4 comments Bill Simmons Attempts to Get All Sentimental about the Oklahoma City Thunder

Bill Simmons thinks, maybe/perhaps/possibly, Oklahoma City Thunder's championship window is closing. He writes a column about this belief where he uses the word "we" 29 times. Yes, he has written a column about how HE thinks the Thunder's championship window is closing and uses "we" that often. So basically Bill believes that he speaks for everyone and his opinion is our opinion. If the Thunder's championship window does close, Bill will link this column for us, but if the Thunder's championship window doesn't close then "we" were so wrong! That's how it works for Bill. He's right, "we" are wrong. Anyway, here is a shot at analysis (not really) and sentiment in one column. It's not even really about the Thunder's championship window, but is a thinly veiled excuse to talk about the Westbrook/Durant dynamic.

There’s a poignant moment in Jonathan Abrams’s oral history about the 2002 Kings, 

It's the first sentence of the column and Bill is already pimping out a Grantland feature. Granted, a good Grantland feature, but it's the first sentence and he's already using his supposedly-weekly column to push other Grantland features. Bill is quickly becoming the NASCAR driver of writing. His columns feature links to other columns (hence the sponsors in NASCAR) on ESPN or Grantland.

That moment resonated for a simple reason: That WAS their shot. And that WAS it.

The boss wasn’t describing a “shot” as much as a window. If you’re blessed with Michael and Scottie in their mid-twenties, that window should last for a decade, as long as nothing funky happens.

You mean like Michael Jordan retiring for two seasons because his father was killed over his gambling debts or does Bill mean like how the Kings would have made the NBA Finals if it weren't for the lone wolf official (and there were no more, not at all...and I don't believe that at all) who was gambling on NBA games who screwed the Kings over in Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals? Funny how both the Kings and Bulls windows closed during a period where there were rumors of a conspiracy involving David Stern and his attempts to keep the integrity of the NBA together. I don't miss David Stern.

If you’re teaming up Pierce and Garnett and Allen at the tail end of their primes, you’re publicly hoping for five healthy years and secretly praying for three.

Come on, it's the Boston Sports Guy. Like he wasn't going to mention the Celtics as early as possible in this column. Bill only mentions the Celtics two more times in this column, which is quite the achievement for him. The article is about the Thunder, but it's no secret Bill shoves some Celtics talk down the throats of his readers whenever possible.

Every A-list contender has a built-in window, and almost always, you know what it is. When that window slams shut well before you’re ready, you never really get over it.

Fine, but how do we know a team is an A-list contender? The Bulls were second-fiddle to the Pistons until 1991. The Kings never really were an A-list contender because the Lakers were in their way, right? They never made an NBA Finals and even the Lakers had to share a few titles with the Spurs during Kobe and Shaq's prime.

Will we remember Oklahoma City that way someday? We know that it’s Kevin Durant’s seventh season and his sixth with Russell Westbrook. We know they’re playing for a small-market franchise that actively avoids the luxury tax. We know Durant’s contract expires in 2016, and Westbrook’s deal expires one year later.

We, we, we, we. I don't give care if Bill is reciting facts here, the repeated use of "we" in four sentences would make an English teacher cry or give up out of frustration.

We know Westbrook endured three knee surgeries in the past 12 months. We know that bad luck comes in all shapes and sizes. We know the West is loaded, and we know LeBron is never going away. We know they easily could have blown the Memphis series, and we know the bumbling officials saved their season Tuesday night.

We overrate youth and potential with sports, movies, TV, music, art and even politics — it’s more enjoyable to imagine what something might become. We envision the Thunder overpowering LeBron’s Heat in Durant’s MVP season because that’s the age-old NBA formula, right? 

Bill begins 10 straight sentences with the word "we." 10 straight sentences. I'm not the best writer in the world at all and my sentence structure isn't very good, but Bill has to do better than this. The use of "we" in 10 straight sentences is ridiculously bad writing.

A few thoughts about these "we" sentences:

1. LeBron is going away. Not anytime soon, but he will go away at some point. His window does coincide with the Thunder's window, though I feel like it will be running out in a season or two with Wade getting older.

2. The Lakers had their 2001-2002 season saved by the officials too. This wasn't a sign their dynasty was done, it was just a sign the officials wanted them to win Game 6 to force a Game 7.

3. "We" don't overrate sports, movies, TV, music, art and politics. Bill Simmons overrates sports, movies, TV and music. He has built an entire career on overrating these subjects and tying them into his sports columns. I don't want to hear about how "we" overrate these things. Bill has used them as a writing crutch for 15 years and tied together any sports event with movies, TV or music. Bill needs to find a mirror so he can see who is the one that really overrates these things. As usual, he's happy to take the success caused by tying these subjects to sports, but when it's a bad thing "we" are the ones who overrated these subjects.

Just like we overrate youth and potential, we underrate injury luck, unfortunate breaks, untimely trades, the Disease of More, greed and egos, poor coaching and plain old bad luck.

Stop saying "we"! YOU write these columns. "We" don't write weekly columns for ESPN/Grantland or any other national sports publication/site. Simply because you overrate youth and potential doesn't mean everyone else does also.

The Thunder could definitely topple San Antonio and Miami next month, but they’re just as likely to not win a single title with Durant and Westbrook.

The Thunder may or may not win the NBA Title this year. Step back people, this is expert analysis occurring. This is how Bill got a prime job on "NBA Countdown," by making bold statements like this.

On paper, OKC should evolve into this generation’s version of the 1990s Bulls: Durant as Jordan, Westbrook as Pippen, and Ibaka as Grant/Rodman. It’s a star-driven league with the least amount of playoff variance in any professional sport. When you have a top-two player, a top-eight player and a top-25 player on one team, you should definitely win a ring.

I really feel like arguing Ibaka as a top-25 player but I have bigger fish to fry right now. Or as Bill would say, "We thought Ibaka was a top-25 player but it turns out we were wrong."

