The NBA’s greatest epics have been built around a meteoric star crash landing in a small market, galvanizing the city around their greatness in hopes of delivering glory. Think LeBron James in Cleveland, Dirk Nowitzki in Dallas, Tim Duncan in San Antonio, Isiah Thomas in Detroit, Hakeem Olajuwon in Houston, Giannis Antetokounmpo in Milwaukee, and Bill Walton in Portland. Kevin Durant deserves to be on that list. But he would be the only one unable to bring a championship to the city that drafted him. Only James can relate to the acrimonious divorce both sides felt when he left in 2016.

Oklahoma City had no idea how good they had it. They immediately knew greatness when they were gifted the Supersonics franchise and Durant from Seattle in 2008. The following year, under the elite acumen of GM Sam Presti, they drafted Russell Westbrook and Serge Ibaka. The next year James Harden. Those four players formed one of the greatest young cores in NBA history. The Oklahoma City Thunder were projected to be a dynasty, with the only thing standing in their way being the maturity of their young superstars.

Then the dominos began to fall, first in the summer of 2011 when Presti declined to re-sign Harden, instead shipping him to the Houston Rockets. From that point on, Presti did his best to balance out his slite draft history with a series of terrible trades, free agent signings, and coaching hires. It culminated in Durant’s eighth season in OKC, mentally and physically tired of sharing the ball with Westbrook and brunt out carrying the load on offense. Durant left the franchise holding its ego in its hand as he bolted to form one of the best teams of all time in Golden State. 

Durant is facing a similar situation in Brooklyn with a mercurial point guard and a revolving door of coaching ineptitude. Durant is playing at the second-highest usage rate of his career at 32.5 but with a win-share percentage of .213. Durant is back to averaging 30 ppg for the first time in eight seasons. Still, it hasn’t translated to wins, as the Nets went 8-9 in the first 17 games after firing former head coach Steve Nash, as well as suspending Irving for sharing anti-Semitic propaganda on his social media.

Durant was so fed up with the circus the Nets have become that he issued a trade request this past summer. He retracted it after lengthy discussions with Brooklyn leadership, but the specter of him circling back to it has haunted this season’s poor start. If he does, there’s one narrative that could repair the villainous turn Durant has fought off and, at times, embraced since leaving OKC. When Durant told the team he wanted a trade mere months ago, Brooklyn found the trade market dried up with the kind of blockbuster offer they were looking for. To trade Durant would require a nuclear rebuild to the roster, making picks the most valuable return.

Only one team can offer this, and in more than one way, it feels like Oklahoma’s hoarding of draft capital over the last few years has led to such a moment. If Durant decides to leave Brooklyn, he should return to Oklahoma City, repairing his relationship with the basketball-crazy fan base and his image as a player who cannot win it all on his own. The Thunder’s roster, as currently constructed, could sacrifice two or three of their young core, let’s say, Chet Holmgren, Josh Giddey, Darius Bazley, and salary filler while maintaining considerable talent around Durant. If Durant could join a Thunder squad consisting of current MVP candidate Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, defensive ace Lu Dort, bench spark plug Tre Mann, improving two-way freak Aleksej Pokusevski, steady bench guys Jeremiah Robinson-Earl, Mike Muscala, Jalen Williams, and Jaylen Williams, the Thunder could be right back to where they were in the summer of 2011, stacked with talent and the best offensive player in the game. 

The Thunder would also have to part with most of the 15 first-round picks they’ve amassed over the last few seasons. Presti has clutched his pearls regarding these picks, refusing to include them to improve the roster in the short term. An SGA/Durant duo is the kind of two-man combination that can win a championship. SGA is the antithesis of Westbrook, and everything about his game and demeanor shows he would defer to Durant as the alpha on a team that would be nearly unstoppable with him as the second option. There are still questions over whether development coach Mark Daigneault is the right guy to coach a Durant-led team. But that’s where Presti has to show he’s evolved and be willing to replace Coach D with a respected name if Durant demands it.

