Sorting through some Thunder BS

If you’re reading this website, you know who Bill Simmons is. He’s the mind behind ESPN’s wonderful “30 for 30” series of documentaries. He’s the guy that is responsible for Grantland, one of the finest sites on the Internet. He authored the “Book of Basketball”, which sold approximately 1.8 bajillion copies.

He can dare his bosses to suspend him, subsequently get suspended for three weeks, kick back and allow a legion of his fans to protest on his behalf. And they doth protest loudly. It’s a borderline religion. His legion defends him staunchly. If you disagree with him, he inspires the rabble like me to write nearly 4,000 words about why I disagree with him. Either way, he wins. That’s success. It’s sustainable success. Idiots, morons, stupids, dolts and dullards typically don’t experience that kind of longevity.

Simply ignoring him isn’t the best solution either. Someone that carries that much power shouldn’t be left unchecked. In short, and in PG language, one must occasionally call him out on his crap. Because when it comes to his thoughts on the Thunder, he chooses to be misinformed and picks funny (to him) over fact.

Simmons has lost a lot of support around these parts with his constant insults and critiques of the Thunder (to his credit, he couldn’t care less), much of which is based on faulty assumptions that he declines to investigate further. And while I’ve largely muted him over the past few years (he’s managed to thrive without my support), I caught wind of the contents of a recent BS Report, which you can find here. Grab some Prozac or something equivalent and skip to the 41:15 mark for “the good stuff”.

One of Simmons’ guests over the years is a character named Haralabos Voulgaris (Bob, for short). I don’t claim to know much about Voulgaris other than he’s a very successful professional gambler, an analytical whiz and probably knows more about math than a calculator. He’s not exactly a fan of anything the Thunder do, which makes him and Simmons two peas in Thunder hating pod. Take this tweet of his from 2013, for example:

A bit of context: This tweet was sent out during a Thunder game. You might think, “Oh it was 2013 so it must’ve been January 7 of that year when they were losing to the Wizards in DC, as they are prone to do.” No, this was sent out on November 3rd of last year. The Thunder were struggling at home versus the Phoenix Suns who were thought by most to be a doormat. The Suns dismantled everyone’s expectations and turned out to be quite good. This was also GAME THREE of the season and Russell Westbrook’s first game back from knee surgery #2.

Overreaction, much? We’ll circle back around to this point momentarily.

Grantland’s Zach Lowe, perhaps the LeBron James of national NBA writers these days, joined Simmons and Voulgaris on the podcast. The following are snips of conversation transcribed to the best of my ability, as well as some deep thoughts from my shallow mind.

Ominously enough, the previous segment ends with Lowe stating, “People hate everything that’s good. Eventually people just hate everything.”

Simmons: “So the Thunder lost last year for a variety of reasons. Serge Ibaka… that didn’t help. They played Derek Fisher in crunch time, that didn’t help. They had Caron Butler out there.”

Let’s not just gloss over that first point. That’s like saying the TV show “8 Simple Rules” ultimately failed because John Ritter died… that didn’t help (note: obviously death is a slightly bigger issue than a calf strain). No, it was crushing, actually. Ibaka’s injury was much more damaging to the Thunder’s title hopes than the other two points (which, to be fair, were valid).

Simmons: “The Jeremy Lamb Experiment did not go well.”

No, the Caron Butler experiment did not go well. Simmons makes it sound as though the Jeremy Lamb experiment is over. It’s not. Lamb is 22 years old and still has potential. Despite shooting struggles that date back to January and continue to this day, perhaps a bit more time is warranted before declaring Lamb a sunk cost.

Simmons: (on the Thunder’s offseason, in a dismissive tone) “Anthony Morrow, a D-Leaguer and Mitch McGary”

Voulgaris (sarcasm on full blast): “What a great summer for them. They picked up a lot of pieces, didn’t they? Yeah they really filled out that roster nicely.”

Were there other 42 percent career 3-point shooters on the market that I’m unaware of? Granted, the name “Ray Allen” carries a lot more weight. He’s also 39 years old and not in any hurry to play this season, and probably wouldn’t consider Oklahoma City if he does.

The McGary pick has been panned by some pundits because of the notion that the Thunder “over drafted” him. People often use Mock Drafts in order to assign “value” to players. There were rumblings before the draft of McGary going undrafted until the very late first round or early second round. The Thunder selected him 21st overall. Hell, he wasn’t even the reach of the first round. That honor goes to Toronto, who selected Bruno Caboclo one pick before. I recall almost no outrage nationally about that selection.