Unfortunately, you never know when “The Rains of Castamere” will start playing.

Hey everyone, it's a relevant pop culture reference squeezed awkwardly into the column!

A similar window opened after Game 7 of the 1962 Finals, when the Lakers came within Frank Selvy’s errant 15-footer of upending Bill Russell’s budding dynasty. That Lakers team employed 27-year-old Elgin Baylor and 23-year-old Jerry West, two of the league’s best five players. (Sound familiar?)

No, it doesn't because Westbrook is not one of the NBA's five best players.

Fifteen years later, Bill Walton’s precocious Blazers

These professional athletes displayed traits that belied their years. Sure, they were grown-up adults but trying to win an NBA title is just so child-like. Thanks Peter King.

toppled Philly for the 1977 title, then took a 40-8 record into the ensuing All-Star break looking like Russell’s Celtics reincarnated.

Bill isn't really even comparing apples-to-apples here. Jerry West did win an NBA Title with the Lakers and the Trail Blazers won an NBA Title with the team Bill is referencing here. The idea of this column is the Thunder's championship window may be closed without them winning a title and Bill is giving examples, but so far he's given examples of players/teams who did win a title with the team whose championship window supposedly closed. Now if Bill's contention is the Thunder may not be a dynasty, that's entirely possible, but considering the discussion is about championship windows then any team/player who has won an NBA Title with the team Bill is referencing would not be a good example.

Every generation has its version of the ’62 Lakers and ’77 Blazers, contenders that fooled us into thinking their window would last longer than it did.

I can buy this but the Thunder may not even win one NBA Title according to Bill Simmons. Their window is being eaten up by the existence of the Miami Heat. The 1977 Blazers had won one NBA Title, so there is a difference when using them as an example. Also, I wasn't fooled into thinking these team's window would last longer than it did because I wasn't alive when these teams were alive. When I don't exist as a human in the world, I can't have an opinion on a team's championship window. Don't "us" me.

An alpha-dog battle submarined the Shaq-Penny dynasty in Orlando and, later, a possible seven-title run for Shaq and Kobe in Los Angeles. Derrick Rose, C-Webb and James Silas suffered untimely knee injuries that ruined legitimate title windows for the Bulls, Kings and Spurs. Steve Nash’s critically acclaimed Suns teams kept falling short in increasingly unfair ways.

Basically what Bill is getting at is that luck plays a part in whether a team wins multiple championships. He can dress it up all he wants to over-complicate the situation, but this obvious-type statement is what he's getting at. This isn't a new perspective Bill is offering, even though he's trying to make it new by looking at it from the perspective of the Thunder, which is weird since this column is 20% complete already and he hasn't really discussed them much.

Four unstoppable-at-the-time duos — Hakeem and Ralph, Penny and Shaq, GP and Kemp, and Malone and Stockton — somehow finished with a combined 8-20 Finals record. Can we really say, with any certainty whatsoever, that “Those guys are gonna be chasing championships and competing for years to come”?

I would argue that Payton and Kemp, as well as Malone and Stockton were not considered an unstoppable-at-the-time duo due to the existence of Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls. They were the unstoppable team. But Bill is going to twist facts/opinions the way he wants them to go to fit his needs.

And "we" aren't saying the Thunder will chase championships for years to come.

You’re more likely to bemoan the opportunities that slipped away. 

Oh I am more likely to bemoan the opportunities that slipped away? I didn't know that about myself. Thanks for telling me about myself because you don't know me and all. 

My father and I talk about the Celtics blowing the 2010 title waaaaaaaay more than we talk about the Celtics winning in 2008. 

That's probably because you both traffic in misery rather than celebrate the successes of your teams. Bill really, really, really wants to be a tortured fan. It's pretty much his dream to be tortured by his favorite teams.

How does that make sense?

It makes perfect sense based on who Bill is and how he made his living as a writer. Bill made his living whining about how tortured and cursed his favorite teams are. In fact, he still does this, except he has expanded it to include fans of other professional sports teams emailing him to whine about how tortured their favorite team is. I would say Bill has expanded his horizons, but he really just found a new group to share his misery with.

Then Bill whines about Game 7 of the NBA Finals because life is unfair and he prefers to act like a child and stomp his feet when his teams don't succeed. Not that Bill acts like a child when he doesn't get what he wants. Not that there is a "Rolling Stone" feature on Bill that somewhat proves this to be true.

We thought we were in the minority … until Doc Rivers told me about eating dinner with former assistant Tom Thibodeau last summer. For whatever reason, they spent an hour talking about Game 7...They just sat there eating and drinking and making each other miserable. Only later did Doc realize that the 2008 Finals never came up.

And because Doc Rivers (who was the coach of the Celtics, so it makes sense why he would rehash everything) and Bill Simmons talk more about failures rather than the successes this means "we" must do it also. Obviously.

By the way, remember this column is about the Oklahoma City Thunder? It's easy to forget with Bill's rambling form of writing.

When should you start feeling real anxiety over something as simple as “We might have Durant and Westbrook for their entire careers … how could we NOT win a couple of titles?”

LeBron didn't win a title until he was 27 years old. Durant and Westbrook are both 25 years old. Let's take it easy about them not winning a title during their careers.

When Durant’s beautiful MVP speech seemingly inspired their best basketball in Game 2 and Game 3, as well as the first three quarters of Game 4, that seemed like something of a “Voilà!” moment...And then the last quarter happened. If you want to watch OKC at its worst, just watch the last nine minutes of Game 4: one-on-one offense, overdribbling, wrong lineups, bad strategy, no composure, no crunch-time savviness and 27-foot heaves.

You know Bill was sitting at this game (because it was against the Clippers and Bill has season tickets to Clippers games and knows Jimmy Kimmel...you need Kimmel's phone number, because Bill has it right here) thinking, "I have to write a column about this."

