Will this Thunder era be different?

Good morning. As the NBA Finals begin, we look at whether Oklahoma City is capable this time of establishing a dynasty with their young core. Plus: Mat Ishbia says now he's taking control. Let's basketball.

The rise of the Oklahoma City Thunder in the late 2000s and early 2010s remains vivid in my memory. It was so visual and captivating, really starting midway into the 2008-09 season, that first season after the relocation from Seattle, Russell Westbrook's rookie year and Kevin Durant's second. Durant's rookie year efficiency deficit disappeared – he had an eFG of 45% as a rookie and some smart analysts were raising red flags – and Westbrook, whose efficiency deficit never really went away, established himself as a holy terror in the open floor. Those Thunder were clearly the most interesting awful team of the time. The ebullient new home crowd and lingering national disgust over the Seattle screwjob helped with the intrigue. James Harden and Serge Ibaka helped some more the next season as the dramatic come-up hit: the captivating 23-win team in '08-09 became a 50-win squad everyone was gawking at in '09-10.

At the time, of course, we appeared to be on the precipice of an era of Thunder domination.

Things happened. The Thunder very well in the grand scheme: the team won 50+ games (or its lockout-induced equivalent) in six of seven seasons. They won 10 playoff series in seven years. That's pretty good for a team full of players just entering their prime. But the run included just one NBA Finals appearance and no championships. Durant left at the end of the run, and the Thunder pivoted twice to get to the present. This story is now well-worn.

The question is what that fell short in the first rise of the Thunder also risks derailing the second rise of the Thunder.