PDA

View Full Version : Westbrook V. Durant



moonpie23
06-01-2014, 09:46 PM
since they're not in the nba playoffs any more, i'l start this thread separately…

I am beginning to think that westbrook is the better of the two. His penchant for defense and the chip on his shoulder from having to be in KD's shadow has brought his skill set to another level…i know how good KD is….but lately, westbrook has really impressed me...

i don't see how they can win a championship together when he is truly the alpha…


thoughts?

superdave
06-02-2014, 09:11 AM
since they're not in the nba playoffs any more, i'l start this thread separately…

I am beginning to think that westbrook is the better of the two. His penchant for defense and the chip on his shoulder from having to be in KD's shadow has brought his skill set to another level…i know how good KD is….but lately, westbrook has really impressed me...

i don't see how they can win a championship together when he is truly the alpha…


thoughts?

Westbrook is a defensive force. He grabs a few steals and rebounds through sheer athleticism that no other guard in the league could get. But he also forces a lot of shots and play too emotional at times. I think Durant is a more efficient scorer, a much better shooter, a huge mismatch for any team to guard and more disciplined.

I would say do not penalize Durant for having to live in Scott Brooks (lack of) offense. Brooks offense really is just freelance, which puts the ball in Westbrook's hands to create an awful lot. Create is not his strength. I've seen Durant post up at the 3-point line too many times because that is the only way he can get the ball because they dont run plays. It's maddening. If they run plays, could Durent score 40 a game? Possibly.

The sky is the limit with Durant, whereas I think Westbrook will always be limited by unforced errors that leave a little something to be desired.

In the long run, I'd love to see OKC grab a point guard and move Westbrook off the ball more often. That would help with offensive movement and they could run actual plays.

wilson
06-02-2014, 10:39 AM
I would say do not penalize Durant for having to live in Scott Brooks (lack of) offense. Brooks offense really is just freelance, which puts the ball in Westbrook's hands to create an awful lot. Create is not his strength. I've seen Durant post up at the 3-point line too many times because that is the only way he can get the ball because they dont run plays. I think this is really a key point, and it was thrown into very clear relief in the San Antonio series, when the Thunder ran up against an opponent who plays beautiful team basketball and moves the ball extremely well. While both KD and Westbrook are quite capable of creating on their own, they both need to have the ball a lot in the absence of a system that maximizes the complementary aspects of their games. Particularly on a team that, apart from these two stars, is offensively limited (in my opinion), I think they're going to keep bumping up against a ceiling of sorts unless and until there is a more comprehensive offensive philosophy in place.

Billy Dat
06-02-2014, 10:43 AM
Westbrook is a spectacular player, but he seems to make as many bad plays in the clutch as good ones. You seem to be saying that the two of them are equals - coming off this last series, its hard to refute. KD's MVP season was enabled by Westbrook missing so many games with injuries. If Westbrook is healthy all year, Lebron is probably MVP again. They are such an interesting duo.

It's a really interesting dynamic, and I think you two did a nice job of pointing out their relative strengths and weaknesses, and those of their coach.

When Lebron, Wade and Bosh first signed in Miami, the fit was initially awkward. It helped tremendously that Bosh close-to-immediately accepted his third banana status and changed his approach to fit the whole. There was some awkwardness with Bosh for the first half of the first season, but he settled in. Then, they had to figure out Lebron and Wade, who both needed the ball to be effective. But, by season 2, they really figured that out. Because he had so many more weapons around him than he did in Cleveland, Lebron was able to expand his passing game. More importantly, he really developed his post game which freed up more perimeter space for Wade - although Wade is really tough in the low post, too. Bottom line, between figuring out how to fit together and Spo creating a rotation that gave them chunks of time on the court without the other, they cracked the code.

It is time for Durant to develop a post game. As others on DBR have said, the fact that the Spurs were able to get away with much smaller defenders on KD was criminal. Reggie Jackson is a nice little PG who meshes well with them, and Brooks has done a poor job developing a effective offense - for years. Plus, whoa, they have no bench.

