Thunder are currently 22nd for next season salary.
8 of the 9 biggest spenders are virtual locks to make playoffs and probably contend. Only 1-2 of the bottom ten spenders are likely to make playoffs and it is uncertain if they will contend.
Thunder are 8th most committed already at this time for 2026-27. They may really want to rise even higher on that, but what is their limit and when?
Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
On average, high to medium 1st round picks may to challenging on the salary cap / "bad immediate term values" for teams with 3 or more big salaries. A severe case of the latter condition is probably more than 2 years off for Thunder but it is coming.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
SGA is 25th on Darko PM projection.
You are probably not going to truly "contend" for a title with your #1 at 25. Especially without a major #2. And #3.
Of course there are other metrics and Darko might be off.
And player values may change some. They will need to, for contention.
You are probably not going to truly "contend" for a title with your #1 at 25. Especially without a major #2. And #3.
Of course there are other metrics and Darko might be off.
And player values may change some. They will need to, for contention.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Questíons about the Thunder:
Has Oladipo and / or Bertans been in town at all? Working out? Renting a place? They don't have to do any of these things yet. But it would be something of a clue if they have or have not. If the media wanted to ask. Though they might not get an answer. Not aware of a single word said about either to date.
Micic, renting, buying or waiting?
Has Oladipo and / or Bertans been in town at all? Working out? Renting a place? They don't have to do any of these things yet. But it would be something of a clue if they have or have not. If the media wanted to ask. Though they might not get an answer. Not aware of a single word said about either to date.
Micic, renting, buying or waiting?
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Thunder currently have 11 guys on roster from their drafting results. But none before 2021. None on 2nd contracts (yet).
Lots who did not develop into keepers and mostly not close.
Lots who did not develop into keepers and mostly not close.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
I've looked briefly at lineup management for next season. Not in position to really establish an accurate lineup set until roster moves are done. But I have a tentative one.
I will say that if 6 players get big minutes (SGA, Giddey, Dort, JDub, KW and Holmgren), another 6 can get minor minutes and the final 6 would only get scraps here and there or none at all.
If Micic or anyone else is going to get big minutes, either someone in first 6 it going to take a cut or 1 or more of the next 6 is going to get pushed to tier 3.
There is no way more than 6-7 players are going to be happy with their minutes (unless they freeze everybody out after 8- very unlikely). Many will be pissed or super pissed.
If Coach D tries to semi-satisfy players beyond the top, he will ring up massive numbers of dink lineups, with a majority likely to be not that effective (from lack of familiarity and lack of design fit).
18 man rosters are pretty ridiculous imo, as stated before.
I fully expect chaotic, sub-optimality for months, if not the whole season (& beyond).
I will say that if 6 players get big minutes (SGA, Giddey, Dort, JDub, KW and Holmgren), another 6 can get minor minutes and the final 6 would only get scraps here and there or none at all.
If Micic or anyone else is going to get big minutes, either someone in first 6 it going to take a cut or 1 or more of the next 6 is going to get pushed to tier 3.
There is no way more than 6-7 players are going to be happy with their minutes (unless they freeze everybody out after 8- very unlikely). Many will be pissed or super pissed.
If Coach D tries to semi-satisfy players beyond the top, he will ring up massive numbers of dink lineups, with a majority likely to be not that effective (from lack of familiarity and lack of design fit).
18 man rosters are pretty ridiculous imo, as stated before.
I fully expect chaotic, sub-optimality for months, if not the whole season (& beyond).
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Only the Rockets, Spurs and Jazz in the West have fewer positive players by DRIP than Thunder. Rockets and Jazz at 3, Thunder 4. Spurs 1.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
SGA was 14th on RAPM last season but fell to 56th of LA-RAPM. Lost 14 spots on LA-ORAPM and about 200 spots of LA-DRAPM compared to unadjusted.
K Williams lost about 350 spots on LA-DRAPM.
The Thunder might argue for defensive skill over luck. The change under the luck adjustment was hugely negative last season, but... SGA gained about 200 spots on LA-RAPM the previous season while K Williams stayed unchanged super elite on it.
I'll assume that the luck changed more than the skill performance.
I probably ought not to trust any of these 1 season numbers.
Under 3 year RAPM the unadjusted / luck adjusted differences are great reduced. I guess I'll go with the averages of them. That would put SGA at about 40th best percentile on DRAPM and K Williams comfortably in top 10%.
