Caeman
06-05-2012, 08:28 PM
I'm tired of hearing this bullshit comparison between these two teams. It's disrespectful to the Spurs franchise and the late Tim Duncan era to compare the teams.
They like to compare how both teams are small-market teams. They also like to compare how the Thunder team is modeled after the Spurs; a Big 3 comprised of draft picks, not via free agency.
I think these comparisons are shallow in nature and do not tell the whole story. These teams are not alike; the Thunder does not constitute a younger Spurs team. There are some immense differences between the two teams, and to compare them is to insult and undermine the greatness the Spurs' FO produced these last 15 years behind Tim Duncan.
First, both teams are from small-markets. However, the Thunder are media darlings and the Spurs are....well, no one gives a shit about them. I don't care that the Spurs are not favored among the media, that's not the point. The point is that the small-market comparison does not hold water because one team is promoted nationally, while the other lives in obscurity despite winning championships. Thus, the teams are not similar.
This difference also has a meaningful impact on the court. The Thunder Big 3 have been coddled by the league/media like no other these last few years. The Thunder Big 3 receive preferential star treatment, the likes never before seen by the Spurs' Big 3. The following numbers come from each players best statistical year with respect to free throw attempts. This means we're looking at the younger versions of the Spurs' Big 3.
Parker's best year; 363 in 2008-2009
Manu's best year FTA-wise; 442 both in 2004-2005 and 2007-2008.
Timmy's best year; 701 2001-2002
Compared to the Thunder
Harden; 369 in 2011-2012 (funny that he has more FTA this year than the previous year considering it's a compressed season)
Westbrook; 631 in 2010-2011
Durant: 840 in 2009-2010 (Timmy swings with the big dicks down low, and this skinny jump-shooting asshole received 139 more FTA than Timmy did in his best years)
So keeping it short here, the teams both derive from small-markets. However, that alone doesn't make them similar. One team is promoted nationally and thus gets preferential treatment and the other doesn't. The small-market comparison is flawed; the comparison between the Thunder and Spurs is flawed similarly.
The second flawed comparison is even more insulting to the Spurs franchise and FO. It goes as follows; the Thunder built their team around a Big 3 via the draft (not free agency), so they are like the Spurs. This comparison does not hold water.
It is true that, like the Spurs, the Thunder Big 3 were acquired via the draft. However, just because this is true, does not mean both teams are alike. First, it is unfair to describe that the Thunder built a Big 3 via the draft. It's more accurate to describe is as follows; the Thunder built a Big 3 via the draft LOTTERY.
Durant was selected second overall in the 2007 draft. Timmy was first overall in 1997. Here, the comparison is valid. However, when you look at Harden and Westbrook (and Ibaka for that matter) versus Ginobili and Parker, the comparison goes to shit. Westbrook was selected 4th overall in 2008, Harden 3rd overall in 2009, and Ibaka was selected 24th overall in 2008. On the other hand, Ginobili was drafted 57th overall in 1999 and Parker was selected 28th overall in 2001.
So to wrap up here. The Thunder built a team mostly via TOP 5 picks in the DRAFT LOTTERY and the Spurs via the draft. To compare the teams is insulting to the Spurs and it's FO. If the Thunder are able to sustain 15 years of success as seen in the Tim Duncan era, then maybe we can talk comparisons. Even then, the Spurs built a team around one draft lottery pick, not 3 like the Thunder.
The teams and their histories are not alike. It's BS to compare them.
To be even more relevant to current sitution. I predict the Thunder come out strong tomorrow night, 8 on 5. They take a 20 point lead by half, and the rest is history. I doubt the league wants 7 games in this series; there is no need to take a chance. Durant v James is just around the corner.
They like to compare how both teams are small-market teams. They also like to compare how the Thunder team is modeled after the Spurs; a Big 3 comprised of draft picks, not via free agency.
I think these comparisons are shallow in nature and do not tell the whole story. These teams are not alike; the Thunder does not constitute a younger Spurs team. There are some immense differences between the two teams, and to compare them is to insult and undermine the greatness the Spurs' FO produced these last 15 years behind Tim Duncan.
First, both teams are from small-markets. However, the Thunder are media darlings and the Spurs are....well, no one gives a shit about them. I don't care that the Spurs are not favored among the media, that's not the point. The point is that the small-market comparison does not hold water because one team is promoted nationally, while the other lives in obscurity despite winning championships. Thus, the teams are not similar.
This difference also has a meaningful impact on the court. The Thunder Big 3 have been coddled by the league/media like no other these last few years. The Thunder Big 3 receive preferential star treatment, the likes never before seen by the Spurs' Big 3. The following numbers come from each players best statistical year with respect to free throw attempts. This means we're looking at the younger versions of the Spurs' Big 3.
Parker's best year; 363 in 2008-2009
Manu's best year FTA-wise; 442 both in 2004-2005 and 2007-2008.
Timmy's best year; 701 2001-2002
Compared to the Thunder
Harden; 369 in 2011-2012 (funny that he has more FTA this year than the previous year considering it's a compressed season)
Westbrook; 631 in 2010-2011
Durant: 840 in 2009-2010 (Timmy swings with the big dicks down low, and this skinny jump-shooting asshole received 139 more FTA than Timmy did in his best years)
So keeping it short here, the teams both derive from small-markets. However, that alone doesn't make them similar. One team is promoted nationally and thus gets preferential treatment and the other doesn't. The small-market comparison is flawed; the comparison between the Thunder and Spurs is flawed similarly.
The second flawed comparison is even more insulting to the Spurs franchise and FO. It goes as follows; the Thunder built their team around a Big 3 via the draft (not free agency), so they are like the Spurs. This comparison does not hold water.
It is true that, like the Spurs, the Thunder Big 3 were acquired via the draft. However, just because this is true, does not mean both teams are alike. First, it is unfair to describe that the Thunder built a Big 3 via the draft. It's more accurate to describe is as follows; the Thunder built a Big 3 via the draft LOTTERY.
Durant was selected second overall in the 2007 draft. Timmy was first overall in 1997. Here, the comparison is valid. However, when you look at Harden and Westbrook (and Ibaka for that matter) versus Ginobili and Parker, the comparison goes to shit. Westbrook was selected 4th overall in 2008, Harden 3rd overall in 2009, and Ibaka was selected 24th overall in 2008. On the other hand, Ginobili was drafted 57th overall in 1999 and Parker was selected 28th overall in 2001.
So to wrap up here. The Thunder built a team mostly via TOP 5 picks in the DRAFT LOTTERY and the Spurs via the draft. To compare the teams is insulting to the Spurs and it's FO. If the Thunder are able to sustain 15 years of success as seen in the Tim Duncan era, then maybe we can talk comparisons. Even then, the Spurs built a team around one draft lottery pick, not 3 like the Thunder.
The teams and their histories are not alike. It's BS to compare them.
To be even more relevant to current sitution. I predict the Thunder come out strong tomorrow night, 8 on 5. They take a 20 point lead by half, and the rest is history. I doubt the league wants 7 games in this series; there is no need to take a chance. Durant v James is just around the corner.