NBA Offseason: Oklahoma! Where the MVP Free Agents Come Falling From the Sky

[Fez]

2 hours ago, sperry said:

One, the contract incentives to stay with your home team from the CBA are meaningless in the case of the players that matter the most. Kevin Durant left ~$50 million over the life of this contract on the table to go to Golden State, because he could get more than max with OKC due to bird rights, as well as the fact that he's going to have to take a paycut in order for them to keep the band together going forward.  But that doesn't matter, because the reality is that Kevin Durant draw their meaningful paychecks from their shoe companies. KD makes $30 million from Nike.  LeBron makes probably double that, and Steph is higher than all of them.  Russell Westbrook is likely in a similar range of $30 million or so. James Harden will make $200 million.  The games best players are essentially marketing professionals that get to play basketball for mon.

You're right. But the numbers aren't quite as high as that. The top 5 in 2015 shoe earnings were roughly:

Harden- $15 million; LeBron- $20 million; Durant-$30 million; Curry-unknown but he's technically a part-owner of Under Armor now, so its probably higher than Durant; Jordan (as always)- $100 million.

I wanna be like Mike.

But there's a lot more endorsements than just the shoes for the top guys. LeBron made something like another $28 million in other stuff last year.

[DunderMifflin]

I read something the other day where Dell Curry said the only reason Steph didn't sign with Nike was because their sales pitch was lazy. It was the exact same one they gave to Kevin Durant, and there were some parts of it where they forgot to take off Durants name and put Steph Curry there.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, briantw said:

I disagree with this.  I actually think we're moving in the opposite direction, as the social media age and 24/7 sports coverage has allowed guys to be incredibly marketable and rake in endorsements regardless of where they live.  Young stars will, as always, stay with their team is the team wants to keep them.  Stars in their prime will largely look for the teams that give them the best chance to win titles.  Role-players will go to the highest bidder.  Ring chasers will chase rings wherever the opportunity is best.  

And yes, there are certain players who would prefer to play in a flashy market over the best team.  But you're probably not winning titles with guys like that anyway.

Yup. This is actually the best time to be a small market team, despite Durant leaving OKC.

1 hour ago, briantw said:

As far as Durant goes, he didn't leave OKC because he wanted a more desirable market, as all accounts are he loved it in Oklahoma.  He left because he didn't want the responsibility of being the best player on the floor every night and the Warriors were the only team that could offer him both that and a shot at winning titles.

This Durant hate needs to stop. It's so over the top, and it's not even factually accurate. By all accounts his family hated living in OKC, and everyone around him that wasn't a part of the Thunder organization were telling him to leave.He wasn't afraid of being the best player on a team. Hell, Curry told him he'd be happy if Durant became the Dubs' best player. Between Durant and Curry, it's Curry that wanted a smaller role. 

But the main reason Durant left OKC, if you believe the insiders with OKC, GS and Miami, is Erik Spoelstra.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

But the main reason Durant left OKC, if you believe the insiders with OKC, GS and Miami, is Erik Spoelstra.

What did Spoelstra have to do with it? Very curious.

[briantw]

32 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

I read something the other day where Dell Curry said the only reason Steph didn't sign with Nike was because their sales pitch was lazy. It was the exact same one they gave to Kevin Durant, and there were some parts of it where they forgot to take off Durants name and put Steph Curry there.

They also pronounced his first name wrong.  Basically Nike didn't consider him a priority.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

7 minutes ago, Michael Seswatha Jordan said:

 

 

What did Spoelstra have to do with it? Very curious.

Supposedly the Heat's pitch was by far the best, and the main reason was Spo's analytics break down. He basically argued that Durant is actually the best player in the league, but the Thunder were using him in abhorrent ways. The problem is, the team he told Durant he could build around him is a worse version of what GS already has. So if you believe this, KD took the info Spo gave him and then made the best decision with that in mind. 