But, this team isn't too far away from a title. I am tempted to say its time to can Scott Brooks because of his poor offensive game plans, but the players really seem to like him. Maybe if KD gets a post game Russell gets one year older and wiser, Jackson gets another year as a starter, some of these bench guys develop or they are able to add some new blood that will make an impact off the bench....I think the group should get at least one more year together.

fgb
06-02-2014, 12:11 PM
personally, i hope that they never win a title together in okc; and that they both win multiple titles, wearing some other jersey. because i'm from seattle.

Billy Dat
06-02-2014, 12:16 PM
personally, i hope that they never win a title together in okc; and that they both win multiple titles, wearing some other jersey. because i'm from seattle.

Not to derail this topic, but are you Seattle NBA fans sad/angry/depressed/whatever that Ballmer bought the Clippers? He was certainly the primary figure in trying to return the NBA to Seattle.

Newton_14
06-02-2014, 10:07 PM
Westbrook is a spectacular player, but he seems to make as many bad plays in the clutch as good ones. You seem to be saying that the two of them are equals - coming off this last series, its hard to refute. KD's MVP season was enabled by Westbrook missing so many games with injuries. If Westbrook is healthy all year, Lebron is probably MVP again. They are such an interesting duo.

It's a really interesting dynamic, and I think you two did a nice job of pointing out their relative strengths and weaknesses, and those of their coach.

When Lebron, Wade and Bosh first signed in Miami, the fit was initially awkward. It helped tremendously that Bosh close-to-immediately accepted his third banana status and changed his approach to fit the whole. There was some awkwardness with Bosh for the first half of the first season, but he settled in. Then, they had to figure out Lebron and Wade, who both needed the ball to be effective. But, by season 2, they really figured that out. Because he had so many more weapons around him than he did in Cleveland, Lebron was able to expand his passing game. More importantly, he really developed his post game which freed up more perimeter space for Wade - although Wade is really tough in the low post, too. Bottom line, between figuring out how to fit together and Spo creating a rotation that gave them chunks of time on the court without the other, they cracked the code.

It is time for Durant to develop a post game. As others on DBR have said, the fact that the Spurs were able to get away with much smaller defenders on KD was criminal. Reggie Jackson is a nice little PG who meshes well with them, and Brooks has done a poor job developing a effective offense - for years. Plus, whoa, they have no bench.

But, this team isn't too far away from a title. I am tempted to say its time to can Scott Brooks because of his poor offensive game plans, but the players really seem to like him. Maybe if KD gets a post game Russell gets one year older and wiser, Jackson gets another year as a starter, some of these bench guys develop or they are able to add some new blood that will make an impact off the bench....I think the group should get at least one more year together.

First, you are one of the brightest basketball minds on this forum, and I always enjoy reading your input. I do agree the breakdown of the two players by others in this thread has been really good as well as your take above.

That said, I can't believe this topic is even up for discussion, much less debate to be honest. Kevin Durant is the 2nd best basketball player on the planet behind Lebron and it's not close. The guy is unreal and like you and superdave said, Durant has not even approached his ceiling yet. When he starts abusing defenders in the post, to go along with what he is already doing now, it is going to be amazing to watch. The guy is simply greatness and will finish his career some day as one of the all time greats ever. Westbrook is a phenomenal player, but is still no where near the class of "one of the all time greats". Perennial All-Star? Yep. Just not on that top tier of all time great players. I think he can get even better too if he learns to limit the wild out of control plays that lead to bad things happening.

Don't misunderstand me. I would take Westbrook as my PG all day everyday and be estatic to have him. I just don't feel you can consider him as being as good a player as Durant. They make a heck of a tandem though. I actually hate the fell short of the finals. I was looking forward to see them duke it out with the Heat again with everything on the line.

kAzE
06-02-2014, 10:46 PM
Westbrook is a defensive force. He grabs a few steals and rebounds through sheer athleticism that no other guard in the league could get. But he also forces a lot of shots and play too emotional at times. I think Durant is a more efficient scorer, a much better shooter, a huge mismatch for any team to guard and more disciplined.

I would say do not penalize Durant for having to live in Scott Brooks (lack of) offense. Brooks offense really is just freelance, which puts the ball in Westbrook's hands to create an awful lot. Create is not his strength. I've seen Durant post up at the 3-point line too many times because that is the only way he can get the ball because they dont run plays. It's maddening. If they run plays, could Durent score 40 a game? Possibly.