Durant would get a chance to prove to the haters he can win a championship on a roster led mostly by his brilliance. The Warriors teams he won two rings with were already champs before he joined. Many have criticized him for quitting trying to win one the hard way and taking the easy way out in Golden State. Returning to OKC would be akin to James returning to Cleveland in 2016 after he left to team up with Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh with the Miami Heat. Durant would also get to repair his relationship with the Thunder fan base and front office, who he has gone back and forth since departing, blackening what was an example of small-town glory.

Most NBA observers outside of Oklahoma City, those not carrying water as Presti-apologists, can admit the Thunder royally fucked-up one of the most incredible young cores in the history of the NBA. But they are in the unique opportunity to have a second chance. Through the second phase of elite player evaluation, Presti has again amassed one of the best young cores in the NBA. He can continue on the path of the slow rebuild, eventually cashing in his picks for another star and building toward an eventual return to contention. Or he can throw the process into fifth gear and bring home the greatest player in franchise history, Durant. While the first option is obviously more prudent, NBA lore is built on those who make their own destiny. And as Presti has said himself, “scared money don’t make money.” We agree, Presti. Now bring Durant back home.

Almost a year ago, I contemplated the soul of Knicks head coach Tom Thibodeau, searching for answers to his most pressing coaching quandaries. Humans are prone to making connections, comparing and contrasting, to make sense of the chaos around us. In the world of the NBA, Thibodeau shares much of the gray matter that made Tony Soprano so fascinating as a case study on man’s ability to change.

That initial article posed more questions than answers. When I penned that first inquiry, almost a year ago, Thibodeau was early in what would be a down season. Especially when compared to the magical vibes and results of the 2020-21 season, which earned him Coach of the Year honors. In the first four games of this season, cracks revealed themselves in Thibodeau’s rigidity. He allowed the bench to ride runs, trusted Cam Reddish to finish games, and gave offensive control to Jalen Brunson. Julius Randle, the Christopher Moltisanti of Thibodeau’s crew, the guy you want to root for but who does everything he can to make you want to choke him out, had only six turnovers through five games. Randle was finding open teammates, limiting over-dribbling, and scoring in the flow of the offense. The Knicks were 3-1, and Knicks fans felt like the Soprano crew, hanging out in front of Satriale’s Pork Store, smoking cigars, reading the paper, and enjoying some well-earned persiflage.

Then came the back-to-back games with the Milwaukee Bucks and Cleveland Cavaliers, actual NBA talent, good teams with winning records, and multiple stars. The Knicks lost both handily. While neither game was close, Thibodeau returned to many of the pitfalls which made him the ire of Knicks fans last season. Most notably limiting Obi Toppin’s minutes to 17 and 15 minutes, respectively. Toppin shot 4-7 in both of those games. Thibodeau’s relationship with Toppin and Randle has been the nexus point to which much of his coaching issues have converged. The extended leash he allows Randle is tenfold the length of the one he extends to Toppin. Even casuals can recognize this. Thibodeau seems to get conned by Randle’s spurts of goodwill, especially when the power forward reverts to the toxic traits that make him the most polarizing player to ever wear a Knicks uniform.

“We’re soldiers. Soldiers don’t go to hell.” – Tony Soprano

So, a year later, where is Tony, I mean Tom, now? We don’t know if Thibodeau has his own Dr. Melfi, a voice of reason and accountability. The Knicks are notoriously private to the point of posturing. Even if he did, which one of his enablers would fill that role? Leon Rose? William “WorldWide” Wesley? Rick Brunson? He’s known all three for years. They’re basically his versions of Silvio Dante, Salvatore “Big Pussy” Bonpensiero, and Paulie Gualtieri, company men who enjoy the optics their friend brings as a coach. Thibodeau exudes confidence, leadership, and accountability, even when those traits are misguided and to a fault.

