your talking about dynasties, then it shouldn't matter if it's consecutive or not. It's the end result that matters and that is championships. They have 4 which is a notch below the Bulls + Showtime Lakers.