Are Dynasties Done In The NBA?

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Are Dynasties Done In The NBA?"

Hosted by Brian Windhorst and featuring ESPN insiders Tim Bontemps and Tim McMahon, this episode of "Brian Windhorst & The Hoop Collective" delves into the evolving landscape of NBA dynasties. Released on August 12, 2025, the discussion navigates through the historical context of dynasties, the current era of parity influenced by the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), and the strategic positioning of teams like the Oklahoma City Thunder.

---

1. Introduction: The Rise and Impact of NBA Dynasties

The episode opens with Brian Windhorst setting the stage by questioning the sustainability of NBA dynasties in the modern era. He traces the rise of the three-point shot to broader changes in the league, referencing Martin Manley’s influence on the game's evolution. (00:00)

2. Historical Context of NBA Dynasties

Windhorst provides a historical overview, highlighting how dynasties have been a cornerstone of the NBA's success. He references iconic eras led by legends such as Magic Johnson and Larry Bird in the 1980s, Shaquille O'Neal and Tim Duncan in the 2000s, and more recent dynasties featuring LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, and Stephen Curry. This historical dominance by select superstars contrasts sharply with today’s competitive parity. (04:06 – 05:33)

3. The Current Era of Parity in the NBA

Tim Bontemps and Tim McMahon explore the unprecedented level of parity in the NBA, noting that the last seven years have seen a record 11 different teams reach the Finals out of 14 possible participants. This trend marks the first time since the late 1970s, during the ABA-NBA merger, that such diversity in champions has been observed. (02:35 – 05:33)

Notable Quote:

Tim Bontemps (03:38): "The last six years in a row, the defending champion has not gotten out of the second round, let alone won the title."

4. The Role of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and Salary Cap

The discussion pivots to the influence of the CBA and salary cap changes on team dynamics and championship prospects. The current CBA aims to promote parity by limiting salary cap inflation and preventing teams from outspending rivals to build superteams. This framework encourages a more level playing field but also complicates the formation of sustained dynasties.

Notable Quote:

Brian Windhorst (17:57): "The next 11 years are locked in. I think Bontemps, maybe there's an opt-out after nine years or something."

5. Spotlight on the Oklahoma City Thunder: A Case Study

The Oklahoma City Thunder emerge as a focal point, exemplifying successful team management within the new CBA constraints. General Manager Sam Presti is lauded for his strategic trades and draft picks, positioning the Thunder as potential future champions despite the challenges posed by the CBA.

Key Points:

• The Thunder have secured a strong core with players like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Jalen Williams, backed by substantial draft assets.
• Historical missteps, such as the James Harden trade influenced by previous CBA terms, have shaped the Thunder’s current approach.
• Sam Presti emphasizes a fair system where dynasties can emerge based on merit rather than financial dominance. (09:06 – 24:19)

Notable Quotes:

Sam Presti (10:17): "We didn't set out to have the goal to have a different champion every year. And I'm not against dynasties so long as they are built within a fair system."

Brian Windhorst (24:19): "The Thunder are the first team that has built a championship team from scratch with the full understanding of what these rules are."

6. Comparative Analysis: Other Teams Navigating the Parity Era

The episode compares the Thunder’s strategies with those of other franchises:

• Los Angeles Lakers: Possess significant talent and market appeal but face challenges in maintaining a dynasty without overreaching financially.
• San Antonio Spurs: Historically stable but may struggle to replicate past successes due to a more conservative approach.
• Houston Rockets: Building around new acquisitions like Kevin Durant while leveraging their draft strategy.
• Philadelphia 76ers and Cleveland Cavaliers: Navigating salary constraints and roster flexibility under the CBA.

Notable Quote:

Tim McMahon (12:31): "Where's the dynasty? Who's leading the dynasty? You know, the Showtime Lakers dynasty was great for the league because it was a major market with one of the most dynamic personalities in the history league." (13:03)

7. The Business of the NBA: Ownership Perspectives

Windhorst and the hosts discuss how the league’s business model prioritizes both owner interests and competitive balance. They highlight that while dynasties can boost revenues and market engagement, the CBA’s design ensures that no single team can monopolize success through financial might alone.