Need to remember to use 3 yr more.
3 year 5 man lineup data might be worth checking in a few cases. I have occasionally. 3 year pair data in more cases. Luck adjusted might be better. Might. Raw is more likely to be consulted. Averages and trends are both worth knowing.
Not entirely trustworthy but probably more broadbrush accurate (on a set of 3 to 5 performance ranges) than not and better than not having / considering the data.
K Williams lost about 350 spots on LA-DRAPM.
The Thunder might argue for defensive skill over luck. The change under the luck adjustment was hugely negative last season, but... SGA gained about 200 spots on LA-RAPM the previous season while K Williams stayed unchanged super elite on it.
I'll assume that the luck changed more than the skill performance.
I probably ought not to trust any of these 1 season numbers.
Under 3 year RAPM the unadjusted / luck adjusted differences are great reduced. I guess I'll go with the averages of them. That would put SGA at about 40th best percentile on DRAPM and K Williams comfortably in top 10%.
Need to remember to use 3 yr more.
3 year 5 man lineup data might be worth checking in a few cases. I have occasionally. 3 year pair data in more cases. Luck adjusted might be better. Might. Raw is more likely to be consulted. Averages and trends are both worth knowing.
Not entirely trustworthy but probably more broadbrush accurate (on a set of 3 to 5 performance ranges) than not and better than not having / considering the data.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
By position the Thunder and Nuggets starters are mostly very different.
They are most similar at PG, but Murray and SGA are still very different at shot distribution.
If Giddey is a SG, he is the opposite of KCP is almost every way. Young, lesser defender, lesser 3 pt shooter, very involved involved in assistmaking and rebounding.
If Dort is mostly a SF, he is mostly the opposite of MPJ. Short, much lesser 3pt shooter and spacing and gravity. Neither is a passer though or much of a defensive rebounder.
If JDub is a PF, as Coach D mostly uses him, he was opposite A Gordon in some ways. Young, not much more than half the ft rate, was light (but maybe not anymore)
At Center JWill is mostly opposite Jokic. Young, not a passer or scorer.
For bench rotation, Nuggets were mostly vets. Thunder mostly young. Nuggets mostly average to well above average ft rates, Thunder almost all very low ft rates.
At team level, the Nuggets were top 5 on offensive efficiency with a slow pace and near average efg%. The Thunder were barely average on offensive efficiency with fast pace and 7th worst efg%.
At factor level, they were similar on 3, 3 factors that weren't really strengths of either. Major differences on the other 5, with Nuggets better on 3.
Different ways to do things and succeed, but I think it is worth noting how different the Thunder were from the champs.
Malone, son of long-time NBA head coach 10 years as an NBA assistant coach, 11 as Head Coach. 5 years in playoffs, title winner. Daigneault, started as a college student manager, then assistant, then G league, 1 year as NBA assistant and now 3 as a Head Coach. No playoffs experience. Malone, appears mostly tough guy. Coach D may have some of that but appears mostly friend / encourager.
Thunder pretty similar to Pelicans at team level stats. Slightly worse in regular season, better in play-in. Huge gap between level of Pelicans / Thunder and Nuggets.
None of the 3 were particularly Moreyball overall. Thunder with advantages on 2 parts, only major difference at the rim. This profile is one of the Nuggets biggest issues.
Nuggets were 12th oldest in league but also barely not the youngest titlewinner. Pelicans almost exactly average aged. Thunder 2nd youngest. Pelicans are probably more realistic lower tier title contenders next season than Thunder on this basis. Will be interesting to see comparative level of regular season and playoff success next season.
Pelicans better on 5 factors and 1 tie with Thunder. Biggest edge on defensive rebounding. Has (or hopes to have) a power scorer.
A lot of the Thunder's ambitions for improve focus on Holmgren. Others might get better but I am not sure how much their development will add. Micic might be big but plenty of unknown about role, minutes, translation or even staying on roster.
Thunder take a lot of shot at rim, in part because they don't get fouled at an average rate. And they rank dead last at making shots at the rim. SGA is mildly below average. Giddey moderately below, Dort incredibly low at 52%. JDub mildly above average. Will he maintain as a more known quantity or improve? What about all the others?
They are most similar at PG, but Murray and SGA are still very different at shot distribution.
If Giddey is a SG, he is the opposite of KCP is almost every way. Young, lesser defender, lesser 3 pt shooter, very involved involved in assistmaking and rebounding.