The sky is the limit with Durant, whereas I think Westbrook will always be limited by unforced errors that leave a little something to be desired.

In the long run, I'd love to see OKC grab a point guard and move Westbrook off the ball more often. That would help with offensive movement and they could run actual plays.

Eh, I would not consider Westbrook a defensive force. He gets steals, but he's actually really bad most of the time on D. What happens a lot with him is he'll gamble a LOT and leave guys wide open or with a clear path to the basket. Here's a typical Westbrook defensive sequence: Tony Parker sets up a pick and roll at the top of the key, Westbrook violently jumps to the other side of the screen, Parker rejects the screen, gets wide open layup. It's kind of like Marshall Plumlee (but way more coordinated), he almost tries TOO hard.

Look, I'm not a Westbrook hater either, I love his game. Westbrook is the most athletic player to ever play point guard. He's ridiculously fast, jumps insanely high, and has the motor of a Ferrari. He's like Derrick Rose, but bigger and way more aggressive. Everything he does can be described with the word "attack." If you're a basketball junkie like me, you just can't help but love guys who play the game the way he does. Offensively, there's probably not more than maybe 3 or 4 guys who are more talented. It just happens that one of those guys is on his team. If Westbrook was the best player on some other team, he'd get SO much less criticism. He'd be praised all day as a top 5 player in the NBA, which he is, in my opinion. (By the way, he's way better than Tony Parker, Parker's coach is just 500 times better)

The absolute best thing about Westbrook is that he's always going to go HARD, no matter what. No matter what he does to piss people off on or off the court, at least you know he really, really cares. At this point, however, he's just not a great defender, compared to other perimeter guys like LeBron and Paul George.

YmoBeThere
06-02-2014, 11:12 PM
When he starts abusing defenders in the post, to go along with what he is already doing now, it is going to be amazing to watch.

Durant lacks the physical kills(read strength) to accomplish this. That's why you can put a shorter defender on him , particularly one who is physically stronger than KD.

Billy Dat
06-03-2014, 12:02 AM
First, you are one of the brightest basketball minds on this forum, and I always enjoy reading your input.

Damn, Newton, this is where your post should have stopped!

Rim shot!

I can't disagree with your take, but the debate is fun. kAzE makes great points about Westbrook's defense, too. I guess the bitter taste of Durant being guarded by guys 6'6" and not abusing them, combined with Westbrook being the guy who could make things happen by himself, down the stretch, is what has lured me in.

They are kind of like a Jordan/Pippen or Shaq/Kobe. Durant is assumed to be the reason that the team is as good as it is, but we'll never know what the team would be like without the "Robin", or what each would do if they had their own team.

If KD can lead our young group of plucky upstarts to the FIBA World Cup this summer, its another feather in his cap. Bottom line, I hope we have a bunch of seasons to let the debate play out with them on the court together.

fgb
06-03-2014, 12:45 AM
Not to derail this topic, but are you Seattle NBA fans sad/angry/depressed/whatever that Ballmer bought the Clippers? He was certainly the primary figure in trying to return the NBA to Seattle.

most of the folks i talk to feel sort of hopelessly fatalistic. when bennet bought the sonics, nobody i knew really believed a word he said about keeping the team in town; and of course, now we do believe ballmer when he says the same thing.

greybeard
06-03-2014, 09:01 AM
Durant will leave as soon as he can. Westbrook hurts his game. He hurts everybody's game. Westbrook's game is terrifically exciting. A great watch, which is what most of the other OKC guys on the court get to do.

The answer to the chest guarding was for Durant to bring the ball up or get it next to midcourt. Westbrook refused to give him the ball in such circumstances any number of times, when it seemed clear that Durant wanted it, waved him off actually, sometimes in ways that no one could miss. Screens that demanded a switch were a must. Double them if you have to. They might have been particularly effective with Durant running past them without the ball. The problem is he'd never see it.

And, stating that OKC had no one else to go to other than the two is another way of saying that Westbrook, at his best, and unfortunately at his worst, will Not participate in a meaningful offense that creates good opportunities for anyone other than Durant. And, in reality, Westbrook does not even do that. Since Westbrook demands that he bring the ball up, or is only really WESTBROOK when he does, OKC has a big problem. It is one that I don't think Durant will tolerate once he's free.

