Comparing Kings and Thunder

[QoooooQ]

I thought it would be interesting to compare our current roster to past and present Oklahoma Thunder rosters since they have improved so tremendously this year. So I did a little research on basketball-reference.com. Let's start with Durant's rookie season.

(OR and DR are Offensive/Defensive Rating, see basketball-reference.com)

Oklahoma

2007-2008 (20-62) OR: 29th of 30, DR: 22nd of 30 coach: Carlesimo
2008-2009 (23-59) OR: 29th of 30, DR: 20th of 30, coach: Carlesimo (1-12), Brooks (22-47)
2009-2010 (49-32) OR: 13th of 30, DR: 12th of 30, coach: Brooks

Main players (starters + 6th men)

2007-2008 Kevin Durant (age 19), Earl Watson (28), Jeff Green (21), Chris Wilcox (25), Nick Collison (27), Kurt Thomas (35)

2008-2009 Durant (20), Green (22), Russell Westbrook (20), Collison (28), Nenad Krstic (25), Watson (29)

2009-2010 Durant (21), Green (23), Westbrook (21), Krstic (26), Thabo Sefolosha (25), James Harden (20)


Draft:

2007 Durant (2nd pick), Green (5th pick)
2008 Westbrook (4th pick)
2009 Harden (3rd pick)

Free agency:

Jan 2009 Krstic

Trade:

Feb 2009 Sefolosha



Sacramento

2009-2010 (25-55) OR: 22nd of 30, DR: 20th of 30, coach: Westphal

Main players

2009-2010 Evans (20), Landry (26), Udrih (27), Thompson (23), Hawes (21), Casspi (21), Greene (21)



So what can we conclude?

1. OKC was clearly built only through the draft and built around Durant. In terms of talent and building for the future, I think the 2009-2010 Kings are slightly better than the Sonics of 2007-2008. Evans matches up with Durant, Landry with Green and the rest of the Sonics didn't have as much youth and potential as we have in Thompson, Hawes, Casspi and Greene.

2. Then they added Westbrook in the 2008 draft. He might be better than anyone on our 2009-2010 roster except Evans. But the chances are pretty good that we will be adding someone of Westbrook's talent level in this year's draft.

3. Even in Westbrook's first year, the team showed only minimal improvement. The big step came a year later without any significant roster changes (although Harden is a solid 6th man). I assume that this year's improvement is mostly due to Durant stepping up to MVP level and the rest of the team finding the right roles and playing together to complement him. Team chemistry seems excellent, their strategy of adding players through the draft rather than free agency or trades has probably made that part easier. Their coaching switch was also important. I think the Kings have that part covered.

I don't want to push the comparison much further. Obviously Durant and Evans are different players and we're certainly not trying to emulate the OKC style of play. But I think this case shows us that we can be a very good team in a couple of years even without a big free agency signing this year. Our 2010 draft pick will be very important but we might still have to take some losing next year if the team needs some time to grow together. On the other hand, we have stacked some good talent in the past few years and if anyone from the group of Thompson, Hawes, Casspi or Greene would emerge as a legit NBA star, we could find ourselves in the playoffs this time next year.

 

[Larry David]

I’m blown away that the media and fans keep comparing the Kings and the Thunder.

Let me point out the huge bit of irony there.

The Sonics went through a rough rebuild, while they were having arena issues, the process broke down (sale), and the team was located in another city when the team was good.

Here, the team is going through a rough rebuild, while they are having arena issues. As addressed in the arena thread, the state legislature looms as a tough hurdle that could derail any progress made over the last 4 years . . .and . . . .

For this reason alone, I’m not sure the Thunder is the best comparison. Instead, of picking the last team to do it … maybe . . .compare them to anther young squad in the last 25 years.

Just my .02.

 

[Kingster]

The Kings need two All-Star talents before they get into Thunder's class. The Kings have no players of the caliber of Westbrook or Green. This draft is critical if they want to compete with the Thunder and Portland in a couple of years. Those two teams are the future competition. Phoenix, SA, Denver, and LA are either on the downhill slide or soon to be on the downhill slide.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

For this reason alone, I’m not sure the Thunder is the best comparison. Instead, of picking the last team to do it … maybe . . .compare them to anther young squad in the last 25 years.

I prefer Portland.

They struggled against the Lakers in the early part of last decade. Fell off the map. Had some arena financing issues of their own despite big bucks owners. Drafted a mid-lotto Rookie of the Year and followed it up by winning the lottery the next season.

Yeah yeah, Oden's hurt all the time, but at least they kept the team in the city.

 

[QoooooQ]

I was thinking about it mainly from a "how to build a winning team around your star player" perspective. Arena issues etc. don't have anything to do with that.