That’s the thing with the draft: if you find a guy you like and if he fits your system, take him when you can get him. In 2008 I recall writers nitpicking Sam Presti because he took Russell Westbrook at #4 and didn’t trade down a few spots to get him. Many mock drafts had Brook Lopez or Jordan Hill going fourth overall and Westbrook going to New York at 6. I think it’s safe to say that pick turned out OK. If one gets too cute in trading down in the draft, you might just miss out on your intended target. But there was one year that then-Portland GM made 98 draft day trades and it was super fun, therefore it’s always supposed to be that way, I guess.

Beyond that, McGary is quite good, albeit slightly broken at the moment. Rather than, y’know, see if he might be good, Simmons opted to take the lazy analytical stance instead. It’s nothing new for him. Simmons’ take on Steven Adams last season was that he was the “12th pick in an eleven player draft”. Whoops.

The “D-Leaguer” reference was, of course, aimed at Josh Huestis. Fair enough. It’s not a move that I’m wild about. There were several other players on the board that merited consideration. It’s also the 29th pick in the draft. Unless they passed on the next Tony Parker, it won’t cripple the franchise if Heustis doesn’t pan out. And what if he turns into a solid rotation player one day? Whoever was picked at 29 wasn’t needed this season, but may be needed two or three years from now.

Voulgaris: “Is there no money in fracking in Oklahoma City?”

Ah yes, the Thunder are cheap. That’s a new way of putting it.

The Thunder continues to get killed because they aren’t handing out money like Wes Welker at the Kentucky Derby. Were they supposed to sign Morrow for the full Mid Level Exception? Should they blow the rest of their under-the-tax money on Jermaine O’Neal or Kenyon Martin just to stupidly prove some point? Should they violate the CBA and pay their players even more under the table?

The team tried and failed to sign Pau Gasol, if you’ll recall. Other than that, what free agent was on the market in the Mid Level Exception price range that the Thunder should have pursued over the summer? Other potential alternatives such as Paul Pierce and Spencer Hawes opted for places that offered larger roles and better fits.

It’s perfectly fair to point towards a collection of young, unproven former first round picks and shrug. Could have done the same thing in 2009 with this team. Since then there has been a proven pattern of improvement for just about every player except D.J. White, Byron Mullens and Cole Aldrich.

And sure, the Thunder could deal these young guys in exchange for more proven veterans that will be out of the league in 3 years or less. Some people want victory so badly that they would choose short-term quasi-certainty over long-term uncertainty. That’s certainly an alternative strategy. Is that sustainable for five, seven, and ten years down the road? Especially in light of the fact that major free agents aren’t exactly tweeting “wheels down!” when they reach Will Rogers World Airport? That question isn’t asked nearly enough.

(I have no idea if people actually tweet that.)

Lowe: “They made (an estimated) $30 million last year.”

I point this out only to reiterate that even if the Thunder wanted to take that $30 million and immediately go on a free agent spending spree, they were over the salary cap and therefore limited in doing so. Lowe knows this, and I don’t think he was implying as much. But this is an important point to hammer home.

It’s OK that the team makes money. I don’t know about you, but when a company makes something I enjoy, I typically want them to remain in business.

The Lakers reportedly made over $100 million last season and were a dumpster fire. The Nets reportedly lost $144 million last season and were totally mediocre. Seems like those should be bigger stories.

Voulgaris: “If you want to own a basketball team and move it from a big market to a small market, OK, and you have that team with those players that are, like, generational players, once-in-a-generation type players, and you aren’t spending?”

I hear this opinion a lot. Who’s to say Sam Presti would have done a single thing different if the team remained in Seattle? Or if he was running the Celtics instead of the Thunder? Or if someone other than these God-awful Oklahoma fracking kings owned the team?

Side note: the Seattle Supersonics ownership regime of Howard Schultz never paid a dime of luxury tax, either.

Voulgaris: “I’ve never been a fan of a trade that he’s made.”

Yeah I never did figure out what that Ronnie Brewer trade was all about.

It’s fair to wring your hands over the contract extension given to Kendrick Perkins upon his arrival in 2011. But to deny how that trade positively transformed the franchise is approaching “President Obama was born in Kenya” territory.

As for the Harden trade, which would require about 5,000 more words to elaborate on, know this: the Luxury Tax angle of that trade has been severely overblown. That was the assumption that a hive mind of writers arrived at when the trade was made and a sort of groupthink has taken hold since. James Harden wanted the spotlight and he wanted a five-year maximum salary extension. Oklahoma City could offer neither.

Simmons: “So in June they had two first rounders, they had Perkins who was about to be an expiring, a couple other contracts… that was their chance to get somebody. Even if, worse case scenario, its Arron Afflalo.”

Worst-case scenario?