Westbrook has star quality but I do not believe that any team that is competitive would touch him. He can bring in the fans, but will not make a good or potentially very good team better. Quite the opposite. On second thought, it is within the possible that the Zen Master would take a shot if he thought he could get buy-in from Westbrook to play the featured, MJ/Kobe role in the Triangle. Derrick Fisher as the Knick coach, perhaps. Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook, not comparable. Westbrook could not lead a team to the water cooler, nor would he try.

Billy Dat
06-03-2014, 09:38 AM
Durant will leave as soon as he can. Westbrook hurts his game. He hurts everybody's game. Westbrook's game is terrifically exciting. A great watch, which is what most of the other OKC guys on the court get to do.

The answer to the chest guarding was for Durant to bring the ball up or get it next to midcourt. Westbrook refused to give him the ball in such circumstances any number of times, when it seemed clear that Durant wanted it, waved him off actually, sometimes in ways that no one could miss. Screens that demanded a switch were a must. Double them if you have to. They might have been particularly effective with Durant running past them without the ball. The problem is he'd never see it.

And, stating that OKC had no one else to go to other than the two is another way of saying that Westbrook, at his best, and unfortunately at his worst, will Not participate in a meaningful offense that creates good opportunities for anyone other than Durant. And, in reality, Westbrook does not even do that. Since Westbrook demands that he bring the ball up, or is only really WESTBROOK when he does, OKC has a big problem. It is one that I don't think Durant will tolerate once he's free.

Westbrook has star quality but I do not believe that any team that is competitive would touch him. He can bring in the fans, but will not make a good or potentially very good team better. Quite the opposite. On second thought, it is within the possible that the Zen Master would take a shot if he thought he could get buy-in from Westbrook to play the featured, MJ/Kobe role in the Triangle. Derrick Fisher as the Knick coach, perhaps. Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook, not comparable. Westbrook could not lead a team to the water cooler, nor would he try.

Durant's MVP acceptance speech was so heartfelt, and he saved his most poignant and moving words for Westbrook - I don't see him leaving OKC after this contract. I know I said that Brooks deserves another year further up this thread, but that is a position I am very wishy washy on, and happy to flip flop. Your mention of the Zen Master does make me think that a properly respected coach with the ability to design around his available talents would do these guys a world of good. I heard Mike Francesca, a local NY sports radio guru, advocate Jeff Van Gundy. That would be a great spot for him, and I think he'd be great for those guys. Plus, we need more Van Gundy vs Van Gundy coaching match-ups.

Aside from Coach K, Westbrook has never played for a great coach. :p

Dukehky
06-03-2014, 10:11 AM
If Westbrook had somebody to pass to who could make a shot other than Kevin Durant, he wouldn't have as many turnovers. He forces plays because he knows Kendrick Perkins, Thabo Sefalosha, Jeremy Lamb, etc can't make a shot. The Thunder need personnel changes that space the floor for Durant and Westbrook better. Especially if Brooks is the coach, which he shouldn't be. This leads me to Scott Brooks. I just don't think he is very good at his job. There is no offense. His out of bounds plays are terrible, the best shot they get is a KD 37 footer at the buzzer. He has very little sense of how to run a rotation, because he too often leaves Westbrook out there with the entire second unit. Of course he's going to rack up turnovers. The Thunder have arguably one of the worst benches in the league, which leaves Russ out there to just GO.

KD will never be able to be an effective post player against a good defender, even if they are 6'5. His physique is not suited to putting on mass, which is what he would need to be able to post up 6'5 210 bulls like Tony Allen. I know LeBron added the post-up to his game, so why can't Durant do it? Because LeBron is a once in 5 generations talent, with the body of an Adonis (man crush).

Russ is a bull on defense when he wants to be, but he has to shoulder so much of the offensive load on that team that he can't waste all his energy harassing the ball handler like he did with the Olympic team. Westbrook is also my favorite non Duke player in the NBA so I love it when he does anything.