Notable Quote:

Brian Windhorst (17:25): "This is sort of the new normal." (17:23)

8. Future Outlook: Can Dynasties Reemerge?

The consensus suggests that while the current CBA fosters a competitive environment, dynasties are not entirely extinct. Teams with exceptional management, strategic asset accumulation, and a bit of fortune—like the Thunder—could still establish dominant runs. The upcoming CBA negotiations and evolving television deals will further shape the landscape, potentially influencing the balance between parity and dynasty formation.

Notable Quotes:

Tim Bontemps (29:04): "The dispersion of talent that has already taken place because of the CBA is a factor in how this could go forward." (31:01)

Tim McMahon (33:25): "What you've seen is teams have to manage every dollar because there are hard choices that have to be made." (32:25)

9. Conclusion: The Fragile Balance Between Parity and Dominance

The episode concludes by emphasizing the delicate equilibrium the NBA maintains between competitive balance and the allure of dynastic teams. While the CBA has successfully diversified championship contenders, strategic foresight and adept management remain critical for any franchise aspiring to achieve sustained excellence.

Final Thoughts: Brian Windhorst urges listeners to monitor how teams like the Oklahoma City Thunder leverage their assets and navigate the CBA’s constraints, leaving the ultimate question open: "Are dynasties done in the NBA?" The answer remains uncertain, hinging on future negotiations and the league's ongoing commitment to maintaining a competitive yet financially sustainable environment.

---

For fans and followers of the NBA, this episode provides a comprehensive analysis of the shifting dynamics in the league, offering insights into how traditional powerhouses and emerging teams adapt to new challenges in pursuit of championship glory.

Transcript

[Brian Windhorst]

You've seen the headlines, heard the debates. The three point ball has created a monotonous rhythm to the game. Has the three pointer ruined basketball? And how did we get here? The rise of the three point shot can be partially traced to an eccentric Kansas genius named Martin Manley, whose story didn't turn out quite the way he imagined.

[Tim McMahon]

I decided I wanted to have one.

[Brian Windhorst]

Of the most organized goodbyes in history. 30 for 30 podcast presents Chasing Basketball Heaven. Available now wherever you get your podcasts. Hello and welcome to the Hoop Collective podcast. We talk about the NBA which we're doing in a pre recorded situation because it's August and not everybody's in position. So we appreciate your understanding. All right. Joining us from somewhere in Northern California. He can't be disclosed where he's at in case somebody may come try to get him. It's Tim Bontemps.

[Tim Bontemps]

Hello everybody.

[Brian Windhorst]

And joining us from Dallas, Texas is Ben McMahon.

[Tim McMahon]

Hey partners, thanks for disclosing where I am and I say come and get me.

[Brian Windhorst]

All right. So Bontemps, you have a story that came out early this week, I believe it was over the weekend about parody in the NBA and whether or not it is going to remain the way it has been or whether the current rules are going to continue to, to have us have a new champion every year. And the reason I liked this story is because there are two interviews contained in here that took place in the wake of the championship and while the transactions were going on, you know, while the draft was happening and free agency was happening and everything. And I don't know if everybody, you know, who was paying attention to the NBA at the time was paying attention to the things that Sam Presti, the president of the champion Thunder and what Adam Silver said in his board of governors meeting in Las Vegas at summer league about where the NBA is headed in this regard. And this is sort of the basis of what you built this story around. So with the point here being that we've had. Was it seven consecutive different champions.

[Tim Bontemps]

Yeah, the only, the only slight clarification I'll make to that is Adam talked to me, but he also said, he also said some things to. He also said similar things about it at the board of governors meeting and much apologized. No, I just, it's, it's just so. Just for clarification's sake.

[Tim McMahon]

But not, not only did did the commissioner speak to Bon Tims, but they are on first name basis.

[Brian Windhorst]

They are in first name basis.

