did we really play okc better or are they just playing even better against GS?

[SAGirl]

I think a lot of time it is. Shooting can have a big variance especially over a short period of time. People get focused on the result and want to attribute it to something. Sometimes, guys miss. That doesn't mean OKC played terrible defense or anything, but beyond the eye ball test, both SA & GS missed makeable looks.

It happens.

They got a lot of easy looks with all the TO Russ had too. Can't play good defense if you are turning the ball over at that rate.

[K...]

Definitely need a youth upgrade, if not, just better role players. Big 3 for outplayed in all areas.

I'm enjoying OKC drop a deuce on people as well. Couldn't tell you how many people on here argued against Westbrook and how much of a negative he was for his team. or how beta Durant was and how he can't win. This is the first time they've had legitimate depth.
Couch analysts and their statistics.. never touched a basketball in their life, believing they know the game better than professionals.

Kawhi and LMA is a great core to build around though. Excited to see where they go. Can't wait till draft night. Likely as ever to make some moves if they're looking to unload players. We also will have some interesting choice at 29 with all the players declaring early this year.

Those people were right though, there is no crow to eat.

Unt guitar dude and hater called Adams being a menace, Harlem called Westbrook. But no one called Roberson and waiters. No one imagined kanter not being abused. Westbrook and Durant have never worked together this well. We are either setting sudden maturity or a rare convergence of two guys checking their ego.

[DPG21920]

They got a lot of easy looks with all the TO Russ had too. Can't play good defense if you are turning the ball over at that rate.

Sure, but even outside of that, GS getting quality looks pretty consistently.

Watch the video:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=15744840

[SAGirl]

Sure, but even outside of that, GS getting quality looks pretty consistently.

Watch the video:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=15744840

Won't watch it bc I watched the game. Can't stop everything bc GSW moves the ball well, if you take out all the easy looks bcc of the TO, OKC wins the game.

[DPG21920]

Those people were right though, there is no crow to eat.

Unt guitar dude and hater called Adams being a menace, Harlem called Westbrook. But no one called Roberson and waiters. No one imagined kanter not being abused. Westbrook and Durant have never worked together this well. We are either setting sudden maturity or a rare convergence of two guys checking their ego.

Also, people are obsessing over the results. What if OKC didn't get blown calls in their favor vs SA and lost those games is anyone saying anything?

How about the fact WB shot 37% from the field vs SA? Sure he does a lot of other things, but people act like because OKC won that everything they did was gold and that is just not true.

How about the fact OKC gave up more uncontested shots than contested vs SA? SA missed good looks, but now because of the result "all credit to that amazing OKC defense".

It's not to knock OKC - they have played amazingly well overall and while they have had really good fortune (FT disparity, 50.50 calls in their favor, teams missing good looks) they have done way more good than bad and have had everyone step up when they needed to.

[DPG21920]

Won't watch it bc I watched the game. Can't stop everything bc GSW moves the ball well, if you take out all the easy looks bcc of the TO, OKC wins the game.

Well that is incredibly stubborn and you have already admitted you just hate GS . I will leave it at that then since it's not a real conversation but a biased one.

Last note, you can't just eliminate their TO's. OKC only had 2 more TO's than GS so if you take away those from them as well, GS still generated better looks overall.

[SAGirl]

Well that is incredibly stubborn and you have already admitted you just hate GS . I will leave it at that then since it's not a real conversation but a biased one.

Last note, you can't just eliminate their TO's. OKC only had 2 more TO's than GS so if you take away those from them as well, GS still generated better looks overall.

Ok DPG. I respect you and all but GSW will lose next game. Their win wasn't really that impressive and they will be crushed at OKC. I think they even are the mentally weaker team too, or more prone to get carried away by bad calls.I was more impressed by OKC in its defeat than GSW in their win.

[DPG21920]

Ok DPG. I respect you and all but GSW will lose next game. Their win wasn't really that impressive and they will be crushed at OKC. I think they even are the mentally weaker team too, or more prone to get carried away by bad calls.I was more impressed by OKC in its defeat than GSW in their win.

I don't disagree at all, in fact I said the exact same thing last night in the game thread and on Twitter:

The difference is, I don't hate one of the teams so much I can't even bring myself to discuss it objectively. OKC has been better, but again, I personally just hate analysing the result without looking at the process. It's empty to me and pointless (to me I mean, others don't care about it that much and it's cool).

[SAGirl]

Also, people are obsessing over the results. What if OKC didn't get blown calls in their favor vs SA and lost those games is anyone saying anything?

How about the fact WB shot 37% from the field vs SA? Sure he does a lot of other things, but people act like because OKC won that everything they did was gold and that is just not true.

How about the fact OKC gave up more uncontested shots than contested vs SA? SA missed good looks, but now because of the result "all credit to that amazing OKC defense".

It's not to knock OKC - they have played amazingly well overall and while they have had really good fortune (FT disparity, 50.50 calls in their favor, teams missing good looks) they have done way more good than bad and have had everyone step up when they needed to.

