I thought the trade was silly when it happened, but the Beard putting up 37 in his first night just makes it sillier. You definitely amnesty Perkins before you give up Harden and you at least you think about trading Ibaka.

Maybe Presti isn't the wunder kid we thought. Maybe he just got lucky with Durant, Westbrook and Harden. If you look at his last three major moves he made (Perkins Trade, Ibaka contract, Harden trade) you have to wonder what this guy is thinking.

dude also had 12-13 assists or something.

dp

[This message has been edited by RealTalk (edited 10/31/2012 9:44p).]

It's one game. Tap the breaks.

And the Pistons is a sucky team.

Someone who drafts Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka late in the first round, Harden and is the man responsible for convincing Pop to draft Tony Parker isn't just lucky. It was purely a financial move.

Plus what real talk said. It's exciting to get a new player that performs well, but it's one game. haha

The "financial move" idea is the thing that kills me. Presti had a great chance to win multiple championships. Now he has an ok chance. Financial moves make sense when you are the 2012 Pittsburgh Pirates in the second half the season or the Charlotte Bobcats. They don't make sense when you have a chance to be in the record books for the right reasons. If you just want to make money (and OKC has) there are better investments out there.

The bottom line is that Harden was the backstop for bad nights from Durant and , more likely, Westbrook. That is invaluable on a championship run. So what Presti got Martin and Lamb and some draft picks? Martin is a terrible defender and well below Harden in FG%. As for Lamb and the picks, tell me how many of these guys do you want on your teamPO: Hasheem Thabeet, Johnny Flynn, Jordan Hill, Brandon Jennings, Tyreke Evans? Who are they? Five players from the top ten of Harden's draft class. Having a young, team-focused, proven player is not something you give up in any league.

[This message has been edited by Halconblack (edited 10/31/2012 10:12p).]

This was a bad decision by Presti in my opinion, but I don't actually think it will hurt them that much this season. K-Mart should be able to provide instant offense this season for the Thunder and Jeremy Lamb should be a decent addition to their bench. Ultimately, it was a bad decision to trade Harden, but given all the good moves he has made, one bad move isn't a reason to write-off Presti.

"Sports do not build character. They reveal it."
-John Wooden

quote:

---

It's one game. Tap the breaks.

And the Pistons is a sucky team.

---

quote:

---

Only three other players in the past 25 years have hit those numbers in a single game: Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and Dwyane Wade. And here was Harden doing it just four days after being traded to Houston.

---

As for Presti, IMO he made a mistake.

Sometimes you can be too smart. Presti was lucky to have all of those great picks. He was smart and drafted the right guys but we're talking about 2, 3 and 5 picks in the NBA draft. How many times have the Spurs and Rox HAD a top 5 pick in the last 15 years? I can only think of one and that was Yao.

If the Blazers draft Durant then the Thunder are mediocre at best today. So don't tell me there wasn't some luck involved.

Presti, and Dumars before him, start to believe their own hype and they forget how delicate it is to achieve greatness in the NBA. You have to have special players and if you get one don't let him go. That's why the Spurs never traded Tony and Manu to build for the future. Its boring but it usually ends up being the smart move.

It will take more than 1 season to evaluate this trade.

If Harden knew he could get 5 yr/80 million, and Presti knew he could only offer 4/56(or whatever) million, than he had no choice if that was the restriction the owner gave him.

Drafting Durant was a no brainier once Portland took Oden. He gets zero credit for that. Westbrook was at the expense of Love. Make your call on which has been better. Harden was a great pick that he just traded for spares.

Perkins was an awful contract. He sucks.

quote:

---

If Harden knew he could get 5 yr/80 million, and Presti knew he could only offer 4/56(or whatever) million, than he had no choice if that was the restriction the owner gave him.

---

Exactly.

If Presti would have offered Harden the max, which for them was 4 years/$60 million, then Harden would have stayed. The Rockets technically could offer the 5th year because of provision in the CBA allowing one 5 year contract per team. The Thunder already used theirs on Westbrook.