[Tim Bontemps]

I mean he's, I would say the commission first name basis. Everybody on the pod but that's true. But yeah, so there's been, for the first. Only the second time in the history of the league, I guess, first time ever, there's been seven consecutive. And the last six years in a row, the defending champion has not gotten out of the second round, let alone won the title. And there's been 11 different participants in the finals out of 14 possible over the last seven years, which is also a record. And the only other period in the history of the league that's even comparable to that is the late 70s, from 1975 to 1980. And the one through line through both of those is that there was a Black Swan event in both of them. The late 70s was when the ABA and NBA merged. So you had a bunch of talent come into the league. And obviously the last several years have been impacted by the COVID pandemic and all of the various things that.

[Tim McMahon]

Impacted.

[Tim Bontemps]

The league, from the salary cap being flattened to three seasons being compressed into two years and everything else.

[Brian Windhorst]

And there was huge. Just keep in mind, before that, I think between 2007 and 2000 and 2020, LeBron or Kobe Bryant were in what, all but one NBA Finals, either one or the other.

[Tim Bontemps]

And I think from 2008 to. From 2008 to 20 or 2008 to 18, they were in all of them. In 2008 to 20, they were in all but 2019.

[Brian Windhorst]

Right. And then before that, you had this run of Shaquille o' Neal or Tim Duncan being in the Finals. They weren't always in the same conference, obviously, in some years they played each other in the playoffs, but there was this long run of one or the other of them. And then you go back even before that, and you look at the overlap of Larry Bird and Magic Johnson. And so there have been these. And even, obviously, Jordan. The history of the league has been the through line has been, you know, maybe not. You wouldn't necessarily say dynasties at all times, but where we've seen the same teams or at least the same players repeatedly getting their teams to the championship round, at least, or highly in competitive. It's been sort of the nature of the league. And then you can even go farther back. It was not necessarily as comparable to the, you know, the 60s and 70s when there were so many fewer teams. But obviously you had the Celtics, you know, Bill Russell, you know, winning 11 out of 13 years and things like this. So it has been. What's going on right now is the antithesis of the way the league has operated for the last 40, 50 years.

[Tim Bontemps]

Yeah. There's. There's believe. I believe. I just did some quick math in my head. I think from when the Celtics started winning titles and Lakers started winning titles in the 80s through 2018, when LeBron won, I'm pretty sure that one of Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, Isaiah Thomas, Hakeem Elijah won, Steph Curry, LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O', Neal, Tim Duncan won something like 37 of 39 titles. And the only two that were different were when the, the Garnett, Pierce Allen Celtics won one and when, man. And you were in the building for when Dirk won.

[Tim McMahon]

Well, and in both lows, in one case they beat Kobe, in another case to beat LeBron.

[Tim Bontemps]

You're talking about just a handful of people over two generations that basically dominated the title landscape.

[Brian Windhorst]

To your point, Obviously, we've had five different Finals MVPs over the last five years, as five different guys have. Have five different teams have won. Before that, we had six different people win the MVP over the previous 12 years.

[Tim Bontemps]

Right.

[Brian Windhorst]

Because you get Kobe racking them up, LeBron racking him up. Even Duran had to. Kawhi had to. The only two breaks in there, Kobe had to. Only two breaks in there were the sort of the one off Iguodala 1, which is still one of the more amazing ones, and Dirk. So, you know, not only were you, were you seeing the same guys, the same guys were winning the Finals MVP over and over and over. And that same truth goes back for the history of the award. Okay, sorry, McMahon, go ahead.

[Tim McMahon]

So basically what we're asking here in terms of like this, this trend of parody continuing, is Shea, Gildas, Alexander, you know, one of those guys? Is he one, you know, is he a Kobe? Is he a Jordan? Is he a LeBron? Is he a Steph, you know, is he in that level of historical company? And can the Thunder continue putting a championship caliber supporting cast around him? My answer would be yes on both counts. I mean, certainly the season that he just had stacks up with, you know, the best of the best in terms of history. You know, we've talked a lot about the challenges of the CBA with a Thunder, but again, they're going to have their top three guys.

[Tim Bontemps]

A lot of their role players are.