[sperry]

2 hours ago, Fez said:

You're right. But the numbers aren't quite as high as that. The top 5 in 2015 shoe earnings were roughly:

Harden- $15 million; LeBron- $20 million; Durant-$30 million; Curry-unknown but he's technically a part-owner of Under Armor now, so its probably higher than Durant; Jordan (as always)- $100 million.

I wanna be like Mike.

But there's a lot more endorsements than just the shoes for the top guys. LeBron made something like another $28 million in other stuff last year.

LeBron has a lifetime deal with Nike rumored at north of $1 billion (with a b).

 

I also haven't heard the Spoelstra rumors, nor do I believe them.  That sounds like something Miami folks would tell themselves to make themselves feel better about the fact that they're now a lottery team. It makes zero sense that KD would hear "you're the best player in the league, you're just used incorrectly" and go to a place where he's not going to get nearly the opportunities that you would want or need as the "best player in the league." The inefficiencies of KD's game are a result of KD, not the talent or system around him.  Both Scott Brooks and Billy Donovan were begging for he and Russell to move the ball around better.  Russell got better at it, KD never did.  He wanted to be a classic iso guy.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

 Bill Simmons was theorizing that it was Jerry West's spiel that pushed Durant over the edge. Not sure if he has any insider information or if that's just a shot in the dark. 

[Jaime L]

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

This Durant hate needs to stop. It's so over the top, and it's not even factually accurate. By all accounts his family hated living in OKC, and everyone around him that wasn't a part of the Thunder organization were telling him to leave.He wasn't afraid of being the best player on a team. Hell, Curry told him he'd be happy if Durant became the Dubs' best player. Between Durant and Curry, it's Curry that wanted a smaller role. 

But the main reason Durant left OKC, if you believe the insiders with OKC, GS and Miami, is Erik Spoelstra.

Well said. 

2 hours ago, sperry said:

I also haven't heard the Spoelstra rumors, nor do I believe them.  That sounds like something Miami folks would tell themselves to make themselves feel better about the fact that they're now a lottery team. It makes zero sense that KD would hear "you're the best player in the league, you're just used incorrectly" and go to a place where he's not going to get nearly the opportunities that you would want or need as the "best player in the league." The inefficiencies of KD's game are a result of KD, not the talent or system around him.  Both Scott Brooks and Billy Donovan were begging for he and Russell to move the ball around better.  Russell got better at it, KD never did.  He wanted to be a classic iso guy.

So much I disagree with here. Just to start: 

1) Durant is among the most efficient offensive players in the NBA. A 50/40/90 guy for his prime. His going iso for the Thunder is almost always a higher percentage play than when Westbrook does it. That's the difference. That's why he does it. He's a smart guy and naturally unselfish but he knows maximum OKC efficiency often involves him taking the shot. 

2) He still averages 5 APG despite not being the team's primary ball-handler. That's fantastic for any forward not named Lebron. It's weird to make him out like he's Carmelo Anthony 2.0.

3) I don't completely blame Brooks/Donovan for not maximizing Durant and Westbrook offensively - part of it was simple roster construction and always having offensive deadweight like Roberson, Sefalosha or Perkins on the floor - but in Durant's 8 years in OC, you're not gonna find anyone who follows the league who believes the Thunder were running a great (or even good) offensive system. Hell you could see it in the GS-OKC series. Couldn't believe how many GS players were able to swarm Durant on every single critical possession without consequence and yet the narrative coming out of that series was "Durant is a choker". 

[DunderMifflin]

I have to believe there's some sort of glaring fault in the management/coaching in OKC. Especially this season after seeing them dominate so many games and clearly be the superior team.........for 3 and a half quarters.

[briantw]

1 hour ago, DunderMifflin said:

I have to believe there's some sort of glaring fault in the management/coaching in OKC. Especially this season after seeing them dominate so many games and clearly be the superior team.........for 3 and a half quarters.

