How did okc thunder beat the spurs 2 out of 3 series against the spurs in early 2010s?

  1. The first half of the 2010s was supposed to be the Thunder’s but injuries really fucked them at the exact moment they couldn’t afford them.

  2. The Thunder overwhelmed the Spurs with their athleticism. Miami could hold their own against the Thunder physically while also being a smarter basketball team. However, since the Heat weren’t as overwhelmingly athletic, the Spurs could overwhelm Miami with their superior basketball IQ. It kinda felt like Rock-Paper-Scissors between the three teams.

  3. Thunder did the same thing to the Warriors in 2016 and choked it away. Their size and athleticism really overwhelmed the Warriors at first, it was really fun to watch.

  4. I remember how things changed in 2012 when we had Thabo defending Parker. Ibaka was also huge in game 3 I think.

  5. yeah the spurs had little answer for the thunder's giant front court of KD, Adams, and Ibaka in 2016. that killed them. All they had was LMA, Duncan was 40 that playoff series I think

  6. down 2-1, KD goes for 41 with 17 points in the 4th quarter was incredible to watch. that was against the 67 win Spurs team too who had the #1 defense

  7. Our athleticism made us a really bad matchup for the spurs. I always personally felt we would have beat the spurs in 2014 as well if Ibaka was healthy

  8. The athleticism of Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka, and Harden, was a bad matchup for the older Spurs. The Heat weren't quite as athletic as the Thunder but could hold their own.

  9. '12: KD played very well and role players like Ibaka and Sefalosha chipped in nicely, but the key difference maker was James Harden. The Spurs couldn't stop him as the primary ballhandler during late game situations.

  10. Thunder's athleticism, size, and defense nullified a lot of the Spurs motion offense. Too bad in 2014 Scott Brooks worked against that by putting Fisher, Russ, and Reggie out there against Duncan.

  11. Those OKC teams were very stacked. 2012-2016 OKC fielded some very strong teams. 2012 and 2016 being perhaps their best two chances given the context of everything that happened in the other seasons. They have some of the best teams to not win a title

  12. If you look at their careers in totality, you could make an argument that KD+Russ+Harden was better than LeBron+Wade+Bosh.

  13. Yea I agree with that, Although their name values were insane, I dont think wade and James were 'great' fit. Bosh also had to sacrifice his scoring ability to play defense

  14. Well the heat had Lebron, Wade and Bosh but they still struggled against the spurs(particularly)

  15. The Spurs weren't THAT good at the time. It's kind of revisionist history because of how hot they got shooting from 3 in the 2014 playoffs.

  16. The Spurs were good in that time. 1st seed in 2012 with a 20 game win streak before losing 4 straight against OKC, 2nd seed in 2013 and almost beating the Heat, and champions in 14. That's not revisionist history. Parker and Duncan were also making All NBAs in the early 2010s so yeah they were old but they were still top of the food chain

  17. Revolutionist history? Stop it. You can check reddit and other outlets in 2014 they were called one of the greatest championship teams after the finals. It sure as hell didn't suddenly come up years later tf

  18. They were way more athletic and had more size. 2016 was a toss up. Westbrook went nuclear in Game 5 and Game 2 was also controversial with the inbound no-call.

  19. Retirement home spurs want none of that youth spunk. Thunder had the perfect recipe to beat them. Length, size, quickness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may have missed