[Tim McMahon]

Locked up on very reasonable contracts that descend. They've got a ton of picks to backfill. I like their eyes. Now, I'm not sitting here saying the Thunder are going to rip off, you know, five of the next seven or anything like that, but if I would certainly bet on the Thunder winning multiple championships. They've already got one winning multiple championships over a seven year span. And then you talk about their challengers. You know, I think you have to look at Luke and the Lakers, not necessarily right now this season, but you know that type of talent with the Lakers having an opportunity to build around over the medium to long term, I like their odds and I think you've got to go down to San Antonio and look at the spurs chances to build around Wimby.

[Brian Windhorst]

All right, so bon temps, what did Presti and Silver say about this exact topic? Before you go on, I think the.

[Tim Bontemps]

Question here is even a little bit broader and more fundamental than our dynasties coming back to the league or not though all that is 100%. Well, you said McMahon's 100% accurate. I think the most important thing that the NBA has hinted at over the past 10 years and Adam said directly in this article is this quote. I believe the parody of opportunity is good for the league when more teams have a genuine chance of winning a championship. The competition on the court is more compelling and fans and more markets are engaged. We didn't set out to have the goal. We didn't set out with the goal to have a different champion every year. And I'm not, but I'm not against dynasties so long as they are built within a fair system. I say that because this current era of parity we are in is smack in the middle of this current cba, which we will talk about plenty on the pod and the things it has done to, you know, disrupt some of the ways teams do business. This CBA runs through the rest of this decade. When the new CBA is enacted at the end of this decade, it will almost certainly run through the end of this current new television contract.

[Brian Windhorst]

Right?

[Tim Bontemps]

The thing that is driving the entire league, it's the reason why guys by the end of it are going to be making $100 million a year and is the engine the whole league is built on, particularly with the RSNs and the local TV market stuff collapsing the way it has been. So I would say the question of the next five years and the question going into the CBA negotiations which will start a couple of years from now, is going to be about that point that Silver made.

[Tim McMahon]

More Hoop Collective Podcast after this.

[Unknown]

ESPN fantasy football is more than just a game. It's thousands of stories in the making. Like that one league that hasn't missed a draft since the 20th century. Or the one that decides their draft order by competing in a legit athletic combine. Or the league where if you come in last, you have to sit in a closet and assemble a 300 piece puzzle in the dark. Yeah, that stuff really actually happened. The football may be fantasy, but the stories are 100% real. So download the ESPN fantasy app, sign up and start your story today. Insights with IBM WatsonX.

This isn't just another ESPN fantasy football season. It's your shot at greatness. With a refreshed design, the ESPN Fantasy app is sharper than ever. So you can draft like a pro and dominate your league. And introducing Gridiron Gauntlet, a new game mode where the best compete to be crowned the number one fantasy football player of 2025. One app, one shot, one champion. Download the ESPN fantasy app and sign up to play ESPN fantasy football.

[Tim Bontemps]

And the thing that the NBA has been pushing towards under his leadership under the last couple of negotiations of these CPAs, is it better for the NBA that dynasties exist, or is it better for the NBA that the Larry o' Brien trophy is moving around and there's a different team winning it every year? And it seems like the league is much more open from a championship level standpoint than it's ever been in the past because we're coming off a decade where Steph and LeBron were in the finals every single year and the ratings were very high at certain points, especially with the warriors and Cav stuff.

[Brian Windhorst]

Right.

[Tim Bontemps]

And the ratings are not as high in this era. And there's a lot of reasons for that. I'm not saying one is necessarily better than the other, but when you're talking about the business of the league, I think that question is going to become a central part of these upcoming negotiations. If we still have teams rotating around or if the Thunder go on some run the next several years and they become the next, you know, warriors or Cavs or spurs or one of these teams that everybody gets locked in on.

[Tim McMahon]

Is it better if dynasties exist? I would say that depends. Where's the dynasty? Who's leading the dynasty? You know, the, the Showtime Lakers dynasty was great for the league because it was a major market with one of the most dynamic personalities in the history league. The Bulls dynasty was great for the league. You know, I don't know that the spurs dynasty was great for NBA business. A small market and very, you know, kind of vanilla personalities, very businesslike personalities. The Thunder would be more in that vein. But it's also, it's not necessarily, hey, what's best for the league and you know, what the CBA kind of is designed to do, it might not matter. The Thunder might be so well set up that it doesn't matter.