I think one problem was their general refusal to bring in some veteran guys to fill out their bench.  I get the idea of trying to maneuver to bring in younger players, but guys like Richard Jefferson help teams win championships, and it's hard for me to remember the Thunder ever really going out and getting guys like that.  I also think they didn't pay enough attention to the three ball direction the game was going in.  You just can't have guys on the wings that can't shoot at all any more.  They're a liability because they allow teams to double your best players.

[sperry]

3 hours ago, Jaime L said:

Well said. 

So much I disagree with here. Just to start: 

1) Durant is among the most efficient offensive players in the NBA. A 50/40/90 guy for his prime. His going iso for the Thunder is almost always a higher percentage play than when Westbrook does it. That's the difference. That's why he does it. He's a smart guy and naturally unselfish but he knows maximum OKC efficiency often involves him taking the shot. 

2) He still averages 5 APG despite not being the team's primary ball-handler. That's fantastic for any forward not named Lebron. It's weird to make him out like he's Carmelo Anthony 2.0.

3) I don't completely blame Brooks/Donovan for not maximizing Durant and Westbrook offensively - part of it was simple roster construction and always having offensive deadweight like Roberson, Sefalosha or Perkins on the floor - but in Durant's 8 years in OC, you're not gonna find anyone who follows the league who believes the Thunder were running a great (or even good) offensive system. Hell you could see it in the GS-OKC series. Couldn't believe how many GS players were able to swarm Durant on every single critical possession without consequence and yet the narrative coming out of that series was "Durant is a choker". 

 

1) I wasn't arguing that Durant wasn't among the most efficient players in the NBA. I'm well aware that he was, which is why he's one of the top 6 or 7 players in the game. He's an iso player, and he wants to be one. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but acting like Golden State's system is perfect for him and that sold him on it seems foolish to me. KD has never shown any inclination to be an extremely active player without the ball, which is a personal inefficiency, not one of the systems he was in.

 

2) KD played a very versatile point forward role at times, he's capable of it (although that further marginalizes Draymond, which again makes me not be so high on this move). The issue is in end game situations where he and Russell were prone to horrible iso possessions, and situations like in the GS games where they wouldn't even get shots off at the end.  This was much more a Durant problem, then Russell.

 

3) Why will Kevin Durant be maximized offensively in GS? Again, moving without the ball has never been his strong suit. Draymond Green is a better ball handler and distributor than KD, and much better suited to the point forward role. If you don't let Draymond do that, his value is drastically diminished.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

The four horsemen of the banana boat were on point last night. I hope it leads to more athletes speaking out on social issues. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 hours ago, sperry said:

 

1) I wasn't arguing that Durant wasn't among the most efficient players in the NBA. I'm well aware that he was, which is why he's one of the top 6 or 7 players in the game. He's an iso player, and he wants to be one. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but acting like Golden State's system is perfect for him and that sold him on it seems foolish to me. KD has never shown any inclination to be an extremely active player without the ball, which is a personal inefficiency, not one of the systems he was in.

6th or 7th best player? You sound like a jilted lover whose saying "she wasn't that hot anyways" after getting dumped. 

[sperry]

That number sets the floor.  Personally I would put him at 4, but I can see as high as 2 or as low as 6.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, sperry said:

That number sets the floor.  Personally I would put him at 4, but I can see as high as 2 or as low as 6.

Who are the 5 before him? Because I can only think of 3 players (James, Curry and Westbrook) that you could make a case for.

[sperry]

14 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Who are the 5 before him? Because I can only think of 3 players (James, Curry and Westbrook) that you could make a case for.

 

Many people think Kawhi is better, and in fact Kawhi made 1st team all NBA over Durant when they play the same position. Anthony Davis would be the 5th, and many people were making that claim prior to the season http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13963434/nbarank-1-5 although after a disappointing and injury riddled season that talk has dialed down.