That unsettled malaise carried over to the first 47 minutes of Game 5, with their defense floundering and Durant inexplicably turning into a right-handed Josh Smith. Everything flipped again in the last 50 seconds, thanks to Durant’s monster 3, two utterly ridiculous calls, three egregious Chris Paul mistakes, and Westbrook draining three of the ballsiest free throws I can remember.

Bill looks at it as the Thunder not playing well, while I look at it as an example of a good team winning a game they shouldn't have won...which is something good teams do, right?

I left that game thinking two things …

1. Why am I out of column ideas?

2. Can I squeeze a column idea out of the Thunder's championship window closing? 

How can anyone believe in this Thunder team?
 
And how can anyone NOT believe in this Thunder team?

It’s a great question. And it’s a great question.

Bill thinks he asks himself some great questions. No, he asks fantastic questions of himself that only he has the intelligence to appropriately answer. Bill thinks that Bill Simmons has a beautiful, inquisitive mind.

We always hear about the “journey” with NBA champions. Wilt couldn’t get past Russell until 1967, when he regrouped and unleashed the best Russell imitation that’s ever been done. West couldn’t shed that “Greatest Player Who Never Won” label until the magical ’72 season.

Jerry West didn't win a title until he was 34 years old. This is important to remember when Bill is writing a column about how two 25 year olds have their championship windows closing.

Julius never climbed the mountain in Philly until a man named Moses showed up.

We see what you did there, Bill!

Jordan didn’t become an NBA champ until Scottie matured into a top-five player. Shaq and Kobe kept belly flopping until their unforgettable Game 7 comeback against the 2000 Blazers. The Heat kept caving in 2011 and 2012 until Game 6 against Boston, when LeBron finally said, “Out of my way, this is MY team.”

So basically there is still time for the Thunder to win an NBA Title. Great, fantastic. "We" knew this.

With their best four players younger than 25, they seemed like the safest bet for a multi-title dynasty since the 1995 Magic.

Incorrect. Either the Shaq-Kobe Lakers were the best best for a multi-title dynasty or the Spurs "Big 3" of Duncan, Ginobli, and Parker were the other best bet. I like how Bill uses the example of the 1995 Magic, as a direct comparison to the current Thunder which would lead to the assumed conclusion that the Thunder won't win a title either.

If Durant and Westbrook never win Oklahoma City a title, the Harden trade will forever be the first reason mentioned.

The Thunder EASILY could have afforded Durant, Ibaka, Westbrook and Harden these next two seasons. Right now, they have Steven Adams and the 21st pick of next month’s draft to show for a first-team All-NBA guard. Can you ever recover from that?

Me? Can I recover from that? Yes, I can recover from it because I'm not a Thunder fan. But no, it's hard for a team to recover from trading away a young player like Harden, though the Thunder have won 59 and 60 games in the two seasons since Harden left. The Thunder lost to the Grizzlies last year in the Western Conference Semifinals, but that was after losing Russell Westbrook for the series. This is a big reason why the Thunder didn't advance further in the playoffs last year. This year the Thunder have made the Western Conference Finals. So they seem to be recovering fairly well.

After Westbrook’s untimely knee injury ruined their 2013 playoff chances, you could hear the Thunder’s window creaking for the first time.

I could? And here I thought that was just the wind.

KD threw up a 34-7-6 every night with 51-38-87% shooting splits. Even better, he started carrying himself like a Liam Neeson character — unfriendly, cold-blooded, blessed with a specific set of skills unique to him and only him.

Boy, this reference feels really forced.

As for Westbrook, it took 11 months and three surgeries before he finally looked like Force Of Nature Westbrook again. He’ll always be polarizing — the point guard who shoots 20-plus times a game, the creator who creates mostly for himself, the leader who rarely makes teammates better, the ultimate 90/10 guy,

"90/10" will not become a "thing" Bill. I will not allow it to happen.

I was fortunate enough to watch Jordan and Pippen in person during their collective apex, when they were ripping through overmatched teams like varsity studs whupping on the JV. 

Bill watched Pippen and Jordan. "We" didn't watch Pippen and Jordan, but Bill watched them. Not like "we" watched them, but he WATCHED them in the mid-90's when they were unstoppable. On the other hand "we" were wrong that the Shaq-Penny combination wouldn't lead to multiple titles. See how that works? "We" were wrong about the Magic in the mid-90's, but Bill watched the Bulls tear up the NBA in the mid-90's.

That doesn’t stop the general public from picking them apart. Following the NBA has become a 24/7 thing thanks to social media, YouTube, Instagram and everything else; we never leave these guys alone. They’re constantly accessible.

Oh yeah, it's the general public's fault for sure. The general public is always on pregame shows, debate shows and talk radio bashing Westbrook or giving hot sports takes in small soundbites about Westbrook and Durant that gets published nationally. That's always what the general public is doing, because the general public and not behemoth sports organizations like ESPN set out the talking points for athletes like Durant and Westbrook. Blame the people because it sure as hell ain't the fault of Bill's employer.

I hate how the general public are such monsters don't you? The same general public that has elevated Bill to what he is and gives him the traffic at Grantland that makes him so much money. The same general public that Bill looks down on with such disdain high upon his pedestal as he talks on an NBA pregame show handing out soundbites and hot takes all while blaming the general public for what's coming out of his mouth. If there was ever any doubt Bill has cognitive dissonance on how he became what he is today and how he was at one point similar to the blogs and the public he has such a distaste for that "Rolling Stone" feature removed all of that doubt.