[Tim Bontemps]

Yep.

[Brian Windhorst]

Well, best for the league is a relative term. I'm making quote figures. Yeah. Because this is one thing that I think is, is fundamental but can easily be missed. Best for league business or best for the league's owners. A lot of times it's synonymous, but not always. So here's just the truth of the matter. Why, for example, why are there max contracts in the NBA? There are max contracts ultimately in the NBA because the players union agree to it. The, it was up to the owners. There would be, you know, hard salary cap and whatever. Why did the players usually agree to it? They agreed to it because there's more middle tier players than there are superstars and everybody's vote counts the same. So, you know, if, if you got a 14 man team and you go, hey guys, let's have a vote. Should we give our best player 95% of the cap and the rest of us split 5% or should he only get 35% and the rest of us split 65%? Who's, who's going to vote? Obviously the middle class has the bigger vote. So that's what's essentially happened. Can we have that vote on this podcast?

[Tim McMahon]

Go on.

[Brian Windhorst]

Listen. I think our, our, our compensation is all aligned for this podcast. All right. So the same situation applies to the owners when it comes to making the decisions on what's probably got priority in the CBA with the Lakers and the Knicks and the Bulls. Vote that the rules favor the big markets being able to build dynasties and hold them together. You're darn right they would. But they got three votes. Their three votes. And you throw on, throw in the Clippers and you want to throw in any other, you know, the warriors, you want to throw in the Nets, you know, whoever, you know, the Celtics, however you want to say it, the big markets are less than a third of the league. They are more than offset if Memphis, New Orleans, Charlotte, Oklahoma City, you know, Salt Lake, all can get together and just simply outvote them. Now, for years it didn't really matter because there were certain forces that they couldn't control, but now it does. And the reason that it does is because the TV money, the TV deal is so strong that they had the, that they knew that they were going to get this money. So the money is assured. If they were fighting for survival, if they were facing TV money coming, being halved instead of being two and a half or tripled, there would be a completely different discussion here. The, you know, you know, you couldn't assemble a core a coalition if you were a small market. You couldn't get, you know, 10 similar sized, small and mid sized markets together and sort of have a voting block. It would be like listen, we got to do what we ever got to do to get more money. And you know, I can't see the future. Maybe in a decade that will be the case. Maybe that there will be a problem with that and they'll be like listen, we got to make sure that the Lakers and the Knicks have star players. But that is not the way we're going because the next 11 years are locked in. I think Bottem's. Maybe there's an opt out after nine years or something.

[Tim Bontemps]

Yeah, it's through 2036. But that's why to me it's, it's about where the league is sitting going into these negotiations at the end of this decade because.

[Brian Windhorst]

Right, but, but, but we're not talking about the end of the decade. We're talking about more like is up the next couple years because that stuff's. The CBA ain't changing. The, the television rights deals are just beginning.

[Tim Bontemps]

Right.

[Brian Windhorst]

This is sort of the new normal.

[Tim Bontemps]

Well, I mean the next couple years are going to lead into those negotiations which are going to lead into all of that. It's just that this is all central to that. And to your point, I thought there was a, there was a pretty telling quote, I thought down in the story about exactly what you said. I was talking to somebody in the league about, you know, is this good or not? And they said if you mean is it good for the 30 owners who are Adam's bosses, then yes, because they all have a chance and every team gets a chance to win. But are you asking is it good for league revenues? I imagine it's better when there's a singularly great player leading identastic team, whether it's Bird, magic, Kobe, Shaq, LeBron, Steph. I would imagine that's better for business. And to your point, McMahon, the question with the Thunder will be right, they rip off the next two or three in a row and Shea becomes, you know, one of the, one of the, one of those kind of guys. What is that? Where does that leave Oklahoma City? And to go all the way back to your question, Brian, about what did Sam Presti have to say in his voluminous end of season press conference, which is always an interesting read. Yes, he was asked about the aprons and whether they would hinder his team or another team's ability to build a perennial championship contender under the new cba. And he said this quote There's a limited amount of experience the teams have with these new rules. We've only had a few that have been in the situation where the aprons are really impacting them. So I wouldn't be too quick to predetermine quote oh, this is the way things work. Which I would say from, you know, the Thunders perspective, they are looking at this as McMahon said, they have a million draft picks into the future. They have a young roster, they have their stars all signed to conference contracts. And even though they're going to start going into the tax, they're not going to be a repeater team until the end of the decade. So they have an extraordinarily long Runway, even if they get expensive, to still have this team in large part together before they have to make any kind of difficult decisions about what they need to do roster wise.