For our series, yes we had a very small margin for error and blown calls that went against us did us in. I think it was a winnable series but I am not sour about it bc I saw an OKC team that played as a team better than I had seen them b4 and their effort was sufficient to win. Once Donovan figured us out there wasn't much Pop could do to hide the guys who were done.

I think our chances to win it all after that series were slim anyways bc old age really did Timmy and Manu in. The next series against GSW would have been even more of a challenge. One always roots for the team but when you get to the postseason and guys the team relied heavily upon look done as or very injured, and role players don't show up, one can tell it just wasn't our year.

[DPG21920]

For our series, yes we had a very small margin for error and blown calls that went against us did us in. I think it was a winnable series but I am not sour about it bc I saw an OKC team that played as a team better than I had seen them b4 and their effort was sufficient to win. Once Donovan figured us out there wasn't much Pop could do to hide the guys who were done.

I think our chances to win it all after that series were slim anyways bc old age really did Timmy and Manu in. The next series against GSW would have been even more of a challenge. One always roots for the team but when you get to the postseason and guys the team relied heavily upon look done as or very injured, and role players don't show up, one can tell it just wasn't our year.

I agree (especially on the 2nd part), but the first part is chicken/egg (with regards to Pop). Like the video I shared w/ regards to GS/OKC, what is a coach to do when the offense is generating the looks it wants (and open ones at that) but guys are just missing shots they have proven they can make all year?

Sometimes there is not some big fancy adjustment (although there were some obvious tweaks that could have helped) when you are a coach and counting on guys to execute better. Offense is not about making shots go in (that is the result). It's about generating the most open & high percentage looks you can get which in turn gives you the best probability of the desired outcome.

I think Pop could have helped with some adjustments but at the same time I don't blame him because like me, he was probably in shock that the guys were just missing and didn't want to change anything when the offense was functioning well with shots they were comfortable with .

Same with Kerr.

[DPG21920]

But in answering the OP, I think SA definitely played OKC better while at the same time OKC is playing much better this series as well. It's both which is why you see OKC dictating pace, scoring a ton and blowing GS out.

Spurs played OKC very well (better than GS has) & I also think OKC wasn't playing as well as they could vs SA so games were all close (because SA wasn't playing particularly well in the area of making shots/rebounding).

[SAGirl]

I don't disagree at all, in fact I said the exact same thing last night in the game thread and on Twitter:

The difference is, I don't hate one of the teams so much I can't even bring myself to discuss it objectively. OKC has been better, but again, I personally just hate analysing the result without looking at the process. It's empty to me and pointless (to me I mean, others don't care about it that much and it's cool).

I watched the games though which has firmed my subjective opinion. The fact I don't go through the process as you do, revisiting the game doesn't make my point less valid. You can't stop everything in a team that moves the ball as well as GSW does and on the road OKC aggravated their situation with really bad TO at times they could have put GSW away. The bad calls like in our games also came at different times, specially early to force OKC into a slow start. Get GSW didn't put them away. Like I said they just really weren't impressive and OKC never gives up. They will respond with runs of their own + kept their minds in the game through the blown calls. I thought Russ made a few TO in a row in the 3rd and looked tired like he should have sat. In those situations in OKC Dion Waiters or Foye would pitch in a few possessions. On the road the ratepayers weren't there at the same level, but they will show up at OKC. Moreover OKC is not scared by this team. They played like they really thought they could close out that series on the road.

With regard to the GSW, they were active defensively, yes they forced TO, their roleplayers showed up. Mo Speights for example and Livingston did for them what our bench failed to do, bought them rest, kept momentum in their favor. They played a good game, but OKC will play better at home and even their best game at home by GSW was not sufficient to break their compe ive spirit. So bottom line, I can give you my opinion and review w/o watching the video you shared bc it wasn't going to change my opinion.

[DPG21920]

Well, if the tide turns and GS wins again, studying the games and what actually happened and why vs just the result will give you insight (is why I do it).

[SAGirl]

I agree (especially on the 2nd part), but the first part is chicken/egg (with regards to Pop). Like the video I shared w/ regards to GS/OKC, what is a coach to do when the offense is generating the looks it wants (and open ones at that) but guys are just missing shots they have proven they can make all year?

Sometimes there is not some big fancy adjustment (although there were some obvious tweaks that could have helped) when you are a coach and counting on guys to execute better. Offense is not about making shots go in (that is the result). It's about generating the most open & high percentage looks you can get which in turn gives you the best probability of the desired outcome.

I think Pop could have helped with some adjustments but at the same time I don't blame him because like me, he was probably in shock that the guys were just missing and didn't want to change anything when the offense was functioning well with shots they were comfortable with .

Same with Kerr.

With regards to Kerr, I have no response really bc I am not a GSW follower. This season I only watched their games against us, the series against OKC and some games against the Rockets and Blazers, and of those that I watched of their earlier series I only watched portions. I have no idea what adjustments he can make.