[Jaime L]

11 hours ago, sperry said:

 

1) I wasn't arguing that Durant wasn't among the most efficient players in the NBA. I'm well aware that he was, which is why he's one of the top 6 or 7 players in the game. He's an iso player, and he wants to be one. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but acting like Golden State's system is perfect for him and that sold him on it seems foolish to me. KD has never shown any inclination to be an extremely active player without the ball, which is a personal inefficiency, not one of the systems he was in.

 

2) KD played a very versatile point forward role at times, he's capable of it (although that further marginalizes Draymond, which again makes me not be so high on this move). The issue is in end game situations where he and Russell were prone to horrible iso possessions, and situations like in the GS games where they wouldn't even get shots off at the end.  This was much more a Durant problem, then Russell.

 

3) Why will Kevin Durant be maximized offensively in GS? Again, moving without the ball has never been his strong suit. Draymond Green is a better ball handler and distributor than KD, and much better suited to the point forward role. If you don't let Draymond do that, his value is drastically diminished.

So I think being on Golden State helps him in two major ways.

1) Spacing - an entire defensive scheme can't collapse on him in critical end game possessions like they did when he was on OKC because you're going to leave room for an all time great shooter or KD gets to eat someone up on a 1 on 1. You can't win. And that doesn't even get into the impossibility of defending a Steph-KD pick and roll. Not sure how you do it honestly without bringing a 3rd defender over and praying etiher Iggy or Draymond don't kill you by being left completely open. 

2) Off the ball movement - Even if KD prefers iso as much as you say and doesn't move well himself, the good news is Steph and Klay are fantastic at moving without the ball. You can totally run the offense through him in a point forward type role. Yes, it diminishes Draymond's role but that's a good thing as Draymond is really not a good shooter. His percentages are passable but because of how much space he gets on the perimeter. Draymond's best function is a guy who you can dump the ball to when Steph gets trapped 25 feet from the basket and run a 4 on 3 fast break. If teams are still defending GS that way, they now have a guy who's ridiculously overqualified for that role. 

Not to say I don't expect growing pains. Durant's going to have to learn to fit into the Warriors system without being a total ball stopper (though it's easier to trust your teammates when you're giving it up to a Klay Thompson as opposed to Dion Waiters.) And Draymond and Klay are both going to get less touches so they have to be both happy and still effective with that. Plus Steph vs. KD alpha issues. I just think with the personalities and basketball IQ of everyone involved, they're going to figure it out. 

 

[Fez]

7 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

Many people think Kawhi is better, and in fact Kawhi made 1st team all NBA over Durant when they play the same position. Anthony Davis would be the 5th, and many people were making that claim prior to the season http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13963434/nbarank-1-5 although after a disappointing and injury riddled season that talk has dialed down.

Davis has the potential to become the best player in the league, and last season didn't change that, but he's not close to there yet. Putting him over Durant, or even in the top 10, doesn't seem warranted based on what he's actually done yet.

I wouldn't put Kawhi there either. Kawhi's great, but his numbers are lower than Durant's in every standard statistical category (points, FG%, FT%, rebounds, assists, blocks) except for steals. And the extra stuff Kawhi can do on defense don't make for it.

IMO the players you can justify putting above Durant would be LeBron, Curry, and Westbrook; depending on the night.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, Fez said:

Davis has the potential to become the best player in the league, and last season didn't change that, but he's not close to there yet. Putting him over Durant, or even in the top 10, doesn't seem warranted based on what he's actually done yet.

I wouldn't put Kawhi there either. Kawhi's great, but his numbers are lower than Durant's in every standard statistical category (points, FG%, FT%, rebounds, assists, blocks) except for steals. And the extra stuff Kawhi can do on defense don't make for it.

IMO the players you can justify putting above Durant would be LeBron, Curry, and Westbrook; depending on the night.

AD is probably a top 10 player, but otherwise, I completely agree.