[Tim McMahon]

More Hoop Collective podcast after this.

[Brian Windhorst]

Thunder are a fascinating thing here. So just allow me a bit of nuance. Twice in the past, big, giant, huge league, things that happened slam the Thunder in the gut. Okay? One was a collective bargaining agreement coming out of the lockout in 20, 2012 or 2011, where famously they traded, ended up trading James Harden. And one of the reasons why they traded James Harden, and I've told this story before, and I don't want to go over old ground, was that the league actually changed Kevin Durant's contract. Kevin Durant had signed a contract. The Thunder thought they knew what it was. And when they got to implementing the new rules, they realized that there was a few players who were sort of stuck in no man's land where the new rules didn't fit the current contract. And so the league had a problem with Durant's contract. He was making less money than he should have been had he just waited and he was sort of being unfairly penalized. So the league just stepped in and gave Durant an extra roughly $3 million a year. Now today, $3 million a year is less than, you know, less than 2% of the cap. But back then it was like, what, bon temps? I think the cap was about, about.

[Tim Bontemps]

60 million, was 5% of the cap. I would, I would say that the second, the second thing is the much bigger.

[Brian Windhorst]

Okay, just let me get my Runway. So the, the hardened trade was a, was a big thing. Had a lot of thorny parts of it.

[Tim McMahon]

Yeah, the Thunder made a lot of mistakes.

[Tim Bontemps]

They made a mistake on the hard.

[Brian Windhorst]

But the Thunder felt that they were wronged to the point where they were pounding the table and that they were wronged. And later on the league agreed with them and actually gave them the money back that they had added to Durant's contract. They said here, here's the money back. But of course it didn't matter because they already made a decision based on their luxury tax with hardin. That was 1, 2. And this is again old trod ground. But I want just to determine, to give you the frame of reference of the Oklahoma City Thunder in the course of this big picture, when the, when the league decides to make the new collect the new television deal back in 2015 and they get this enormous tripling of the salary cap and all of a sudden the cap was going to explode in one year. It was just going to come in out of nowhere. And they, and they didn't have a mechanism to sort of smooth it in. And all of a sudden we have what is known as the cap spike. Adam Silver has the famous quote, well, this is going to have some unintended consequences. And you have a team like the warriors, who are a 70 win team that all of a sudden ends up with enough cap, with enough cap space to sign Kevin Durant. And the Thunder are kneecapped by that decision. So they exist in a world and I mean the league could present a case where there are other teams impacted or whatever, but the Thunder exists in a world where they believe twice they have had to have teams that they thought could win championships broken up by big, giant, overarching league decisions. Okay? So now partially through good management by the Thunder and partially due to fortune, and what I say the fortune is, is that they were starting a rebuild at the beginning of a new CBA with a bunch of different rules. If they were in the middle of another run, it would affected them differently.

[Tim Bontemps]

But this time I would just point out they started, they started the rebuild in the middle of the last cba.

[Brian Windhorst]

I understand, but as they put this team together, they had a full understanding of what the rules were. And so they in essence were able to get a bit of fortune after having the karma of big over things happening. So the Thunder are the first team that has built a championship team from scratch with the full understanding of what these rules are. And so while Presti is saying on the record here, let's not predetermine what's going to happen. And I do think that is sage advice that he is certainly speaking of somebody who knows how fragile things are. And the first thing you can do in the NBA to get yourself in trouble is making assumptions, especially with like oh, this team's going to be great for three months or three years.

