As bad as the Lakers are...

[Cry Havoc]

The Thunder are likely going to be something like 4-14 when Westbrook comes back. But just leaning on him every night isn't going to get that team to .500 in the brutal West. In fact, it's not crazy to postulate that the Thunder are going to only be able to keep their heads at sea level missing Durant. And that's assuming WB comes back in 4 weeks. If he misses 6, things get REALLY dicey as we're looking at possibly a 5-18 record at that point.

Let's say WB comes back on the 7th of December and the Thunder are 5-14. Fairly reasonable given their current pace. They have 14 games in December before the KD train is supposed to return.

With Westbrook, let's say they go 8-6 to close out the month. That's pretty optimistic considering WB will not be 100% and his shot might be off with his shooting hand injured.

That puts them at 13-20 with 49 games remaining in the season.

If the bar for the playoffs is 49 wins in the regular season in the West, the Thunder need to go 36-13 to close the year out, and this assumes everyone stays healthy.

36-13 is nearly a 60 win pace, something they didn't do last year. That's pretty blistering, tbh. Not impossible but I would absolutely NOT put money on the Thunder making the playoffs this year, and that's assuming they don't pick up injuries to Ibaka or further injuries to KD or WB.

[Mel_13]

Hole keeps getting deeper

3-11 now, with six of those losses to:

Brooklyn x2
Milwaukee
Detroit
Utah
Denver

[BatManu20]

I seriously doubt OKC misses the playoffs. If they do, the Spurs would have a clear path to SEIS.

Dallas is still a legitimate threat, unfortunately. Especially if they get home court.

[TampaDude]

Dallas is still a legitimate threat, unfortunately. Especially if they get home court.

Speaking of Dallas...they are assraping the Lakers tonight...love it!!!

[TheGreatYacht]

[spurs1990]

Hard to hate LA with their current state.

Not sure if it's feasible but that quandry would resolved if both Durant and Westbrook bolted to LA in 2016.

[Uriel]

The Thunder are likely going to be something like 4-14 when Westbrook comes back. But just leaning on him every night isn't going to get that team to .500 in the brutal West. In fact, it's not crazy to postulate that the Thunder are going to only be able to keep their heads at sea level missing Durant. And that's assuming WB comes back in 4 weeks. If he misses 6, things get REALLY dicey as we're looking at possibly a 5-18 record at that point.

Let's say WB comes back on the 7th of December and the Thunder are 5-14. Fairly reasonable given their current pace. They have 14 games in December before the KD train is supposed to return.

With Westbrook, let's say they go 8-6 to close out the month. That's pretty optimistic considering WB will not be 100% and his shot might be off with his shooting hand injured.

That puts them at 13-20 with 49 games remaining in the season.

If the bar for the playoffs is 49 wins in the regular season in the West, the Thunder need to go 36-13 to close the year out, and this assumes everyone stays healthy.

36-13 is nearly a 60 win pace, something they didn't do last year. That's pretty blistering, tbh. Not impossible but I would absolutely NOT put money on the Thunder making the playoffs this year, and that's assuming they don't pick up injuries to Ibaka or further injuries to KD or WB.

You wouldn't put money on them to make that playoffs. But that doesn't mean you think they won't make the playoffs. Do you?

[FireMicoHalili]

here are NBA teams' strength of schedule: http://espn.go.com/nba/stats/rpi/_/sort/SOS

If I interpret it correctly, it indicates MEM, DAL, PHX, and HOU have it relatively easier than the Spurs thus far. Lakers expected to lose heavily. Sacramento at #2, so it's a pleasant surprise to see them constantly winning. Clips and Spurs expected to have better records as season progresses.

[Cry Havoc]

You wouldn't put money on them to make that playoffs. But that doesn't mean you think they won't make the playoffs. Do you?

Wtf. Why would I not put money on something that I thought was going to happen? That's the entire point of saying, "I wouldn't put money on it." I'd say they have a 35% chance of making the post-season.

[Uriel]

Wtf. Why would I not put money on something that I thought was going to happen? That's the entire point of saying, "I wouldn't put money on it." I'd say they have a 35% chance of making the post-season.

There's a difference between saying "I wouldn't put money on them to make the playoffs" and "I would put money on them to miss the playoffs." The former implies that you're uncertain as to whether they would make the playoffs or not, and so you'd rather not risk losing money by betting on the outcome. The latter implies that you're reasonably certain they would miss the playoffs.

Hence, my question pertained to whether you thought they would make the playoffs or not. Your "35%" estimate, then, puts you at the latter camp, not the former.