Orlando wound up dealing Afflalo to Denver for Evan Fournier and a second round pick that became Roy Marble. The Magic did this deal because Denver had a large trade exception and they somewhat kind of liked Fournier. Sure, it would appear that the Thunder could have offered a more compelling talent package, but that’s not what Orlando wanted. They wanted cap space so they could sign Channing Frye and Ben Gordon. There’s no way the Thunder could have made that happen for the Magic unless they found a way to pawn off Perkins’ contract on another team. And while technically doable, it would have cost at least one future first round pick. And because the Thunder are very likely to select near the bottom of the first round for a while, those picks aren’t as valuable to other teams when it comes to absorbing contracts.

Assuming the Magic had an offer of, say, Perkins and Lamb for Afflalo (and there’s no proof that such a deal was ever proposed), they preferred Fournier and Frye (Gordon signed a contract starting at $4.5M and likely would have signed even if Orlando was over the salary cap). Frye addressed needs for them. Perkins would not have. Simple as that.

Also, expiring contracts don’t carry the leverage they once did. Many years ago under a prior CBA, teams could sign players for up to seven years. Expiring or soon-to-expire deals were valuable because it was a way to buy long-term debt with short-term debt. A team could unload a contractual mistake along with a valuable asset or two and kick off a rebuilding project rather than be saddled with several more years of bad contracts. Under the 2011 CBA, contracts are much shorter. In other words, Kendrick Perkins and two late first round picks were not going to buy an All-Star caliber guy. This isn’t 2004.

And this was far from their only chance to “get somebody”. It was “a chance” to get someone. It was not the only chance.

Lowe: “I think if Presti were here… I don’t think Afflalo moves the needle for them. I think that’s what he’d say.“

This feels like Spock explaining concepts to ordinary humans. In fact, forget the LeBron comparison earlier. Zach Lowe is Basketball Spock. Zach Lowe makes us all smarter, and for that we should be thankful.

Simmons: “They need someone who’s competent and can be the fifth guy at the end of the game. They didn’t have it last year and that’s why they lost.”

The Thunder lost last year largely because of a horribly timed injury and the fact that Kevin Durant’s play had descended from the mesosphere he’d been in for several months prior. It didn’t help that Scott Brooks was running out of guys to bench by the time the playoffs ended. If this team had splurged on, say, Dorrell Wright (a Summer 2013 free agent pursuit that fans tried to talk themselves into), I doubt the end result would have been much different.

Lowe: “They’re banking a lot on Andre Roberson and Perry Jones III. I just haven’t seen enough of those guys.”

Lowe‘s point, which is spot-on, is that the Thunder have long relied on unproven and/or developing supporting talent. Miami won titles with the likes of Ray Allen, Mike Miller, and Shane Battier playing key roles. The Thunder are crossing their fingers and hoping for the best out of Roberson, Jones and Lamb. There’s more upside to the Thunder model, but clearly more risk. It’s what you do when you can’t convince the likes of Allen, Miller or Battier to join your team.

Simmons: (points comparing the Thunder to the New England Football Patriots)

Can we stop pretending that there’s a surefire formula (or payroll total) that guarantees NBA titles? Or Super Bowl championships? Or World Series titles? Put together a good team and try your luck. Improve the odds if you think you can. But how many pro sports titles could we go back and attribute largely to dumb luck?

Simmons: (points out Morrow’s zero games of playoff experience)

This admittedly a concern. However, given the postseason flameout of grizzled veteran Caron Butler last season, it’s fair to say that this idea gets overstated sometimes. Cleveland, for example, may experience some growing pains because they have a roster loaded with key players without a lick of playoff experience. I can’t imagine that the Thunder’s title hopes hinge on Anthony Morrow and his playoff goose egg.

Lowe: “They’ve been saying for years that, ‘we’ll pay the tax when it’s time to pay the tax.’”

For the record, I believe that at this point if the right trade opportunity comes along, luxury tax implications should be of no concern. This will be awfully hard to judge since we aren’t exactly privy to every trade proposal that crosses Presti’s desk.

Voulgaris: “I really hope Durant leaves.”

Simmons: “I do too.”

Voulgaris: “I’m rooting for that.”

Lowe: “I want to push my chair away from the table.”

This is the kind of advice you give to someone in a toxic relationship or in a terrible work situation. It’s disingenuous and ignorant to suggest Durant is in such a situation in Oklahoma City.

Lowe: “Who deserves him? Do the Lakers (makes air quotes) deserve him?”

Spock nails it again. Durant could hitch his wagon to Jim Buss’ party van and wind up in a situation no better than he is in today. Or he could buy into James Dolan’s cluelessness in New York and bathe in Amare Stoudemire’s red wine baths. Or he could fall for Mikhail Prokhorov’s “spend money, win games, right?” approach. I will say this: it will be interesting to see if there are more title-ready destinations available for Durant in 2016.