Shaq and Kobe never would have survived life together in 2014 — they would have imploded well before that third title. Scottie Pippen never would have survived the Migraine Game in 1990 or the Self-Benching in 1994; he would have been skewered and reskewered and rereskewered, 

So who would have skewered and reskewered Pippen again? Is it the general public or is it the 24/7 coverage and hot takes handed out by the brainless trolls at ESPN, when Pippen's migraine situation would end up being discussed on all of ESPN's daily news/opinion shows and every "SportsCenter" at length? I think I know the answer to this long question, but does Bill? He needs to be more self-aware.

That’s why there wasn’t a snippier, angrier, more hostile contender than OKC during the regular season. They hated hearing about Harden, hated falling short, hated the Westbrook microscope, hated the constant scrutiny. Everything about them oozed the words “Leave us alone, let us play basketball.”

Who should leave them alone? The general public or Skip Bayless? Does Bill think that Westbrook and Durant hear the criticism from the public or the criticism from the talking heads at ESPN more? Again, I know the answer and I'm not surprised that Bill doesn't.

When Jackson saved Game 4 in Memphis, Durant and Westbrook bear-hugged him for unusually long times. You could feel the relief pouring out of them. This wasn’t just about escaping a threatening playoff moment. It was bigger than that.

And I didn’t totally understand until Durant’s incredible MVP speech, which was simply one of the greatest off-the-floor moments in NBA history.

It was a really good speech. The inability for Bill to understand the criticism of Durant and Westbrook is partly (mostly?) coming from his fellow co-workers at ESPN is baffling to me. I get that he can't just call out Skip Bayless or other ESPN employees, but the mention of "the general public picking them apart" is infuriating to me.

To me, it shows his dislike for the public and those people who have made him the person he is. He's Bill Simmons, fuck you, he's not like the general public and apparently thinks the general public don't take their cues from ESPN at all...despite ESPN being the most popular sports/entertainment organization around. ESPN creates stories out of soundbites by their employees and then runs the story through the ESPN vacuum to get as much mileage out of the story as possible. "Colin Kaepernick could be the best QB ever," "LeBron/Durant aren't clutch," or "I see bust written all over Johnny Manziel," there's no story created by ESPN that ESPN won't beat into the ground. I just take offense to the idea the general public are the ones who are picking Durant/Westbrook apart. That talks from the public is just noise to those guys, but they pay attention when their name is on "SportsCenter" because Skip Bayless is crying for attention again. Durant/Westbrook aren't bothered by guys they don't know giving an opinion on their performance, but when they see themselves being discussed on the national stage in a negative way, these are the types of comments that gets their attention.

He remembered every obstacle he overcame, every moment that mattered, everyone who helped him along the way. He didn’t read from anything. It was unclear how much he even prepared.

"We" were shocked that Durant didn't seem prepared.

Bill won't mention this moment because he's too busy talking about Westbrook/Durant, but the best moment was that one shared between Durant and Butler. Butler hasn't been on the Thunder team long but it's clear he has made an impact on Durant by leaving a note in his locker (yeah, it does sound juvenile) calling him the MVP. It was obvious it all meant something to Durant.

But enough about that, Bill wants to pick apart the Westbrook/Durant dynamic that the general public likes to pick apart so much. Bill is only writing about this dynamic because the general public, not the media, likes to pick this relationship apart.

I mean, can you even compare it to anything? Could even the great Bill Russell have pulled this off?

Bill is essentially a parody of himself at this point. "Could even the great Bill Russell have pulled this off?" I don't remember when Bill Russell became the go-to reference for good speeches, but he was a Celtic and that's all that matters to Bill.

“I know you guys think I forgot Russ,” he joked as everyone laughed nervously. “I could speak all night about Russell. An emotional guy who would run through a wall for me. I don’t take it for granted. There’s days where I just want to tackle you and tell you to snap out of it sometimes. I know there’s days you want to do the same thing with me. I love you, man. I love you.”

Stop there.

You are the one writing the column. You can stop at any point you want.

No way Jordan would ever describe Pippen that way. No way LeBron describes Wade that way. No way Kobe describes ANYONE that way. Durant’s best quality was always Duncan’s best quality — he doesn’t care how his team wins, just that they do. He’s one of the best teammates ever. And just with those eight sentences, he squashed even the most remote possibility of an Avon-Stringer ending.

Well, that's it then. The Thunder's championship window isn't closed and they still have time to win championships. I mean, isn't that what this column is about? Or was about? More importantly, remember how Bill talks about those who pick apart the Westbrook/Durant relationship? What's Bill doing now? The exact same thing. As we learned in the "Rolling Stone" article Bill has rules for others that don't apply to him. He's tired of the general public picking them apart, but it's fine for him to do so.

So much for trading Russell Westbrook.

Bill has now decreed it...RUSSELL WESTBROOK WILL NEVER BE TRADED! WHO SAYS "NO" TO THIS?

I have been following sports for something like 40 years — I can’t remember a teammate sticking up for another teammate better than that. Not ever.

NEVER! EVER! Not even the great Bill Russell could have stuck up for a teammate like this.

Terrell Owens crying about Romo being his quarterback was him sort of sticking up for a teammate. I'm sure there are other examples of a player sticking up for his teammate, but it's pointless for me to try to remember them because Durant just did it better than any other player ever.

Kevin Durant flipped the script on the “journey,” just like that, in less than 50 seconds. Either KD sticks around like Duncan stuck around in San Antonio, or he’s a greater actor than Daniel Day-Lewis. I’m betting on the former. You can’t fake that stuff. You just can’t.

Right, because athletes haven't said things they later take back or have sworn dedication to a team/teammate publicly and then reneged on this dedication later. If Westbrook decides he's not sticking around when he hits free agency, then maybe Durant decides he'll test free agency. There's still a lot of time. And wasn't this column supposed to be about the Thunder's championship window and whether it was closing or not?

And you know what else? Even if they drive us bonkers sometimes, 

Yes, "us" are driven crazy by Durant and Westbrook. "Us" are.

Would LeBron have ever dumped Cleveland if he had Westbrook there?