If Dort is mostly a SF, he is mostly the opposite of MPJ. Short, much lesser 3pt shooter and spacing and gravity. Neither is a passer though or much of a defensive rebounder.
If JDub is a PF, as Coach D mostly uses him, he was opposite A Gordon in some ways. Young, not much more than half the ft rate, was light (but maybe not anymore)
At Center JWill is mostly opposite Jokic. Young, not a passer or scorer.
For bench rotation, Nuggets were mostly vets. Thunder mostly young. Nuggets mostly average to well above average ft rates, Thunder almost all very low ft rates.
At team level, the Nuggets were top 5 on offensive efficiency with a slow pace and near average efg%. The Thunder were barely average on offensive efficiency with fast pace and 7th worst efg%.
At factor level, they were similar on 3, 3 factors that weren't really strengths of either. Major differences on the other 5, with Nuggets better on 3.
Different ways to do things and succeed, but I think it is worth noting how different the Thunder were from the champs.
Malone, son of long-time NBA head coach 10 years as an NBA assistant coach, 11 as Head Coach. 5 years in playoffs, title winner. Daigneault, started as a college student manager, then assistant, then G league, 1 year as NBA assistant and now 3 as a Head Coach. No playoffs experience. Malone, appears mostly tough guy. Coach D may have some of that but appears mostly friend / encourager.
Thunder pretty similar to Pelicans at team level stats. Slightly worse in regular season, better in play-in. Huge gap between level of Pelicans / Thunder and Nuggets.
None of the 3 were particularly Moreyball overall. Thunder with advantages on 2 parts, only major difference at the rim. This profile is one of the Nuggets biggest issues.
Nuggets were 12th oldest in league but also barely not the youngest titlewinner. Pelicans almost exactly average aged. Thunder 2nd youngest. Pelicans are probably more realistic lower tier title contenders next season than Thunder on this basis. Will be interesting to see comparative level of regular season and playoff success next season.
Pelicans better on 5 factors and 1 tie with Thunder. Biggest edge on defensive rebounding. Has (or hopes to have) a power scorer.
A lot of the Thunder's ambitions for improve focus on Holmgren. Others might get better but I am not sure how much their development will add. Micic might be big but plenty of unknown about role, minutes, translation or even staying on roster.
Thunder take a lot of shot at rim, in part because they don't get fouled at an average rate. And they rank dead last at making shots at the rim. SGA is mildly below average. Giddey moderately below, Dort incredibly low at 52%. JDub mildly above average. Will he maintain as a more known quantity or improve? What about all the others?
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Thunder have 18 guys under contract for 2024-25. All but 2 are fully guaranteed.
Push guys out soon, push more out next summer. And on and on.
Of 22 on 2020-21 roster, 4 remain. At least 28 others have been added and mostly have gone since.
Push guys out soon, push more out next summer. And on and on.
Of 22 on 2020-21 roster, 4 remain. At least 28 others have been added and mostly have gone since.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
From 2019-20 to 2020-21 there were roster changes and a coaching change. Almost everything got worse except some improvements in rebounding and 3pt attempt rate.
In year 2 with Coach D, the defense recovered some due to lesser opponent efg%, caused and / or luck based. The offense remained horrible overall with only own turnover rate improving. FT rate fell to horrible.
In year 3, things improved to where offensive and defensive efficiency were both slightly better than league average.
Compared to last season under Donovan, own efg% recovered halfway back to the still below average prior efg%. Own turnovers were lower than the prior. Offensive rebounding was far better though barely better than league average. Thanks to SGA, FT rate recovered halfway back from the bottom but only to average. The offense overall was slightly better than Donovan left it.
Shot defense remained below average. Opponent turnover rank improved by about as much as fouls committed got worse. Defensive rebounding fell to 29th, considerably worse than any time in prior comparison year or since. Overall the defense was only half the way to the level Donovan produced in his last season.
3 factors better than under Donovan, 5 worse. Overall they are still a bit worse than before the changes. Before the meh performance level that proved unacceptable to retain Donovan.
What is next? Hopefully several factor improvements without much or any slippage. We'll see where they are in 4 months and beyond. What are the goals and standards? Have no specific read. Presumably mildly or moderately better.
In year 2 with Coach D, the defense recovered some due to lesser opponent efg%, caused and / or luck based. The offense remained horrible overall with only own turnover rate improving. FT rate fell to horrible.