Simmons: “Just spend the money. Just spend the money one year.”

Because that guarantees… what? More on this momentarily.

Simmons: “They wasted the 29th pick in the draft on a guy who went to the D-League right away. The D-League thing was a disgrace.”

The key phrase here is “29th pick in the draft.” Suppose the Thunder selected K.J. McDaniels instead. Does he crack the rotation? If so, does he play any significant role?

To be clear, I’m not in love with what the Thunder chose to do here. But Simmons is reaching. Not even Plastic Man can stretch this far without snapping. This is only “disgraceful” to Simmons because he is unable or unwilling to take the time and understand Presti’s process. He also continues to spew preconceived notions about the D-League instead of seeing it as a tool that many teams are using to develop talent.

Lowe: “For all this talk… if they had Westbrook two seasons ago and Ibaka last year not get hurt in the playoffs, they may have a ring. They may have won a title by now. I don’t know if it’s likely or not…”

Hashtag, logic.

Simmons: “Spurs spend money though.”

Lowe: “They do. They’re under the tax too.”

Simmons: “But they paid tax a couple times though.”

Indeed they did. Five times, to be precise. Forthcoming numbers are courtesy of the remarkable Mark Deeks shamsports.com website.

• The 2002-03 Spurs paid the luxury tax and won the NBA Finals that season. Their tax bill? $187,000.

• The 2005-06 Spurs lost to Dallas in the Western Confernce Semifinals. They paid less than $900,000 of luxury tax that season.

• The 2006-07 Spurs won another NBA title at a cost of payroll plus $196,000 in luxury tax.

• In 2009-10, the Spurs more or less went all in and wound up with a tax bill of over $8.8 million. The team won 50 games and snagged only a 7 seed. They were swept in the West Semifinals by the Suns.

• Finally, the Spurs dipped into the tax well one more time in 2011-12, coughing up an additional $2.5 million for a team that looked like one for the ages. You might also remember this as the team that lost to Oklahoma City in the Western Conference Finals.

So to recap, the Spurs paid less than $400,000 in luxury tax en route to winning two titles and over $12.5 million in tax to not win three others. This was all done prior to the implementation of the current incremental tax system with repeat offender penalties. The Spurs paid zero dollars worth of luxury tax the past two seasons, where they went 1-1 in Finals appearances.

Rehashing the Harden trade again. Lowe: “Those injuries are why you keep him.”

Simmons: “It was also a lack of understanding of how the league works because injuries happen all the time.”

Anyone really think that the Thunder organization was ignorant to the possibility of injuries? At this point, Simmons is resorting to desperate tactics to back up his irrational dislike of the team. This is like someone that wants to end a relationship and has a handful of solid reasons, but then begins throwing “you don’t wash your hands with soap enough” into the justification and watches the credibility dissolve.

Lowe: “They clearly have a ‘no-tax’ mandate.”

I’m no journalist. I am, at best, a rank amateur. Compared to Lowe, my pool of sources is practically barren. When I get a rare opportunity to ask questions from informed people about the Thunder’s mindset, I do. I’ve been told that while finances are part of the decision-making process, they are not the driving concern. I’ve also been told from people in the know that there is no such ‘no-tax’ mandate. If you want another source, Larry Coon said as much during an interview with Jim Traber on The Sports Animal back in July.

Lowe and Voulgaris agree that Steven Adams is a good player.

Simmons: “Are we sure he can play 20 minutes? Can he play 30 minutes in a playoff game without fouling out?”

I’m very sure. I’m comforted by the fact that he did not foul out of a single 2013-14 playoff game. He managed to stay on the court for 40 minutes in game 6 versus the Clippers. He played 33 minutes and collected only 2 fouls in game 2 versus San Antonio.

Adams hacks away like Juan Corona, the Butcher of Cadiz. He’ll improve over time, I don’t think there’s any doubt.

Voulgaris (referring to Scott Brooks): “I think he’s terrible.”

Brooks has his flaws, yet he has shown improvement. In-game adjustments leave something to be desired. Staunchly sticking with ineffective lineups is often maddening. His over-reliance on the likes of Perkins and Fisher over the years has made me utter bad words. Criticism of his iso-heavy offense and over-reliance on Durant and Westbrook is valid. These flaws may well turn out to be fatal.

Perhaps Scott Brooks is really Mike Brown or Byron Scott in disguise. Voulgaris actually did express positive opinions about Brooks as a human being and as a leader. Take that for what it’s worth. Calling him “terrible” is, well, terribly unfair.

I believe the assault on the Thunder ended at this point. Eleven minutes worth was plenty enough, anyway.

Jon Hamm is a contributor to NewsOK.com and Daily Thunder. You can follow him on Twitter here.