RECAP: Warriors 104, Thunder 112 - Durantula Is a MONSTER
by R Dizzle on Feb 1, 2010 2:12 PM PST
in Recaps
19 comments
Open Thread | Warriors vs Thunder boxscore | Welcome to Loud City | Warriors Web Links
Did anyone think we could ACTUALLY win this game? I mean really, our starting 5 vs. their starting 5? Not only did they have YOUTH (something we claim to have, but it's all injured) but they have EXTREME talent (something we, sorta have?)
Instead of having my normal whine and moan sessions with an extra hint of emo, I decided to focus on the best part of last game.
No, it wasn't Monta's 25 points since he went 9-24 shooting and added 5 turnovers (wonder why he's not an All Star?)
No, it wasn't Stephen Curry's 14 points with 4-10 shooting and 5 turnovers (that's not a good ratio for a backcourt)
No, it wasn't "efficient' Maggette's 26 points 8-14 shooting, and 4 personal fouls.
It was this man.
I have now decided (since it's allon me) that Kevin Durant is one of the best players to watch in the NBA. You think Monta's got moves? Look at this guy...straight up, he's going to be a top 5 NBA Talent in the next few years. He's got moves, he's got shots, he's got rebounding abilities, he's got...
Just about everything?
I briefly mentioned this in the Open Thread, but the Blazers have got to be kicking themselves in the "you know what's" for drafting Greg Oden over Durant. I remember at the time it was a toss-up - either was looking as a good pick and both were slated to be "great" draft choices.
A few years later, we find out Greg Oden was actually 45 and has terrible knee and leg problems while Kevin Durant was actually 19 and has yet to hit his prime. In every game, he's busted crazy energy, extremely good shooting average, and great rebounding ability. I don't know where his game is lacking (I'm sure it's somewhere), but this kid straight has game.
Speaking of 45...anybody notice that he scored 45 points against us last night? Sure, credit it to the Warriors "poor" defense, but that's also some amazing skill by this man. ESPECIALLY because it came off 16-21 shooting, 2-3 three-pointers, and a smooth 11-11 from the charity stripe. Oh ya, want to toss in 11 rebounds with that game?
Look, I'm not trying to say this guy is the best in the game - that's obviously a debate with Kobe and LeBron. But I think sooner, rather than later, we're going to have to toss his name into that mix.
Hey, Larry Riley - want to make a move? Find a way to get Durantula on the team so we can sell some more tickets and actually be fun to watch.
I'm gonna go ahead assume I can't give this to Kevin Durant since he's not on the Warriors...
So how bout I give it to Coby Karl? Not only is he our latest edition, but he's going to provide us with great fotos (Mike Duleavy-eque) while he's around!
Big thanks to Coach Karl of the Nuggets for reasons a funny son!
0 recs |
19 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Defense matters.
Look, I’m not trying to say this guy is the best in the game – that’s obviously a debate with Kobe and LeBron
There is no debate, Kobe’s not in the conversation, and it’s doubtful he’s even the second best player in the league. Just because it gets repeated over and over doesn’t make it true, much less obvious…..
I also don’t think you can criticize taking Oden over Durant. Always easy to kick yourself over injuries, but it’s rarely easy to actually predict those injuries ahead of time. Big men rule the NBA. When Oden’s played, he’s shown exactly why he was such a big time prospect – he’s a monster. He’s a beast on the boards. He scores a decent amount, and does it very efficiently. He’s a monster defensively, giving you quality play on and off the ball. I think it was the right move to pick Oden, and anyone that regrets it only does because of injuries – something they couldn’t have known. I’m not big into physical measurements at the NBA combine, but man they highlight what a prospect Oden was. For his year, nobody with a standing reach higher than 8’10 finished with a higher no step vert than he did (most players were a decent amount below 8’10). He had a standing reach of 9’4. He also outweighed the next heaviest guy (of those with an equal or greater no step vert) by 24 pounds…
Durant is a scoring machine, though. His length and skills are pretty unique. Not trying to take anything away from him. We’ll see how he develops as a playmaker and defender. I’d take him over any Warrior we currently have any day of the week. I’d definitely give up some package of those poll options for him.
Fun fact – Coby Karl just happened to be right next to Oden when I was looking through the measurements. Talk about a freak – 6’3.5 without shoes with a 6’11 wingspan!