Bottom line, Durant is better than Westbrook, I think will always be better than Westbrook, but may not be more important to a team than Westbrook can be, if that makes any sense. Also, the Thunder need to make some serious roster changes and probably get rid of Scot Brooks, both of which, I think are imperative to their team winning a title. There are 3 no touch players on the Thunder (Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka), everybody else needs a serious look if they can get anything back for them. You probably don't wanna get rid of Adams or Jackson, but those are probably the only other 2 people on the team who can bring anything back in a trade situation.

superdave
06-03-2014, 12:17 PM
If Westbrook had somebody to pass to who could make a shot other than Kevin Durant, he wouldn't have as many turnovers. He forces plays because he knows Kendrick Perkins, Thabo Sefalosha, Jeremy Lamb, etc can't make a shot. The Thunder need personnel changes that space the floor for Durant and Westbrook better. Especially if Brooks is the coach, which he shouldn't be. This leads me to Scott Brooks. I just don't think he is very good at his job. There is no offense. His out of bounds plays are terrible, the best shot they get is a KD 37 footer at the buzzer. He has very little sense of how to run a rotation, because he too often leaves Westbrook out there with the entire second unit. Of course he's going to rack up turnovers. The Thunder have arguably one of the worst benches in the league, which leaves Russ out there to just GO.

KD will never be able to be an effective post player against a good defender, even if they are 6'5. His physique is not suited to putting on mass, which is what he would need to be able to post up 6'5 210 bulls like Tony Allen. I know LeBron added the post-up to his game, so why can't Durant do it? Because LeBron is a once in 5 generations talent, with the body of an Adonis (man crush).

Russ is a bull on defense when he wants to be, but he has to shoulder so much of the offensive load on that team that he can't waste all his energy harassing the ball handler like he did with the Olympic team. Westbrook is also my favorite non Duke player in the NBA so I love it when he does anything.

Bottom line, Durant is better than Westbrook, I think will always be better than Westbrook, but may not be more important to a team than Westbrook can be, if that makes any sense. Also, the Thunder need to make some serious roster changes and probably get rid of Scot Brooks, both of which, I think are imperative to their team winning a title. There are 3 no touch players on the Thunder (Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka), everybody else needs a serious look if they can get anything back for them. You probably don't wanna get rid of Adams or Jackson, but those are probably the only other 2 people on the team who can bring anything back in a trade situation.


Based on my understanding of the post up game, Durant is too slight in his booty and legs to have a significant post-up game. He is more likely to get interior buckets or short jumpers in the lane on curl routes or flash plays in the post.

I do like the use of Reggie Jackson over Seoflosha. Sef is not consistent enough from 3 to earn the 3&D moniker. I really liked Steven Adams this season. He played beyond his years. Adams can be a 15 and 10 for them in two years, in my estimation. Kendrick Perkins contract expires next year, meaning they can trade his expiring deal for some assets to someone looking to clear cap space. OKC has not done much of that in the past, but it could work with the right deal.

Collison and Caron Butler are not the players they once were. Derek Fisher is likely in a suit next season. These next few years for OKC are going to look very different from the last 5. You have a core of Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka, and a secondary group of guys including Sefolosha/Adams/Jackson and maybe Lamb who will be in the rotation. But that's not enough.

The issues they have are the Big Three eat up $48 million+ of salary cap and they have little else to trade. They may have gotten a player in Adams and gotten a little hosed with Lamb. I also think they have a few guys stashed in Europe they could bring over. But unless they get lucky with a later draft pick (sort of like Spurs did with Kawhi Leonard) or can package a deal together with Perk's expiring, they will have trouble adding a significant player to the rotation for another year or two. So really, Westbrook has to get better and Adams/Lamb have to get much-much better for them to make it back to the Finals.

Duvall
06-03-2014, 12:20 PM
Westbrook has star quality but I do not believe that any team that is competitive would touch him.

Depends on the coach, I think. (http://www.timesunion.com/sports/article/Players-good-as-gold-3783158.php)

Des Esseintes
06-03-2014, 05:23 PM
Westbrook has star quality but I do not believe that any team that is competitive would touch him. He can bring in the fans, but will not make a good or potentially very good team better. Quite the opposite. On second thought, it is within the possible that the Zen Master would take a shot if he thought he could get buy-in from Westbrook to play the featured, MJ/Kobe role in the Triangle. Derrick Fisher as the Knick coach, perhaps. Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook, not comparable. Westbrook could not lead a team to the water cooler, nor would he try.