We'll see how it plays out. It may come down to how good Lamb ends up being.

Presti was stuck at 4/52.

I think it was a good trade for OKC and a good one for the Rockets.

Martin gives you a legit scorer now and is also a $13mm trade piece as an expiring contract.

Lamb is a cheap lottery pick that is a good shooter and a good defender.

Toronto is going to suck balls this year. That pick could very well be a top 5 pick.

Plus they still get the Dallas first rounder (likely 15-25 pick) and the Charlotte 2nd rounder, which could very well be the first pick in the second round since they suck more balls than Toronto.

Is all that any guarantee that they will replace Hardin? No. but I think that the league is going to spend the next two years evening out because of the ridiculous luxury tax and you don't want to be on the wrong side of that, especially when you are a small market team like OKC with very real salary constraints.

I do find it a little ironic that some people are complimenting Harden for "getting what he's worth" while others are saying he was dumb to leave a championship caliber team.

It's like the reverse of the Labron situation. He took less money to play with Wade and Bosh. Some killed him for it, others applaud.

Personally, I think if Harden truly loved playing with Westbrook and Durant he should have taken the $52 million and tried to win championships. He didn't take it, so that tells me he really didn't like being part of a Big Three. He'd rather be a Big One. That fine I guess, he'll have a great career and have great numbers. But he won't win any rings.

quote:

---

Lamb is a cheap lottery pick that is a good shooter and a good defender.

Toronto is going to suck balls this year. That pick could very well be a top 5 pick.

Plus they still get the Dallas first rounder (likely 15-25 pick)

---

I agree with your sentiment (Good trade for both teams), but I have a few corrections to your statements:

1) There's nothing to indicate that Lamb will be a good defender in the NBA. He routinely showed a lackadaisical attitude to defense at UCONN and needs to be able to keep his focus on that end to even become an average defender, much less good. Splitting hairs, but wanted to point that out.

2) The Toronto pick is top and bottom protected. It's Top 4 protected and bottom 15 protected, so if it falls anywhere between 5 and 14 it goes to OKC. I guess it could "technically" still be a top 5 pick, but if it is, it's going to be #5, so I would say the odds that the pick ends up top 5 are pretty low. More likely that it will be in the 8-12 range, and potentially not be conveyed for another year or two or three. Still a good pick, but likely not top 5.

3) The Dallas pick is top 20 protected until 2018, so it won't be a 15-19 pick. It'll be in the 20+ range. Again, a nice trade chip, but not likely to land you a significant contributor.

Not trying to be nit-picky, but didn't want incorrect info spread about in the discussion of this deal.

[This message has been edited by SuperAg05 (edited 11/1/2012 5:02p).]

Thanks for the corrections. I knew the Toronto pick was protected, but I thought it was top 2-3 protected. Not sure about this pick, but generally the protections decrease with time.

edit:Just checked and nbadraft has the Toronto trade as:
Rockets receive the Raptors' 2013 first-round pick (Top 3 protected and 15-30 in 2013, top 2 protected and 15-30 in 2014 and '15, Top 1 protected and 15-30 in 2016 and '17, and unprotected in 2018.

[This message has been edited by Guitarsoup (edited 11/1/2012 5:07p).]

GS, those are one off. It's top 4 protected this year, and top 3 protected after.

Although I've seen what you posted in many areas as well.

[This message has been edited by Ryan34 (edited 11/1/2012 5:21p).]

Hmm, I've seen it with different levels of protection. Just did some more searching and found this one form the Houston Press:

quote:

---

Houston receives the Raptors draft pick next year if it falls between 4-14. If not, it must fall between 3-14 in 2014 or 2015 or 2-14 in 2016 or 2017 to come to Houston. If it never hits any of those ranges, the pick goes to Houston unprotected in 2018.

---

Either way, there is a much greater likelihood that it turns into an 8-13 pick than for it to be a top 5 pick.