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2010 2:36 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I agree about the Oden vs. Durant thing. If I were the Blazers, I would have taken Oden over Durant 100 times out of 100. Along with Oden having a freakish size, I’ve argued many times that Durant would not be the Durant we all see now if the Blazers had drafted him. That Blazers team belongs to Roy. The OKC team belongs to Durant. Had the Blazers drafted Durant, he would be the second man on that team, putting up a max of 20ppg with a few boards and an assist or two. There is enough room on a team for one wing player that dominates the ball and one big man that dominates the paint. Roy and Durant on the same team would be too repetitive. Roy and Oden is a nasty combination.
by samuraaaaiiiiiii on Feb 1, 2010 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the rule about always take the big man
Is only true when Portland is not involved. The history says it all.
by tjmax on Feb 2, 2010 1:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My how history repeats itself
The parallels to the Sam Bowie/Michael Jordan mistake are uncanny, even to the excuse that the Blazers couldn’t take Jordan because they already had a similar player in Clyde Drexler. I live in Portland, so I was aware that the locals came soundly down on the side of drafting Oden and I caught some grief by preferring Durant.
I covered my heinie by saying that I was a Warriors fan and Nelson would draft Durant instead of Oden if he had the chance. The locals looked at me funny, probably not hearing a word after I said I was a Warriors fan…
by breaker on Feb 2, 2010 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
"A few years later, we find out Greg Oden was actually 45 and has terrible knee and leg problems..."
HILARIOUS!!!
Geeez Louf*ckingweeez!!!
by scottiepimppen on Feb 1, 2010 5:16 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
The word has leaked that Channing Frye is in the 3 pt shooting contest
no word on Morrow yet
by IQofaWarrior on Feb 1, 2010 5:57 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ok i would have taken Oden at the time most likely.
But in hindsight it is obvious Durant is the much better player.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 1, 2010 6:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well, including injuries, sure, but if Oden had been healthy all 3 seasons, I could definitely see him being as good as Durant…
by Missing Barry on Feb 1, 2010 7:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well it depends on what you want. If you want a 10-10 center with good defense, or a stud 2/3 who scores at will and rebounds well.
I’d still take KD in hindsight because he is such a good scorer.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 1, 2010 9:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, you take Durant in hindsight because he’s been so much more durable. Period. At the time of the draft, there were rumblings about Oden’s health/leg issues, but none serious enough to make one pass on a once-in-a-decade big man.
On a per minute basis, Oden’s been a more valuable player over his career than Durant. More valuable = more likely to make his team win games. You’re vastly underrating Oden’s skills by characterizing him as a “10/10 big man.” This season, per 36 minutes, he was averaging 16.7 pts / 12.8 reb / 3.4 blocks, with a .647 TS%. Sustained over 36-40 minutes a game, and 82 games a season, those are elite, NBA champion-big-man numbers.
If you could guarantee 100% health, I’d still take Oden over Durant, without a moment’s thought. Since the real world gives no such guarantees, I’d probably take Durant.
There will be no extra point!
by Sleepy Freud on Feb 2, 2010 6:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Plus one of my points is I think his game, particularly his offensive game, would be farther along right now had he been healthy.
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2010 9:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Healthy Oden = Young Center with Hall of Fame Potential
I love them both, but it’s hard to really fault the Blazers for taking Oden #1.
Golden State of Mind :: Always keeping it... "Unstoppable Baby!" | SBNation.com
by Atma Brother ONE on Feb 2, 2010 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But
He can’t play more than 30 minutes because of his ridiculously high foul rate. However, when paired with the right pieces, I think Oden can be a defensive force ala KG in his prime. I don’t think he will ever be a great offensive center but you are probably right just because of his defense.
Euro Players Rock! Go Warriors!
by monta.da.boss on Feb 2, 2010 5:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oden will never be great
Many were saying this when he came out of college – He has an old man’s body already and when you are a center – this does not bode well. Compare him to the athletic specimen that David Robinson or Alonzo was coming out of college – even Ewing looked more youthful coming out of college.
Oden seems like a good guy and its hard not to be a Blazers fan – but I would have taken Durant in a heartbeat.
by tjmax on Feb 2, 2010 1:21 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
So what you’re saying is you knew he was going to get hurt back then. Oh, ok, it’s so simple that way. It’s not like they had doctors check him out or anything…
by Missing Barry on Feb 2, 2010 4:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