Bill is tapping into his inner Skip Bayless. This is what being a talking head on television does to a person.

And why would Durant leave OKC when he has Westbrook there?

But he may not always have Westbrook there. Therein lies the rub. Westbrook didn't seem all that touched by Durant's comments and he doesn't have a lifetime contract with the Thunder. Westbrook can become a free agent after Durant can. If he thinks Westbrook isn't staying, why would Durant stay?

It’s the rarest of basketball partnerships — two alpha dogs coexisting and complementing each other (for the most part, anyway), with their friendship transcending every conceivable landmine. Why would you break THAT up? Keep that window pried open, baby. For as long as you can.

So what if this is the Thunder's last shot? That was the question in the title and it remains unanswered, though Bill did a great job of rambling around for a few hundred words until he could lazily talk about the Westbrook/Durant relationship, which has been done a thousand times before (mostly by the general public of course).

So was last night’s remarkable comeback something of a watershed moment for the Durant-Westbrook “journey”? Can they extend their window for 10 years, or 12, or maybe even 15?

15 years seems a bit much. Simmer down a little.

Or will some Thunder employee be wondering What if that was it? What if that was our shot? next month and end up looking like Nostradamus? I don’t know, I don’t know, and I don’t know.

Glad you wrote this column then. NOBODY KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING, EXCEPT NO ONE KNEW NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING AS MUCH AS THE GREAT BILL RUSSELL KNEW NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING. 

Just remember to keep enjoying the ride. Even when it’s a roller coaster.

If Bill doesn't want to write columns anymore, I just wish he would stop. It's clear his heart isn't in it anymore. I'm assuming Bill still has a heart and didn't leave it in Boston as he headed out to California to become a talking head and hopefully a pop culture celebrity. 

0 comments You Aren't Going to Believe This, but Skip Bayless Makes the Kevin Durant-Russell Westbrook Dynamic About Himself

Skip Bayless loves to make things about himself. He's written a column about Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant where he (surprise) makes their dynamic about himself and things he has said in the past about Westbrook and Durant. Skip is just a disaster as a writer, but he sure does love bringing any topic back around to himself. He seems to believe athletes pay attention and give a shit about what he says on television. It's all about attention to Skip and he's getting good at getting attention. Everything else related to sports, he's not so good at. Let's see how Skip Bayless thinks he is part of the Kevin Durant-Russell Westbrook dynamic.

Some nights I'm convinced Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook will win their first NBA championship this June. Other nights, I'm Thunderstruck by their bizarre limitations.

Sometimes Skip runs, sometimes he hides, sometimes he's so scared he won't be relevant. 

Durant and Westbrook are the strangest duo this side of Jekyll and Hyde. If only Dr. Jekyll could explain what keeps going on with Westbrook's knee. And only Dr. Freud might clarify the Nice/Not Nice conflict within Durant.

Skip has this fascination with a player being nice or not being nice and that affects how he plays the game of basketball. I don't know. Magic Johnson was nice when he was on the court, Shaquille O'Neal always had fun on the court, while Isiah Thomas and Michael Jordan would rather rip your head off than lose. Different players are different when it comes to competitive nature on the court. Just because LeBron is "playing angry" doesn't necessarily mean he is playing better.

On second thought, maybe Freud could better explain the team's mysterious decision to possibly rest Westbrook, age 25, for one game each of the Thunder's six remaining back-to-backs, starting last Sunday night. He watched as Durant & Co. were blown out at home by Dallas.

Dr. Freud wasn't a doctor that dealt with physical ailments. Freud may be able to say that Westbrook's knee kept acting up as a response to some mental or emotional ailment he was dealing with, but I'm pretty sure explaining the Thunder's strategy to sit Westbrook wasn't down Freud's alley. Skip has abused this "Dr." analogy too much and it's probably time to move on. 

Yes, he keeps saying the knee is fine and keeps playing with his usual 100 mph rage to win -- and without a hint of a limp. Yet he's being rested as if he were 37-year-old Tim Duncan?

That's a good point. Maybe Skip and Stephen A. Smith should have a debate on "First Take" about what mysterious ailment has befallen Russell Westbrook. Is it West Nile Virus, HIV, or has he been suspended for every 6th game by the Thunder for some unknown violation of team rules? Skip and Stephen will debate it and come to a completely speculative conclusion on "First Take" sure to test the limits of the viewer's patience and logic. 

Don't ask Thunder coaches or management, who are CIA secretive and lead the league in media stonewalling. This naturally makes you wonder what they're hiding.

I wasn't kidding when I said Skip will speculate why the Thunder are resting Westbrook one game of the remaining back-to-backs.

Could Durant win a title without Westbrook? I used to believe so.

I raved on "First Take" about the most freakish scoring talent I'd ever seen -- 6 feet, 9 inches tall with arms stretching from Austin to Oklahoma City and the lightning release and long-distance touch of a Ray Allen.

For years, I railed about how ego-crazed Westbrook,

Not that this article is about Skip talking about himself and his own opinions or anything like that of course.

Last season, Westbrook took the NBA's second-most shots behind Kobe Bryant -- 102 more than Kevin Durant! As much as Durant liked (even loved) his little buddy Westbrook, the two had occasionally clashed over No. 0's shot selection.

"Would LeBron James and Russell Westbrook clash as much as Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook do? Find out at 9am when Skip and Stephen A. Smith discuss this, plus whether Tim Tebow could get Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal to reconcile."

Durant/Westbrook still seems an uneasy alliance, a Thunderstorm on the horizon.

Get it? It's a Thunderstorm because Durant/Westbrook both play for the Thunder? See the word "Thunder" is in "Thunderstorm," which underlines just how fucking creative Skip Bayless can be with his writing. Step back, this is real sportswriting happening.

But on Wednesday night, April 24, 2013, life changed for the Thunder.