Would be nice if NBA.com or someone had the exact details. Oh well. Still a cool protection on that pick from Morey. Very innovative.

[This message has been edited by SuperAg05 (edited 11/1/2012 5:25p).]

In any event, it is a lottery pick, and I see Toronto being a bottom 5 team for a while. That pick has some nice value either as a draft pick or coupled with a contract like Perkins or Martin for someone else.

Do you think that if they coupled that pick with Martin and some other assets, they might be able to pull a guy like Harden? That'd be swell!

quote:

---

Do you think that if they coupled that pick with Martin and some other assets, they might be able to pull a guy like Harden? That'd be swell!

---

The question of "should Presti have made the trade?" comes down to this: Is OKC better positioned to win NBA titles with the trade? I think the answer is "No."

It is true that Presti got a nice development piece in Lamb (No 12 2012 Draft), a few decent picks (2013 Toronto and Dallas 1st Round, both protected, and 2013 Bobcats) and a decent scorer. But, you are rolling the dice with all of those players except Martin. Plus, if you are trying to win a CHAMPIONSHIP you don't trade QUALITY for QUANTITY (I am always trying to trade Heath Miller, Dwayne Bowe, and Stephen Jackson for Tom Brady, not the other way around). I think this is especially true in basketball with only five players on the court and only three other contributors.

If you don't have the team to win a championship now then a trade for a bunch of pieces works in some sports. Herschel Walker built the Cowboys three Superbowl teams in the 90's and the Rangers got a ton for Terxiera. But, there hasn't been a lot of success in a star for quantity in the NBA.

At the end of the day the Thunder have a lower probability of winning an NBA CHAMPIONSHIP because of this trade. I think that is the only metric that really matters.

quote:

---

The "financial move" idea is the thing that kills me. Presti had a great chance to win multiple championships. Now he has an ok chance. Financial moves make sense when you are the 2012 Pittsburgh Pirates in the second half the season or the Charlotte Bobcats. They don't make sense when you have a chance to be in the record books for the right reasons. If you just want to make money (and OKC has) there are better investments out there.

---

Someone is toeing that Bill Simmons line. The popular opinion is "go for it this year with Harden, or sign him and potentially cripple yourself for years to come and leave you no flexibility if you need it to tweak the roster.

The Thunder got assets back in the deal, and still have their Batman & Robin. Plus Eric Maynor is back. The Thunder helped secure themselves as a legitimate top 5 NBA team for longer than if they had kept Harden and signed him to a ridiculous contract.

As many have said, there were no real losers in this deal, both sides got something they needed. The Thunder will be fine. The Rockets will be improved. In the words of Michael Scott "win win win."

quote:

---

The question of "should Presti have made the trade?" comes down to this: Is OKC better positioned to win NBA titles with the trade? I think the answer is "No."

---

If that was the absolute only thing he had to worry about, then that would be the only thing that it comes down to. The fact is that that isn't the case.

quote:

---

At the end of the day the Thunder have a lower probability of winning an NBA CHAMPIONSHIP because of this trade. I think that is the only metric that really matters.

---

Except for the fact that they are in an ultra-small market with an ownership group that can't afford to pay the uber-ridiculous new luxury tax. (Instead of $1 per $1 over, it escalates to like $4.50 per $1 over) And If you have Durant (19), Harden (13), Ibaka (12), Westbrook (15), Perkins (9), you are at $68mm with a luxury tax at 70mm and 9 spots on the roster to fill. Plus, you have Thabo, Collison, and Perry Jones on guaranteed contracts.

The new NBA salary cap rules are brutal, and Presti is the guy that has to keep the team compliant. I think the SuperFriends thing may blow up soon. Not sure the Knicks really want to pay $60mm to keep Tyson Chandler, Amare and Melo together for too much longer.

quote:

---

The Thunder got assets back in the deal, and still have their Batman & Robin. Plus Eric Maynor is back. The Thunder helped secure themselves as a legitimate top 5 NBA team for longer than if they had kept Harden and signed him to a ridiculous contract.