[Tim Bontemps]

There's also not a person in the league who has studied the CBA more than Sam Presti. And all of these in part because of everything Brian just said before.

[Brian Windhorst]

So the Thunder. I don't know if anybody would read this book other than Oklahoma City or people like who take Bobby Marks summer school class, but the Thunder are in the middle of this arc of league changes and how they've had huge differences and battle scarred as they are from what happened, they are now positioned which makes them somewhat a remarkable test case of what Presti is discussing.

[Tim McMahon]

Well, and I would argue, I would argue that their biggest fortune was benefiting from ripples that they didn't create to where they were positioned to trade the rights to a reigning Finals MVP without ever having Kawhi Leonard on their roster. They didn't get the haul they got from the Clippers just because they were trading Paul George who was an all NBA player who was I believe third in MVP voting at the time. They got that type of haul because the delivery of Paul George sealed the deal with Kawhi Leonard. And even saying all that people thought Shea Gilgis Alexander was going to be a very good player. He was coming off a second team all rookie campaign as a late lottery pick.

[Brian Windhorst]

Well again I will say as I pointed out a couple of weeks ago when they won the championship the night that the trades that the trade happened and Kawhi committed to the Clippers. In Woj's new story, Shay's name was in the fourth paragraph. And that's not a shot at Woj, that's a shot at where he was thought of in that trade.

[Tim McMahon]

It's not a shot at all. It's a credit to Shay and to the Thunder franchise coaching staff, etc. That this guy has gotten better and better and better and better to the point where he just had one of the best seasons by a guard in recent NBA history and is just entering his prime. Also listen, when they got that picks package it was like oh my God, like that is a massive haul of picks. Nobody at the time anticipated that one of those picks very early in the process would be a lottery pick. And even when it landed at 12 nobody. You don't pick 12th thinking you're going to get a guy who in his third season is a all NBA wing, who is a dynamic playmaker on both ends of the floor and can be the second best player on a Championship team. So they were forced.

[Brian Windhorst]

Jalen Williams, just in case he's right.

[Tim McMahon]

They were fortunate with the situation.

[Brian Windhorst]

They, they had to, they also had to draft well. I mean, yeah.

[Tim McMahon]

And then they've been fortunate. Like they, there was some, some luck involved on just how awesome Shea and Jalen Williams have gotten so quickly. But they're set up damn well for the future with those guys and all those picks to come. And there's that, you know, you got to kind of trace back. They still got a bunch of picks because they keep just pushing them back and parlaying it for higher swings at upside down the road.

[Tim Bontemps]

You always need luck to win. But the, the current system that the NBA has put in place is supposed to reward teams that are managed well. And the Thunder are in the position they are in because they have one of the best general managers in the league who has done a remarkable job going back to that trade and building this roster out. And they are now well positioned for the next several years. And that what this, what this whole CBA was about from the beginning was to Adam's point, having parity of opportunity across the league and for not allowing teams to be able to spend their way out of mistakes. And if you make mistakes, it's going to be costly. And that's from all the rules of the second apron stuff to not being able to add extra players, the draft picks being frozen, to the amount of money it costs like that. We've talked a ton about having to value every dollar that you spend in negotiations and that some teams have done it very well and some teams have not. And we will see over the next few years what the ripple effects of that are. And we've already seen some of it already. Just look at the Michael Porter and Cam Johnson trade. Those are two fairly even players who were traded for each other with an unprotected first round pick because Denver needed to save a ton of money, in part because of negotiations they'd made in the past where they'd spend too much on a bunch of guys, they had to pay more guys in the future. They ran out of money, so they had to make a move like that. That's the kind of stuff that this CBA has created. And if you're a team like the Thunder, that the goal is to be able to take advantage of that. And that's why they're sitting in the position they're in now and why it's going to be fascinating to see if they can buck this trend and get back to the Finals and win next year.