It’s also the fault of this current front office for its inability to draft/sign/trade/convince a bonafide first option to make MSG their home. Rose has provided Thibodeau with a dense, utility-packed roster full of variation and untapped potential. But it’s also held back by duplicity and positional rigidity. Randle is the best player, but Toppin holds the most promise. The bench is deep but rarely integrated with the starting five. Fournier is fine when hot from three but that’s rarely the case.

“More is lost by indecision than wrong decision.” – Tony Soprano

After the team’s most recent loss to the Atlanta Hawks, something shifted. Whereas the losses to the Cavs and Bucks felt rational in that the Knicks lost to clearly better teams, the Knicks’ 23-point squandered lead against the Hawks felt terminal. In the third quarter, they were outscored 32 to 10. That blown lead tied the team’s third-largest blown lead in over 30 seasons. Almost as bad was the loss to the Oklahoma City Thunder, to who they gave up 145 points. And yes, Julius Randle has been awful. He’s shot 46.7 percent from the field this season and 33.3 percent from three. Remember those mere six turnovers over the first four games? He’s now averaging more turnovers than assists. Yet, Thibodeau’s symbiotic addiction to Randle endures. Christopher Moltisanti was one of Tony’s biggest fears during The Sopranos. He was family but also the crime family’s most significant liability. His drinking, drug use, and unpredictability were thorns in Tony’s side. Randle fits this role for Thibodeau to a scary degree.

When the opportunity presented itself in one of the series’ final episodes, “Kennedy and Heidi,” Tony held Christopher’s nose after a car accident, suffocating his nephew to death and ending the threat he represented. To Tony, he was doing Christopher a favor, saving him from himself. And that’s perhaps the biggest difference between Tom and Tony. When Tony saw an out, he took it. When Tom looks up at the scoreboard to see another lost lead, his gut reaction tells him Randle is the answer.

“Sometimes it’s important to let them have the illusion of being in control.” — Jennifer Melfi

The first logical step in finding solutions to the Knicks’ current paradox is firing Thibodeau. Perhaps he is willing to change, we’ve seen increments. He’s embraced the three-point shot. He’s improved the Knicks’ defensive identity. He elicited, at times, the best basketball possible from Randle. But his coaching style has become extinct and his stubbornness borders on arrogance when he over-relies on the starters. He’s been enabled by his boss Rose, who has built a mediocre roster without a true first option. For every Knicks win, like their super fun revenge game against the Thunder on Monday, it feels like Thibodeau’s leash grows. While it was great to see Miles “Deuce” McBride finally dust off the cobwebs to play stifling defense on Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, one game doesn’t rectify Thibodeau’s lack of offensive creativity or typical nine-man rotation.

The Knicks are deep but Thibodeau rarely maximizes their full potential, outside of Isaiah Hartenstein and Immanuel Quickley. Toppin, Reddish, Sims, and McBride are treated like serfs by Thibodeau. What’s the point of being 12 deep when Quentin Grimes barely sees any time and Toppin stays glued to the bench, even when he has the best plus/minus some nights? Toppin holds the most potential of the young core but is buried behind Thibodeau’s biggest vice. Leon Rose has picked up high-value guys in Derrick Rose, Hartenstein, Reddish, and Jalen Brunson, but he’s whiffed when it comes to making a move to give the team the star it desperately needs.

Signing Brunson was a smart solution to the team’s two-decade dance with desolation at point guard. He’s been a blessing for a team filled with players needing initiation on offense and he’s been worth every penny of the 4-year, $104 million deal he was given. But the roster improvements should not have stopped there. Perhaps the cost of entry into the Donovan Mitchell sweepstakes was too high. Most Knicks fans did not want to give up more than two unprotected picks plus a collection of Barrett, Toppin, Quickley, and Quentin Grimes. But what about Dejounte Murray? The Knicks could easily have beaten out what the Hawks offered for a guard who almost averaged a triple-double last season. Since taking over the team, Rose has improved the roster via trade, free agency, and the Draft, providing Thibodeau with just enough to squeak out around 40 wins a year and make the playoffs once. But he has not built a team ready to compete at a high level, nor has he hired a coach capable of leading that level of a team to the promised land.