(Cue dramatic music)

Game 2 of the Houston-OKC first-round playoff matchup, in OKC, was Patrick Beverley's first NBA start. Westbrook hadn't missed a game in two college and five NBA seasons. Beverley, battling to prove he wouldn't back down, went for the ball as Westbrook attempted to call timeout. The problem wasn't so much that Beverley violated an unwritten rule -- let the opposing point guard tuck the ball under his arm and make the "T" signal. Beverley knifed too low and made contact with Westbrook's planted knee.

"Would LeBron James' knee have buckled if Patrick Beverley dove at it in this same situation? Find out at 9am when Skip and Stephen A. Smith debate whether LeBron's knee would have buckled in this same situation, as well as find out whether LeBron's knee would give out because he chokes in big situations or because he doesn't play angry enough."

Westbrook was gone for the rest of the playoffs. Without him, the Thunder survived the Rockets in six games and beat Memphis in Game 1. Then, it happened.

(Cue more dramatic music)

In four straight narrow losses to Memphis -- soon to be swept by San Antonio -- Durant turned into Du-can't. Not without Westbrook.

Get it? His name is "Durant" and Skip changed it to "Du-can't." The creativity of this is blowing my mind.

This is the part where Skip ignores the Durant helped lead the Thunder to a playoff series victory over the Rockets as pretty much the only scoring option and then focuses entirely on when the Thunder played the Grizzlies to say that Durant came up small. In fact, Skip doesn't even focus on the entire series because that would involve mentioning Durant averaged 28.8 points, 10.4 rebounds, 1.2 steals and 6.6 assists during the Memphis series. He led the team in all these categories by the way. But let's get to the part where Skip cherry-picks information.

In "clutch time" of those four losses -- the last five minutes and the game within six points -- Durant shot a combined 3-17, 0-3 from 3 and 2-5 on free throws, with one assist. Lord have mercy.

The next two leading scorers in that series were Kevin Martin and Reggie Jackson. Think part of the reason Durant came up small is that everyone knew he would get the ball? I'm sure Skip would argue Michael Jordan would have come up big in these moments. Because he always did, right?

This prompted "told you so" correspondence from a highly trusted, longtime NBA source of mine who had tried to warn me my view of Durant vs. Westbrook was upside down.

And of course it took this series for Skip to actually believe this highly trusted source of his. This source was so highly trusted that Skip didn't believe this person and would not change his view of Durant v. Westbrook based on this person's "trusted" advice, but now all of a sudden this anonymous person's advice should be taken by all of Skip's readers, despite the fact Skip wouldn't take this person's advice himself. Got it. Don't do as Skip does, do as he says, after he has spent several years ignoring the advice he now wants his readers to believe as he says they should believe.

My source is plugged in to several superstars.

And of course don't forget that no matter how plugged in this source was, Skip blatantly ignored what the source was saying. But now, Skip totally thinks we should pay attention even though Skip didn't think enough of how "plugged in" this person was to listen to what he/she had to say in the past.

My source had told me Westbrook actually was Batman to Durant's Robin -- that the point guard built like (and who often played like) a strong safety was the one with the killer instinct, the assassin's clutch guts. Westbrook, my source had insisted, was mentally tougher than Durant and more feared by opponents late in games.

I still love how Skip is totally buying what the source is saying despite the fact he didn't believe this person previously. But those five games where Durant was the Thunder's only scoring option totally convinced Skip that Durant isn't the one with a killer instinct, it was Westbrook who was mentally tough. I wonder if the situations were reversed and Westbrook had to play against the Grizzlies without Durant how that would have gone?

Still, on air I hung in with a Durant I often had called my favorite NBA player.

Look at how the king of making declarative statements with much gusto is wavering on whether he thought Durant had the killer instinct or not. On air, Durant was still Skip's favorite player, but in that hollow crevice where most humans have a heart the black seeds of discontent with Durant's killer instinct was growing. So Skip wasn't wrong, he just wasn't ready to tell everyone how right his NBA source truly was. I like how Skip essentially admits here to peddling bullshit on the air.

Westbrook showed up for training camp but -- what? -- immediately needed a second surgical procedure. He returned ahead of schedule for the season's third game, but, after recording a triple-double and finishing the game against the Knicks on Christmas Day, he needed a -- seriously? -- third procedure and missed the next 27 games.

I know, Gregg Doyel is totally like "Why all this surgery and why is this surgery necessary when I thought the last one was successful?"

And "my man" KD hit bottom at home on New Year's Eve, scoring a grand total of one point in the fourth quarter as Portland outscored the Thunder 27-16 and won by four. Two nights later, again at home, the Thunder allowed a late 14-0 run by 10-21 Brooklyn and lost by two. Durant: four in the fourth.

Of course Skip can't simply analyze the situation of Durant playing without Westbrook, he has to tie Durant's performance in with his own personal feelings about Durant, thereby making himself become a part of the story. I'm guessing Skip doesn't teach Sunday School at his church, because otherwise he would probably have himself on the ark with Noah or insert himself as one of the servers at the Last Supper.

Skip chooses to cherry-pick his data here. Russell Westbrook was out from December 27 to February 13. During the month of January, an entire month in which Westbrook was out, Durant had his highest scoring month and best shooting month of the entire season. Skip can have his two cherry-picked games to draw an idiotic conclusion that gets him attention, but I'll take the entire month of January to show that Durant stepped up when Westbrook got injured. The Thunder's record without Russell Westbrook during this time? They were 21-7 without Westbrook during this time, but Skip still tries to sell us on Durant stepping back and "hitting bottom." What a joke.

The thing is, I believe Skip Bayless knows Kevin Durant stepped up without Westbrook and he is only saying the opposite to garner attention and be a troll. There is a difference in being a contrarian and simply saying something contrary to gain attention.