For ourselves, I have my own opinions and I have listened curiously to others. I think Pop could have done things too, but he's stubborn and he stuck to the guys who he had trusted in the past, which is why to me the decline of the big 3 was the biggest factor. I think if was Chinook who said it best, they were our depth. We need better/younger depth that is going to improve with experience and even improve in the postseason. It doesn't matter if the chicken or the egg came in first if we were not at our best and didn't have the best chance to win it all anyways for me. I would have liked to have seen us advance but we weren't really at our best, so what can you do?

[SAGirl]

Well, if the tide turns and GS wins again, studying the games and what actually happened and why vs just the result will give you insight (is why I do it).

I do that with our games bc I care and know our team very well. These teams I am watching as a casual fan. Donovan has impressed me with what he's done with his team but it's not like I know the team that well either.

[spurtech09]

If Spurs were to play them again Im pretty sure Spurs could win the series....Minus the cheating refs....

[DPG21920]

Well, if the tide turns and GS wins again, studying the games and what actually happened and why vs just the result will give you insight (is why I do it).

Well, I am not totally surprised at all. I mean, it's still an amazing thing but there were plenty of signs even in the losses for GS that they were fully capable of winning games by doing much of the same.

Dion Waiters/Roberson regressed to their means over the last 3 games (not a shock).

GS started hitting more shots; both open (there were plenty of those) & contested (what they have done all year).

OKC missed some of the looks they were making (especially from 3) and again this is not a surprise. They were a very mediocre 3PT shooting team all year so them keeping pace in the first 4 games with GS was not a likely outcome.

The blown 4th quarter leads and TO's that they overcame vs SA/GS did them in vs GS as well.

The result is what people will focus on and I get it, but the tea leaves were there the entire time (but nothing is guaranteed obviously as we saw with OKC vs SA where the same signs were there).

[HarlemHeat37]

OKC had a nice stretch of luck in these playoffs, tbh..their defense was mediocre, just like it was during the RS, they allowed a ton of open looks, according to SportsVu, the other teams just couldn't capitalize..the 3-1 meltdown version of the Thunder was closer to the "real" OKC..

[DPG21920]

That's what I was saying. It's not that they played bad - far from it. But a tiger usually doesn't change it's stripes for long stretches. They could have lost to SA & ended up losing to GS. They played their usual ball and came up aces on a lot of coin tosses.

It's not a knock at all either. They are a damn good team and had a legit shot to win this series (even if it was a little fluky).

[HarlemHeat37]

^^It's just how basketball works, sometimes..

The ultimate result is very predictable in the NBA, but the ride to the finish line can be interesting..Andre Roberson having literally the best shooting stretch of his career is something you can't predict, but can be certain that it's only temporary..

[DPG21920]

For sure. But that's why analysing the actual process vs just going off of the result usually wins out. Sure, a team can overcome odds and do things differently over a small sample size, but usually the numbers don't lie over the longer term.

[Kawhitstorm]

That's what I was saying. It's not that they played bad - far from it. But a tiger usually doesn't change it's stripes for long stretches. They could have lost to SA & ended up losing to GS. They played their usual ball and came up aces on a lot of coin tosses.

They turned the ball over & took bad shots in Gm 2/Gm 5 against the Spurs, it's just that the Spurs could make 'em pay.

-In Gm 2, Patty Mills AIR BALLED what would have been a potential game winner after the turnover on the inbound.
-In Gm 5, they turned the ball over twice in the final minute but Porker missed two consecutive jumpers. (They also got bailed out by a bogus foul that resulted in two FTs for KD)

They also made up for their terrible shot selection by pounding the Spurs on the offensive glass but they couldn't play Kanter/Adams together in the WCF.

Curry badly outplayed WestBrick in the final 3 games of the WCF & that was all she wrote.

[spursistan]

They turned the ball over & took bad shots in Gm 2/Gm 5 against the Spurs, it's just that the Spurs could make 'em pay.

-In Gm 2, Patty Mills AIR BALLED what would have been a potential game winner after the turnover on the inbound.
-In Gm 5, they turned the ball over twice in the final minute but Porker missed two consecutive jumpers. (They also got bailed out by a bogus foul that resulted in two FTs for KD)

They also made up for their terrible shot selection by pounding the Spurs on the offensive glass but they couldn't play Kanter/Adams together in the WCF.

Curry badly outplayed WestBrick in the final 3 games of the WCF & that was all she wrote.

It is all moot..I'm kinda at peace with getting bounced because we were pretenders at core, and GSW would have shredded our sorry asses..

[DPG21920]

It is all moot..I'm kinda at peace with getting bounced because we were pretenders at core, and GSW would have shredded our sorry asses..

I disagree. SA defense was legit, even with hobbled Tim. Look at what SA did to OKC offense vs what GS did. SA had success vs GS on defense in RS as well. Could SA have scored enough? Doubtful, but I think SA would have made it compe ive (even if not as compe ive as OKC did).

[spurtech09]

I disagree. SA defense was legit, even with hobbled Tim. Look at what SA did to OKC offense vs what GS did. SA had success vs GS on defense in RS as well. Could SA have scored enough? Doubtful, but I think SA would have made it compe ive (even if not as compe ive as OKC did).

+1