In year 3, things improved to where offensive and defensive efficiency were both slightly better than league average.
Compared to last season under Donovan, own efg% recovered halfway back to the still below average prior efg%. Own turnovers were lower than the prior. Offensive rebounding was far better though barely better than league average. Thanks to SGA, FT rate recovered halfway back from the bottom but only to average. The offense overall was slightly better than Donovan left it.
Shot defense remained below average. Opponent turnover rank improved by about as much as fouls committed got worse. Defensive rebounding fell to 29th, considerably worse than any time in prior comparison year or since. Overall the defense was only half the way to the level Donovan produced in his last season.
3 factors better than under Donovan, 5 worse. Overall they are still a bit worse than before the changes. Before the meh performance level that proved unacceptable to retain Donovan.
What is next? Hopefully several factor improvements without much or any slippage. We'll see where they are in 4 months and beyond. What are the goals and standards? Have no specific read. Presumably mildly or moderately better.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
The 4 & 5 seeds in west last season averaged 4 factors in top 40% and 1.5 in bottom third.
Thunder had 2 in top tier and 3 in bottom. Probably need 3-4 factors to change up from middle or into middle from the bottom to get to that level of contention (mild). That or 2 huge changes from bottom to top. If either of the previous strengths slip, then they'll probably need to add another tier improvement to offset.
Factors aren't of equal value. The Thunder strengths on smaller factors. So the gap to 4th / 5th and need for change is even bigger than described above. It might take multiple seasons to achieve this much. Then more time to get higher.
At the level of offensive & defensive efficiency, the Thunder are closer to the Clippers. But at factor level they are way way more like Suns (except for shot defense and defensive rebounding to a lesser degree) and almost the complete opposite of the Clippers. It is surprising how poor the Suns efg% was (22nd best, only slightly better than Thunder), though that could change. (It better, if they are going to do anything significant.)
Thunder had 2 in top tier and 3 in bottom. Probably need 3-4 factors to change up from middle or into middle from the bottom to get to that level of contention (mild). That or 2 huge changes from bottom to top. If either of the previous strengths slip, then they'll probably need to add another tier improvement to offset.
Factors aren't of equal value. The Thunder strengths on smaller factors. So the gap to 4th / 5th and need for change is even bigger than described above. It might take multiple seasons to achieve this much. Then more time to get higher.
At the level of offensive & defensive efficiency, the Thunder are closer to the Clippers. But at factor level they are way way more like Suns (except for shot defense and defensive rebounding to a lesser degree) and almost the complete opposite of the Clippers. It is surprising how poor the Suns efg% was (22nd best, only slightly better than Thunder), though that could change. (It better, if they are going to do anything significant.)
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Seth Partnow has SGA ranked in 2C Tier of his player tier rankings.
On a list of 125, the mean is 4.2 guys per team. The Thunder have 4.0. (Rookies apparently rarely rate in group.)
Pelicans, 6.
On a list of 125, the mean is 4.2 guys per team. The Thunder have 4.0. (Rookies apparently rarely rate in group.)
Pelicans, 6.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Only 2 of the 4 for the Thunder have anywhere near the metrics to be top 125. The rankings of the other two are super generous and projective.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
The Thunder's most used lineup last season went -2.3 pts / 100p. The obvious change is Holmgen for JWill. If that isn't enough, change more.
The only other 3 lineups over 1 minute per game for season were very bad to horrendous and probably need multiple changes. That generally means pulling a starter out. Which ones and for whom? I could make suggestions.
Let Coach D figure it out? He picked only 6 positives in his 20 most used lineups last season. 2 of the 4 strong ones are no longer possible. Will the other 2 get prioritized? Probably not.
Only 1 of his 12 most used pairs was better than +3 / 100p. SGA-Joe. Does that see more or less use next season? I'd guess less. Same for the 3 only other strong pairs in most used 20. Time will tell.
The only other 3 lineups over 1 minute per game for season were very bad to horrendous and probably need multiple changes. That generally means pulling a starter out. Which ones and for whom? I could make suggestions.
Let Coach D figure it out? He picked only 6 positives in his 20 most used lineups last season. 2 of the 4 strong ones are no longer possible. Will the other 2 get prioritized? Probably not.
Only 1 of his 12 most used pairs was better than +3 / 100p. SGA-Joe. Does that see more or less use next season? I'd guess less. Same for the 3 only other strong pairs in most used 20. Time will tell.