That's when -- on air -- I gave up

Here goes Skip making Durant's performance without Westbrook about himself again.

and said, OK, Durant is no longer The Man in OKC. Westbrook is. The Thunder, I said, would ultimately go as far as Westbrook carries them when he returns.

And of course in typical non-sensical Skip Bayless fashion he says this after Durant has his best scoring and shooting month of the season, as well during a time period when the Thunder went 21-7 without Westbrook.

I have no idea whether Durant was watching.

He probably wasn't Skip, but I still appreciate your diligent efforts to push yourself into the storyline and make it seem like athletes respond to your criticism by doing what you request they do. It's very egotistical of you.

I know he has twice taken public issue with me, for criticizing Westbrook and for criticizing him for getting too close to LeBron James in offseason workouts.

I'm sure Skip got a massive erection out of an athlete responding to him publicly with something he has said. Attention is all Skip requires. Take away the attention and he becomes a sad, 60-year old man screaming into a void. Unfortunately, Skip is so good at garnering attention and ESPN is so shameless in giving him a forum to gain attention, Skip is able to get under the skin of athletes and keep attention for himself. It's amazing the huge ego that Skip Bayless has. He isn't able to write a column or make a statement without drawing himself in as part of the story.

But Durant soon went on an MVP tear. The Thunder won 15 of 17 -- including one at Miami -- before Westbrook returned for the home rematch with the Heat.

AND I'M SURE SKIP BAYLESS WAS ENTIRELY RESPONSIBLE FOR KEVIN DURANT GOING ON THIS TEAR!

It's ridiculous how Skip seems to believe he has an impact on how professional athletes perform. It just goes to show how massive his ego is and how desperate he is for attention that he would believe his comments could have an impact on a professional athlete. I wouldn't expect anything more from Skip though. He's a Grade-A troll.

What sometimes detonated Durant was getting a technical foul. Again down to Portland at home, this time by three with 3:45 left, Durant blew up after two straight questionable calls and got a tech. Then he blew up on the Blazers with 10 more points as OKC won by eight.

Were we seeing some new fire in Durant's belly?

I love the narrative that is driving Skip's analysis of how he (Skip) is affecting Durant's game while also driving the narrative that an angry NBA player is a better NBA player. What this all amounts to in my mind is that sometimes an NBA player comes through in the fourth quarter to lead his team to victory and other times that player doesn't come through and lead his team to victory. Of course, for the sake of a narrative Durant's performance was entirely dependent on the criticism he received from Skip Bayless regarding how he performs while Russell Westbrook is injured.

Last season, Nike promoted Durant's signature shoe with a "KD is not nice" campaign. This suggested Durant had developed a complex after losing in the Finals to LeBron and being viewed as too buddy-buddy with his good buddy. "Not Nice" KD drew 12 techs last season, equaling his total for his first five seasons. He always seemed to be mad at somebody.

This season, Durant already has 13 techs. Yet he recently announced a new "Strong and Kind" Movement. Huh?

I think Skip gets confused sometimes. This isn't Kevin Durant getting together with Nike and telling them how they are going to market him and his shoe. Nike had a campaign idea and most likely ran it by Durant who liked the idea and the commercials that would follow. Durant's "Strong and Kind" movement isn't affiliated with Nike and isn't a part of Nike's promotions for his signature shoe. So "huh" is explained by knowing that one is a movement Durant is starting and the other is a campaign to sell shoes. I hate to break it to Skip, but Larry Bird doesn't eat McDonald's while he's shooting basketball at the gym either and Michael Jordan doesn't play basketball with Bugs Bunny. I know, it's shocking to hear.

Durant told ESPN's Chris Broussard: "If you see me play, I'm barking at guys, I'm talking trash, I'm being physical. But at the same time, if you fall on the ground, I'll help you up, and after the game we'll talk as friends. So it's not a weakness to be a kind person. Everybody always says nice guys finish last, but I'm trying to change that."

Nice ... or Not Nice?

Why doesn't Skip tell Durant which one he should be, you know, since athletes like Durant listen to Skip and adjust their behavior to reflect what Skip Bayless thinks these athletes should do.

Durant often unsuccessfully fights the natural nice in him. He sometimes comes off as a surly jerk in on-court postgame TV interviews because he's trying to seem dead-seriously angry about winning a championship.

Or this could be a reflection of what Durant said above, which is that when he's playing on the court he's barking at guys and talking trash. But I guess that's too obvious of an answer and Skip wants to take this into a more non-sensical direction.

Translation: He's trying to come off more like Westbrook naturally does.

Well, of course. It's incredibly obvious that Durant wants to be like Westbrook so he acts surly because Westbrook comes off as surly. What Skip should do is publicly tell Durant to not try to be more like Westbrook and that will fix the whole situation. Because, you know, Skip Bayless believes himself to have an effect on the behavior of athletes and probably also believes he controls the weather.

Durant still appears to wrestle with exactly why God blessed him with such rare talent. Westbrook doesn't seem to think about much but using his freakish speed, strength and spring to play basketball as hard as he can. Westbrook often seems happier than Durant.

This reads like the writing of a seven year old writing a book report.

"Russell doesn't think about how to play basketball. He just knows how. Russell plays as hard as he can all the time. Kevin doesn't always try hard. Russell looks happy. Kevin is not as happy as Russell. They both have dogs. Kevin loves dogs. Russell has a dog but doesn't like his dog. Skip is up his own ass."

Now, Durant's first championship hinges on Westbrook's not-nice knee. Once so durable, now so defective?

I bet Westbrook's knee gave out from trying to play basketball as hard as he can.

But guess what happens now. I hope you are sitting down, because Skip Bayless makes Durant's knee injury about Skip Bayless. I know, it's shocking to hear that Skip would do this.

Three times I've had medial meniscus tears scoped and bounced back quickly. These aren't big deals.