Firing Thibodeau isn’t the only move that needs to be made, but it’s the bare minimum. This Knicks roster is on the precipice of potential and runs counter to Thibodeau’s directive to win at all costs. To reach the young core’s full development, there will need to be a lot of trial and error disguised as losing. Thibodeau would rather be in a near-death coma than not play Rose, Fournier, and Randle. To reach mediocrity and beyond, this Knicks team needs the freedom to lose in order to learn. As it currently stands, the Knicks are languishing in one of the furthest rings of Dante’s Inferno.

“I find I have to be the sad clown; laughing on the outside, crying on the inside.” – Tony Soprano 

Where does that leave the team? Step one, fire Thibodeau and his entire coaching staff, save for Lead Assistant Johnnie Bryant. Hand the reins to Bryant and surround him with a mix of veteran and forward-thinking assistant coaches. Then do what’s needed to trade Randle while returning trade value. If that ends up as a collection of expiring deals, a first-round pick, and a young player, so be it. At this point, Randle should net a return similar to what the Knicks received for Kristaps Porziņģis from the Dallas Mavericks in 2017. Once Randle is gone, start Toppin at the power forward alongside Grimes or Reddish at the shooting guard spot, moving Fournier to the bench. Simple right?

To be fair, Rose has done much good in his short time at the helm. Thankfully, the Knicks are not straddled with a myriad of terrible salaries as in years past. They have a collection of tradable contracts, as well as one of the best young cores in the league. Through a series of shrewd moves, they’ve collected seven first-round picks over the next three seasons, although four of them are heavily protected. They have enough talent at almost every position to handle a trade that drains them of their depth while maintaining roster balance.

With all that being said, today, more than in any other decade, talent wins. The NBA champions of the last five years have had cumulative star talent in the starting line-up and bench, paired with an elite coach. The Knicks have an elite bench, and that’s it. The Knicks have no star, much less a superstar, and are saddled with a coach that is in a symbiotic relationship with both his best player and front-office boss. When Tony sits comfortably in the booth at Holsten’s diner with his family, with Journey on the jukebox, the momentum of the scene’s tension outpaces Tony’s casual browsing of the menu. By the time the screen cuts to black, and we are left in the dark and to our own thoughts, we can assume Tony has been killed. Who pulled the trigger is less important than why. The answer to that, is Tony’s own doing, by his refusal to change. Through a series of events, most if not all at his control, he chose a path that led him to that booth and the man in the Member’s Only jacket. When Thibodeau is eventually handed his pink slip by longtime friend and confident Rose, the why in his case will be just as easily answered.

The kicking rocks and bemoaning the gods are in the past now for the USMNT. They let two points slip against Wales, while the one they gained is certainly valuable. They’re still very much in the tournament, but the draw against Wales means that the game against England is no longer a free hit. Had they held onto their lead Monday, they could lose against England, beat Iran, and toddle off to the second round. Now merely beating Iran might not be enough, depending on what the other results are.

Had this England game been a “fuck it it’s free cake” event, Gregg Berhalter might have been tempted to let his team loose, try and attack England from jump street, see if they couldn’t catch them by surprise, and shrug off the quite possible thwacking that could result in as England romped through the space behind. Again, the U.S.’s hopes would have been pinned on the Iran game anyway.

And Berhalter may do that anyway, because it’s Berhalter and we can’t say for sure he won’t get a little too brave for his own good to serve his “principles.” Secondly, whatever other plan Gregg might come up with is dependent on the U.S. being defensively sound, and that’s awfully shaky ground indeed. If you had to count on the USMNT keeping a clean sheet above all else, what would your day drinking regimen look like? Maybe a glorious death in a 5-3 is better.

That said, the US’s one goal against Wales came when it could get out on the counter instead of intricate build-up through a packed defense, and most of the midfield and forward line is better conditioned to play on the break at speed than it is trying to unlock a low block in tight windows. So that will play well against the Three Lions. The idea of Pulisic, Weah, Reyna, and Musah getting time and grass to run into is tantalizing.