---

Yeah, I agree with Simmons. But, I disagree with you on the Thunder "securing themselves as a legitimate top 5 NBA team for longer." I don't know how you arrive at that conclusion. The only assets in the deal are the draft picks. If you are telling me you would take Lamb, Martin, and Maynor over Harden then the Bobcats will probably be willing to give you their GM job.

Maybe, with a little luck, OKC finds a quality starter or 6th man out of the two players and three draft picks. However, history has shown us that, in the NBA, the team that trades a known quantity for "pieces" normally comes out on the losing side.

It's simple, they both A.) didn't over extend themselves by paying Harden what he wanted and B.) eliminated the risk of having Harden this season and losing him to free agency, thus receiving zilch in return.

Simmons has a hard on for OKC anyhow since they stole his precious Sonics away, so I'm not surprised to see him go bombs away on the Thunder after the deal was done. Like I said, no real loser here. I agree that trading a stud for pieces never works, but in this instance there may not have been another option.

quote:

---

Yeah, I agree with Simmons. But, I disagree with you on the Thunder "securing themselves as a legitimate top 5 NBA team for longer." I don't know how you arrive at that conclusion.

---

Who is better than OKC?

Legit teams:
Lakers
Heat

In the conversation:
Spurs
Celtics without Ray Allen?
Clippers [even with new flopping fines?]


Legitimately, who else is there?

Guitarsoup,
Good points, but remember the following:
1) OKC still has a player they can amnesty
2) There is still the mid-level exception out there (I can find some bench players for 5 million)
3) the really harsh taxes for repeaters go into effect 2013/14

Yeah, you get to 68 pretty quick, but the only contracts your really need are Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Ibaka and Sefolosha and that leaves you at around $62 mil next year. Make do with cheap contracts on the rest (Perry Jones counts has $1mil? Gotta love draft pick contracts).
I am not saying Presti can ignore the cap, but he had options.

Everyone automatically things that OKC will just automatically amnesty Perkins after this season, but their front office values him more than anyone out there. I don't see it happening. I think they knew what they were getting when they extended him and are okay with it. It's not like they signed a guard who they expected to score 17+ per game and is scoring less than 10.

quote:

---

uitarsoup,
Good points, but remember the following:
1) OKC still has a player they can amnesty
2) There is still the mid-level exception out there (I can find some bench players for 5 million)
3) the really harsh taxes for repeaters go into effect 2013/14

---

The MLE is reduced significantly if you are a luxury tax payer.

If they amnesty Perkins, who is going to guard Dwight Howard to help get the Thunder to the Finals? Ibaka can't guard Howard. They need Perkins for Howard.

Went to last nights game. I understand the move financially but this trade hurts the Thunder badly. I've been a fan since they drafted KD and I know that Presti made the right long term decision but I still feel he should have gone for the title this year and just see what happens. The second unit last night was worthless. Harden would have swung that game. Of course if Manu had been playing it would probably have been equalized. But without Harden the Thunders bench was outplayed and when RW went cold they didn't have Harden to turn to run the offense. Bad move, plain and simple. Personally I think they could have gotten a younger proven player instead of Kmart if they had tested the waters.

I was actually surprised Maynor didn't get more time late, but I have to remind myself he's coming off a pretty bad knee injury. People forget year before last he was pretty damned reliable running the offense late in games.

It was Martin's first game so I'm not going to judge anything based on such a small sample size, but one thing I will say is that guy has a nice shooting stroke (nice as in he's a good shooter, not nice as in that's a pretty shot, because it's not).

Russ is just like Manziel, you live and die by him. He had a lot of those layups that just didn't fall last night. There will be other nights where he makes 80% of those.

The problem isn't Westbrook's layups, it's the dumb mid range jumper he takes that he probably makes less than 20% of the time. It blows my mind that Brooks can't coach that shot out of him. When he gets to the rim good things happen.