Depends on the coach, I think. (http://www.timesunion.com/sports/article/Players-good-as-gold-3783158.php)

As resident greybeard exegete, I think I can clear this up. When greybeard says "any team that is competitive" he means "any team blessed by the infinitely humane wisdom of Larry Brown." Westbrook might be a widely agreed top five overall guy and an integral element of Team USA, but Larry Brown doesn't like his game. So he can't be good.

nmduke2001
06-03-2014, 10:58 PM
I know most won't agree but if I was OKC I would try to trade Westbrook and Perkins to Minny for Love, Rubio and shabazz. The trade works money-wise. Ibaka would have to play center but I believe a core of Durant, Love, Rubio and Ibaka wins a championship and I don't think Durant and Westbrook can win one together.

http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine

greybeard
06-03-2014, 11:44 PM
Perhaps better said that Durant and Westbrook have essentially the same games. Both like the ball way, way outside, Durant will kill you with the three, Westbrook a midrange pull up, and both are breathtaking going to the basket. Burns up a whole lot of seconds on the shot clock.

One thing I should say, passes can present as empowering, arrive consonant with the receiver's style, be timed, shaped, delivered with different methods, that produce better outcomes if the receiver shoots. Diaw. Does Westbrook present the ball with the intention to empower, with the feel, sense, and selflessness that developing such a skill set and using it with awareness require? Is it in his nature? Does he see the game in such terms?

These are important questions; my strong sense is that the answers point in the direction reflected in my earlier post. However, my sense of things did not account for the possibility that Westbrook's ability to empower others is hampered by Durant's presence. Devising an offense that coheres and brings the best out of the support players on OKC must be next to impossible given the touches that the two stars need. Westbrook's game might be well be constrained by the combined scoring tatents of the two of them. He might have a more well rounded game, or the potential for it, than I see.

I think that Durant could be terrific playing around the lane. Not so if he and the team have put no work into a scheme that plays to such a role. We all saw that last week. I think that Durant creates opportunities for inside catches in the flow of play and is extremely dangerous when he does. His value as a three shooter and how he plays off of that in spectacular fashion speaks against making post-up play a meaningful component of how he is used.

If what others here see as within Westbrook's game actually is, that is, if he truly can play the role of an offensive leader, then perhaps it makes sense to build a team around him without Durant. With the assets that a Durant trade would garner, a Westbrook-lead team might well be more potent that anything that could be built around the two of them.

As I've said, I think that Durant might force the issue. I do not see a conflict between the genuine feelings for his teammates, Westbrook in particular, Durant expressed, and his potentially wanting to move on. Life works that way sometimes. Hopefully, when it does, it produces good outcomes for everyone involved. Friendships, ones that run deep, have a way of enduring, or perhaps if they endure, we say they run deep. These two guys, Durant and Westbrook, share things in common of tremendous importance to each of them, and have made it work so much of the time. Their relationship, I have to believe, is better termed a brotherhood, than a friendship. Each knows that no one will ever know what it means to be him than the other. Ironically, why that is so might be the reason that they part ways.

gurufrisbee
06-04-2014, 08:18 AM
Both are very talented. Westbrook is a better defender, but he makes so many turnovers. And his attitude is repulsive to me. I'd take Durant eight days a week over him if I had to choose.

I also think Westbrook is in the wrong position. He needs a true pass first point guard to play along side with. If OKC could get that, I don't think they would keep getting stopped in the playoffs (which would suck, because as a Seattle resident the only team I root against harder is the Tar Heels).

Turk
06-04-2014, 12:48 PM
If we were building OKC from scratch using the current roster, I think almost everyone would start with Durant. What we're really trying to answer is "Whose team is this?" or in other words, "Which guy is the alpha dog - KD or Russ?" There can be *ONLY* one alpha dog. Every championship team figured it out or else they didn't win. After a year or so, the Heat figured out they were LeBron's team, but the process was quicker because DWade got slowed with injuries and started showing his age, LeBron added things to his game, the right role players (Bosh, Ray-Ray, Shane, Mike Miller, Haslem, etc) adapted, and Spolestra figured out rotations and sets to spread it all around.