[Brian Windhorst]

And I will say this. If you look at the teams that are rising, so obviously the Thunder have risen. You look at the Rockets, who by the way, the Christmas Day games became public in the last couple of days. How about the Rockets getting centerpiece Christmas Day?

[Tim McMahon]

Hey, how about the Rockets getting the visitor slot for ring night in Oklahoma City while Kevin Durant makes his debut, right?

[Brian Windhorst]

So the Rockets get some major, some major, you know, major marquee games. And if you look at the Rockets and the Thunder, their builds are somewhat similar in that they began their rebuilds by trading away multiple star players on a previous contending team that weren't working. And they both traded the same player, in fact Russell Westbrook at different times. And they both, while they benefited from trade, you know, the Thunder obviously benefited from trading for Shake Gildas Alexander and now the Rockets have traded for Kevin Durant. The primary way they've been built is through the draft and you know, those are the teams that are at the centerpiece. And this is something else you point out and that's if you're looking at the spurs potential rise. And the spurs are got some marquee games coming too. It's also similar because they're a team that obviously has drafted back to back rookies of the year but traded for de' Aaron Fox, a guy that they hope has the same type of impact. The big trades that the Thunder and the Rockets made. But bottemps you point out in this story about the possibility of parity is that the dispersion of talent that has already taken place because of the CBA is a factor in how this could go forward. The clustering of stars has been getting pried apart already.

[Tim Bontemps]

Yeah, it's just, it's, it would force teams to have to make decisions on their spending and you just can't. You know, they didn't want a scenario where you could have the warriors and the Clippers and some of these very big market teams just spend into oblivion and not have to have any worries about the ramifications of that. And so you know, we've already seen, you know I, I think when you're, I think rarely if ever going to see is a team lose a star or superstar player because of financial stuff because those are the hardest guys to get still. But what you are going to see are the depth pieces move around. You're going to see the Michael Porter, Cam Johnson, Chris. That's for think it's a Drew holiday going from the leaving the Celtics because of money. Al Horford and Luke Cornett leaving the Celtics in large part because Paul George. Paul George, right. Paul George not being resigned by the Clippers. You know, they, that was obviously a bet on flexibility and optionality going forward. And Paul George is a very good player, but the Clippers did not want to be locked into that deal with him. And if you just look at that divergent pass of the Clippers and the Sixers over the past year, where the Clippers have built out a very deep, albeit older roster with optionality going forward and a ton of cap space in 2027, when a bunch of teams, a bunch of big name players could be free agents, could be in quotes because we've seen most of those guys extend in the past. And then the Sixers, who are locked into over $100 million a year in Paul George and Joel Embiid, and it's unclear when or if they'll be able to play. That's. Those are sort of the. That, that's sort of a perfect test case of what the league set up with this cba. And even a team like the Cavs, with all the money the Cavs have, they couldn't afford to keep Ty Jerome. I know the Cavs are in a small market, but Dan Gilbert's one of the richest owners in the league. He's never had any problems spending money, but they even hit a limit at some point. And that, that's really what this whole thing has set up is that you have to again, it goes back to teams have to manage every dollar because there are hard choices that have to be made. And you know, there are downstream impacts of that. Whether you decide to go all in with the roster and deal with the ramifications of that, or you do what the Clippers did and you live to fight another day and keep your options open for stuff down the road.

[Tim McMahon]

And for the Thunder, the hard choices are going to be Lou Dort, Isaiah Hartenstein, you know, maybe Case and Wallace. It'll be those kind of guys because the choices have been made on Shea on J Dub.

[Brian Windhorst]

I would answer what you're saying, which it that's conventional wisdom in the summer of 25. But let's listen to what Sam Presti says and not not predetermine that probably that's what's going to be the case. But.

[Tim McMahon]

Right.

[Brian Windhorst]

You know, we'll see what happens. Yeah. All right. Well, it's an interesting story, especially for August Reading. Thank you for breaking it down here. Thank you to Bontemps. I just thanked him. Why I thank him again, I wouldn't know. Thank you to McMahon. Thank you to Jackson, our producer. Thanks for sticking with us through the summer. And we'll talk to you later this week.

[Tim McMahon]

Adios, amigos.