But you don't play professional sports. You sit in a chair and put words on a computer screen when you aren't busy arguing with another troll in the ESPN studios. But yeah, playing in the NBA and sitting in a chair are very close to being the same thing.

No, I don't play NBA basketball.

"I pulled a muscle in my back running last week, but I only took a few days off. So why is it Joel Embiid is out for the entire season with a back injury? Sure, I don't play college basketball and I'm not seven-feet-tall, but I bounced back quickly. Why didn't Embiid?"

But last July, I had what my surgeon called a "significant tear" on a knee whose cushioning cartilage had been clipped once. Three weeks later, I had built back up to running eight miles.

Well Skip, that's just because you are a lot tougher than Russell Westbrook is. You ran eight miles after three weeks and that's the same thing as pivoting and playing on a knee while playing basketball against world-class athletes. There is no difference. Now if I tell you how special and tough you are will you stop waving your dick around...or at least stop making everything about you? Thanks, that would be great.

I still play a lot of basketball without issue.

Do you play a lot of basketball against NBA players? Do you play basketball everyday against NBA players? If not, shut the fuck up. It's not the same thing.

Something went very wrong with Westbrook's knee. He's obviously sucking it up and rampaging through pain game after game. By resting him for the second game of these five back-to-backs, the team obviously is trying to save him for a deep playoff run.

I guess Dr. Freud isn't needed to figure out why Westbrook was sitting out one game of the Thunder's remaining back-to-backs because Dr. Bayless is on the case.

Late in playoff games, "Kind" Kevin has no chance without him.

It's not that "Kind" Kevin has no chance without Russell Westbrook due to some deficiency on Durant's part, but it's that the Thunder have very few scorers they can count on from night-to-night that could help replace Westbrook's scoring average per game. I'm sure that's entirely Durant's fault. I wonder how Westbrook would perform without Kevin Durant around? It's hard to say considering Durant hasn't ever missed an extended portion of any NBA season.

One thing is for sure, Skip Bayless sees Durant's performance late in games as directly dependent on what kind of criticism or praise Skip directs towards Durant. Obviously, all athletes listen to the criticism that Skip Bayless has for them and respond to it on the court or field. Skip always find a way to drag himself into the story. What a lonely, sad man.

15 comments The Durant/Westbrook Power Struggle

Way back when, Macedonian generals returned home from battle to a heap of lavish praise and gifts. As long as their aggression brought back the fruitful spoils of devastation, all was forgiven. That is Russell Westbrook. If he were an historical figure, I’d assume he’d be Alexander The Great (If you take anything away from this, remember that Alexander was Macedonian, not Greek). Capable of conquering in a flash, but ultimately renounced and rebuked by future schoolteachers everywhere. “Be humble,” they would say. “Live within your means. Don’t overextend yourself.” But we are the masses, and we don’t listen to the wise words of a few. When we hit the street courts to emulate our favorite players, we don’t take a charge and scream “Big Baby!” Instead we chuck a fadeaway from the elbow, clinging to ephemeral hope while teetering on the precipice of utter disappointment. But then the shot goes in, and calamity turns to jubilation. Poor shot selection turns into greatness.

For three and a half quarters, this is Russell Westbrook. He meanders through the game, aimlessly fulfilling his every desire on a whim. For three and a half quarters, we indulge ourselves in the best part of Westrbook’s game. His blazing speed and unabashed invasion of the paint remind us of the beauty that basketball can be. There’s something alluring about a smooth crossover followed by a finger roll unperturbed by the rim. To the unenlightened, it’s merely large men gathered in a small space. But the basketball fan can extract meaning, and eloquence, and emotion, and a host of other seemingly unrelated adjectives. Westbrook is that answer. He’s at the heart of our desire.

The fourth quarter clock passes the six-minute mark. Possessions slow. Misses are that much more heart wrenching. A Nick Collison rebound causes Jeff Van Gundy to yelp in delight. But the beauty that we appreciate in Westbrook evolves from authoritative to transgressing. He is no longer conquering, but usurping. But only because Kevin Durant is a passive king. Just as we laud Westbrook for his confidence and ambition, we kneel at Durant and his storybook caricature. He’s dominant, yet unselfish. Industrious but respectful. Resourceful but loyal. Cruel on the hardwood, kind off of it. When it’s time to stamp down legacy, the greats momentarily reverse this trend. MJ and Kobe tap into something more. It is this same part of them that transcends basketball and pervades their general personalities. “I want to beat you, slaughter you, put you back together and hack you to pieces again.” But not only do they beat you, they let you know about it. And then step on you. And trash talk some more. And then they score another basket, jawing at their defender as he crawls back to the locker room. Durant may be a scoring champion with unparalleled levels of shot-making ability, but he’s missing that indefinable something else. That same something else we that we disparage if it’s not the last six minutes of the fourth quarter. I want to call it a killer instinct, but it’s not; everyone has the instinct to close out games. It’s just extra. Russell Westbrook has it, but is missing that elite basketball skill which Durant possesses.

This is how the God made the Thunder – unrelenting youthful enthusiasm, loose reigns to guide the stallions. Ultimately this protocol has led to a consistent yet scary narrative: build a big lead, don’t blow it at the end. During these playoffs, they have seen both sides of the coin. They have come back from huge deficits, riding the unpredictable wings of Westbrook and the hot hand of Durant. On a few occasions, they have finished off these comebacks. This is how narrative lives. It changes, transforms and evolves. When retold or reread, it is not the same. The miniscule changes throughout the chapters culminate with a slightly different ending. A missed free throw here, a made three there. That’s the difference with the Thunder. They never know whether a botched play in the 2^nd quarter will impact the final result. The Mavericks, meanwhile, don’t worry. Dirk will swoop in to clean up the mistakes. Keep him within striking range and the storybook ending will write itself. Until Durant throws Westbrook off the throne that is rightfully his, the Thunder will just beneath the cusp.