If this were the older version of England, the U.S. would at least know how exactly they attack. It’s Harry Kane dropping off the front line into midfield, staying out of sight for his opponent’s holding midfielder while drawing a central defender with him into the deep water and out of position, and then pinging balls either out wide to their wingbacks or over the top to their wide forwards.

But this is, supposedly, an unleashed England, who have switched to a back four and having just punted Iran into space by scoring six, they’re going to be feeling their oats. It’s hard to imagine manager Gareth Southgate deviating from Monday’s plan too much. What was so destructive was that England had so much variance to their attack. Sometimes it was Kane dropping deep, but in a 4-3-3, Mason Mount was at the head of the midfield and could take that spot. Or Jude Bellingham, released to do whatever he pleased by the security provided by Declan Rice, could pop up there with four runners ahead of him. Try to close that off and there was still the danger of Bukayo Saka and Raheem Sterling out wide, supported by Luke Shaw and Kieran Trippier at fullback who both know their way around the attacking third. And if Southgate really wanted to be impolite, he’d bring in Phil Foden for Mount and it’s an even bigger problem.

So what’s the solution? One may be to play more of a 4-2-3-1 instead of the 4-3-3 that Berhalter has used almost exclusively. Who joins Adams as a double-pivot is questionable. If Berhalter trusts Musah’s defensive instincts and effort, he can do it. If there’s any doubt or Musah’s fitness is a concern, bringing in Kellyn Acosta is probably the move. That would also give the US a plus-set piece taker, as Pulisic’s deliveries on Monday made Baby Jesus cry. Having two defensive midfielders would limit the space that Kane can drop into and/or provide more cover against England’s midfielders.

But you can’t beat England or just draw them by simply defending (unless you’re Scotland, who played a back five in the Euros, but that’s not really available to the USMNT). Again, assuming full fitness, Sergiño Dest and Antonee Robinson aren’t really built to be just Alamo their way through 90 minutes (or 107, as FIFA has decreed for this tournament). When the U.S. does get the ball, getting those two fullbacks forward will be a priority, as that would pin back England’s wide forwards too. It’s a balance, a push-and-pull over who gets to take advantage of the space behind. But if you want to score, risks need to be taken.

Getting the fullbacks forward at pace will help whoever starts out wide for the US to come inside and link. Staying out wide and throwing crosses into the box isn’t likely to provide much, as that’s what the England defense is built for (depending on who starts). If this is the spiffy new England that likes to get spicy, that means Declan Rice will be pretty much on his own as the holding midfielder. It’s not a role he can’t do, as he does it excellently, but the space will be on either side of him. Take up enough of it and it’ll keep Bellingham far from goal. This may be why the feeling has been that Gio Reyna was kept in reserve Monday so he can start Friday, whether in place of Weah and coming in from wide or at the head of midfield instead of McKennie. The latter gives the US someone in the middle that Pulisic and Weah or Aaronson can combine with, because it’s not really what McKennie does and the U.S. don’t really have a striker who does it either, despite whatever Jesus Ferreira’s claims may be.

Wherever the US decide to press, either up high or in a mid-block, they have to squeeze in and try to cut off England’s defense from feeding Bellingham or Mount or Foden or whoever. Force them out wide. Keeping numbers in the middle means more bodies that can try to create the turnovers and takeaways to spring counters and breaks. Bellingham still might beat you by dancing through three of your guys, but make him do so at least. And yes, England didn’t have much trouble creating from wide against Iran, but Iran were utter dogshit. If the US is planning on being similar dogshit, none of this matters anyway.

It’s far easier said than done, but the six goals against Iran has clouded the fact that England came into this tournament looking pretty ropey (though all Nations League games should be taken with a 10lb grain of salt given the circumstances). Hungary beat them twice. Germany put three on them in September. Get Stones and Maguire or Dier having to turn and run to cover space and there’s joy to be found. It’s just the other end that’s scary as fuck.