Here's a theory for you: Russell Westbrook is Allen Iverson 3.0 - a bigger, faster (!) athlete, more developed offensive game, but shows some of the same flaws. At least I get the same kinds of emotions watching Russ as I did watching AI: awe at their berserker intensity and fearlessness and highlights when everything was going their way; frustration at some of the low-percentage plays or decisions that didn't make SportsCenter but eventually cost ballgames. For example, they both liked to gamble for steals, but when it didn't work, the other team got an easy shot.

I believe that the Russ / KD "Fire and Ice" combination can work, and I also believe Scott Brooks is not the guy who can figure it out. They also need to add the right kind of role players / supporting cast, and that hasn't happened yet either. One of the big reasons the Spurs won is that they got good minutes from deep in their bench, and OKC had no one left to roll out except Perk and Fish. As it stands, OKC is one of the three best teams in the NBA, so I wouldn't blow them up.

greybeard
06-04-2014, 12:56 PM
Both are very talented. Westbrook is a better defender, but he makes so many turnovers. And his attitude is repulsive to me. I'd take Durant eight days a week over him if I had to choose.

I also think Westbrook is in the wrong position. He needs a true pass first point guard to play along side with. If OKC could get that, I don't think they would keep getting stopped in the playoffs (which would suck, because as a Seattle resident the only team I root against harder is the Tar Heels).

What happened in Seattle tarnishes David Stern and the NBA forever. Seattle should stand as a watershed moment; a reminder of how the insatiable greed that is professional sport knows no bounds. Instead we forget, even while the coliseums we have paid for pander to the very rich, even while these sports drive cable costs through the roof, and even while basic public services cannot be sustained. We forget for the very reason that the blackmail works. They have the gold, and we can't lose for winning. Thanks for mentioning this. Awakened what I forgot. If they don't give Seattle the next franchise that is available, we should all understand why. They want us to remember, remember real good.

greybeard
06-04-2014, 01:41 PM
If we were building OKC from scratch using the current roster, I think almost everyone would start with Durant. What we're really trying to answer is "Whose team is this?" or in other words, "Which guy is the alpha dog - KD or Russ?" There can be *ONLY* one alpha dog. Every championship team figured it out or else they didn't win. After a year or so, the Heat figured out they were LeBron's team, but the process was quicker because DWade got slowed with injuries and started showing his age, LeBron added things to his game, the right role players (Bosh, Ray-Ray, Shane, Mike Miller, Haslem, etc) adapted, and Spolestra figured out rotations and sets to spread it all around.

Here's a theory for you: Russell Westbrook is Allen Iverson 3.0 - a bigger, faster (!) athlete, more developed offensive game, but shows some of the same flaws. At least I get the same kinds of emotions watching Russ as I did watching AI: awe at their berserker intensity and fearlessness and highlights when everything was going their way; frustration at some of the low-percentage plays or decisions that didn't make SportsCenter but eventually cost ballgames. For example, they both liked to gamble for steals, but when it didn't work, the other team got an easy shot.

I believe that the Russ / KD "Fire and Ice" combination can work, and I also believe Scott Brooks is not the guy who can figure it out. They also need to add the right kind of role players / supporting cast, and that hasn't happened yet either. One of the big reasons the Spurs won is that they got good minutes from deep in their bench, and OKC had no one left to roll out except Perk and Fish. As it stands, OKC is one of the three best teams in the NBA, so I wouldn't blow them up.

Manu has long been a "bench" player to anchor the second team, to be fresh on the court when the rotation kicks in; but he has been a starter as games wind down. Diaw was never not a starter against OKC. Pops just had him starting at a time that was very inconvenient for OKC, and fresh through the most important parts of the game. Including their production in bench numbers is to me a confusing practice. Whether that media practice influences your perspective on what comprises "deep into the bench" I don't know.

SupaDave
06-04-2014, 05:26 PM
Both are very talented. Westbrook is a better defender, but he makes so many turnovers. And his attitude is repulsive to me. I'd take Durant eight days a week over him if I had to choose.

I also think Westbrook is in the wrong position. He needs a true pass first point guard to play along side with. If OKC could get that, I don't think they would keep getting stopped in the playoffs (which would suck, because as a Seattle resident the only team I root against harder is the Tar Heels).

I agree with this except I think the two should be divided. Durant should be with the Lakeshow - after they get Kyrie and Love. (Hey, I can dream can't I?)

Westbrook simply does not know when to give the ball up to the more talented player. He'll make any hot shooter go cold.