Michael Harris II had a great season for the Atlanta Braves. The centerfielder won National League Rookie of the year with a 135 OPS-plus and 19 home runs, and a 5.3 overall war. The Braves saw this coming and inked him to an eight-year, $72 million contract this summer.

Seems generous to offer a rookie a long-term deal a few months into a good season, but it really puts them in a sweet spot. His contract is, per the collective bargaining agreement, under their control for seven years. Harris wouldn’t be arbitration eligible until after his third season, unless he qualified as a “Super Two” player after his second. Also, the only significant money he has seen as a pro is his $550,000 rookie signing bonus in 2019, so of course, he would be satisfied with some millions in his pocket so quickly.

The problem with Harris, and many other players, is that they are bound to the team that drafted them for seven years. It leaves them no room to maximize their value so while Julio Rodríguez’s contract looks great, the deal favors the Seattle Mariners. They control all the options, and he has to meet all the MVP escalators to get all the money in a deal that can last through 2039.

The small Middle Eastern country — known for its poor human rights record — is the World Cup host, but did Qatar actually WANT it to begin with? Whichever government officials were responsible for bringing the world’s biggest sporting event to their country must’ve wanted it enough to take the initiative, but the enthusiasm surrounding the event from the locals feels non-existent.

The host nation had never qualified for a World Cup before, but got an automatic bid for holding the World Cup inside its borders, and had its first tournament game Sunday. With 12 years of controversy and anticipation leading up to this moment, with the world watching the lone game of the tournament’s opening day, Qatar fans were leaving at halftime.

I can’t think of any other country in the world whose fans would do that. Think back to 2014 and how passionate the Brazilian fans were. Now imagine if it was Brazil’s first time ever competing at the World Cup. Do you think supporters would be leaving just because the team was losing? No, the fans would probably still be in their seats long after the janitors finished sweeping the floors. These fans stayed and watched through tears when Germany beat Seleção Canarinho 7-1 in the semi-finals. There were plenty of reasons why Brazil shouldn’t have hosted the tournament either, but it was clear that many people wanted it.

Qatar is the first country to make its World Cup debut as the host nation since Italy in 1934. Ironically, Italy was the only host nation ever required to qualify. Not only did the Italians qualify, but the Azzuri won the whole thing.

Spoiler alert: Qatar isn’t going to win this World Cup. Hell, Qatar has no business playing in this tournament.

The team’s quality and the indifference from the fans both point to the fact that everyone already knew, that this is one of the last places that should host this event. How’s that for contributing to the discourse? Just wait until you hear how I think they got it. Money may have changed hands, though Qatar has denied allegations of bribery.

Bigoted government and terrible human rights record aside, it still doesn’t make any sense. The 2026 World Cup will take place in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, three countries that already have the infrastructure needed to host. No new stadiums are being built, and only one U.S. stadium (Arrowhead Stadium) will need to be upgraded. This should significantly cut down on the number of construction worker deaths, of which there were an estimated 6,500 in preparation for the tournament in Qatar.

To bribe your way into hosting the event, have thousands die building the stadiums, and then to almost empty those very stadiums during the game like you’re Texas A&M fans is absurdly disrespectful.

The opening ceremony featured every home video of the country’s princes playing soccer that they could find to show that they do in fact have a “soccer culture.” No one is happy the World Cup is there, and that apparently includes the people of Qatar. If the Arab nation didn’t actually want it, then it seems like it just bought it because it could.

Before the United States men’s national team plays its next game against the Three Lions on Friday, and in the next edition since Robert Green’s all-time mess-up, the first World Cup meeting between the two adversarial sides of the Boston Tea Party was made up of top-flight English men and part-time Americans.

Joe Gaetjens scored the game’s lone goal to give the Americans, none of whom played professional soccer, the win. It would be the biggest moment in the USMNT’s final appearance at the showcase until 1990.