As teams look ahead to the offseason, the Oklahoma City Thunder were mostly left out of that discussion as they fought tooth and nail to hoist the Larry O’Brien Championship Trophy after Sunday’s Game 7 win over the Indiana Pacers.
Of course, even champions need to keep the wheels moving to return next year to try win the whole damn thing.
Advertisement
So, what challenges lie ahead? How can a team that won it all improve for next season?
Let’s break down some key factors.
The Thunder won it all, but the future is always lurking. (Photo by Justin Ford/Getty Images)
(Justin Ford via Getty Images)
The status quo
The Thunder aren’t in a position where they have a major decision to make on a core player.
They have some team options to consider on Jaylin Williams and Ajay Mitchell, but since the Thunder are in control of those situations, they enter the 2025 offseason on solid footing in terms of maintaining their own players for next season.
That said, they do have some long-term decisions to make regarding two extensions, as both Jalen Williams and Chet Holmgren will be eligible for those this summer because it’s now been three years since they were both drafted.
Advertisement
While many assume both will receive maximum extensions, which would trigger next summer, it’s fair to wonder if the Thunder actually have some leeway on a possible Holmgren extension.
After all, the 7-foot-1 center has played in just 114 regular-season games over his career, meaning injury concerns remain present.
Furthermore, the 23-year-old hasn’t exactly been dominant this postseason. His 15 points, 8.7 rebounds and strong weakside defense is fine, but he’s struggled from behind the arc (29.2%), hasn’t been much of a playmaker (one assist per game), and has often been the obvious third option.
You’d think a player in a third-option role, playing off Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Williams, could produce better efficiency, especially as a finisher, but that simply hasn’t been the case.
Advertisement
Should the Thunder be worried about Holmgren? Probably not. He’s still young, he’s still enormously talented and his potential is immense.
But contract negotiations are just that for a reason. If the Thunder wish to present a case for why they’d feel more comfortable with Holmgren on an extension that’s worth less than the max, they absolutely have an argument.
What general manager Sam Presti and his team will have to navigate is the likelihood of Holmgren turning down a below-max extension and entering restricted free agency in 2026 — a path the Thunder shouldn’t be fearful of because they can match any offer he receives.
Advertisement
As for Williams, he just made the All-NBA and All-Star teams in the same year. He’s durable, switchable and can essentially play four positions. The same concerns simply don’t apply in his case.
Acquiring outside help
While the Thunder had one of the best defenses in the history of basketball this season, it’s woefully clear their offense could use another scorer. The team simply went through too many dry spells in the postseason.
Oklahoma City is closing in on the first apron if it uses the full non-tax MLE, but it could create a bit more space if it were to pivot off Ousmane Dieng, who holds a $6.6 million salary for next season.
Advertisement
The Thunder aren’t likely to get anything of significant value in return, as Dieng has yet to find a foothold in the league, but if a young team is willing to absorb his contract, perhaps into an exception, that should allow the Thunder to use their entire non-tax MLE and still have enough space under the first apron to have additional wiggle room before the 2026 trade deadline.
The player they should target with that money seems obvious, as their need for quality shooting is becoming increasingly dire.
Could they perhaps persuade Malik Beasley to sign up? The 28-year-old drained a whopping 319 3-pointers this season on 41.6% accuracy.
While he isn’t the same caliber of defender as Lu Dort or Alex Caruso, the Thunder can allow themselves to sacrifice a smidge of defense to optimize floor spacing.
Advertisement
Beasley has the ability to bend defenses just by moving around off the ball to an extent Caruso and Dort can’t, as defenders are often glued to him out of fear he shakes loose.
With Beasley, Gilgeous-Alexander, Williams and Holmgren on the floor, opposing defenses will constantly have to make decisions on whom to leave, where to help from, and be in constant awareness of where everyone is on the floor.
That is a taxing endeavor, and that’s the point if you’re the Thunder. Force defenses to make one mistake and penalize them for it.
A big swing?
The Thunder obviously have assets for a big move if they so desire. But that comes with more than one kind of risk.
Advertisement
If they were to spend a significant portion of their treasure chest on another All-Star player, future financial commitments begin to add up, and the organization would soon find itself over the second apron, which is basically roster flexibility prison.
Second-apron teams can’t aggregate contracts in a trade, they’re limited in sending out future picks, and, of course, they can’t take back a single dollar in any trade.
That’s the first hurdle.
Secondly, would another All-Star impact the flow of the main core in a negative way? More talent is always a good thing, as long as it’s applied the right way. Would Gilgeous-Alexander relinquish touches? Would Williams?
Advertisement
Thirdly, the Thunder would have to move off depth to make any deal make sense, and we’ve just seen how valuable depth has become in the NBA postseason.
Overall, it depends on the player. If it’s Giannis Antetokounmpo, you make a deal and try to figure things out from there, as the talent upgrade is simply too good to pass up.
The big picture
For now, the Thunder are in good shape financially and when it comes to trade assets. A year from now, the situation might look drastically different, in which case the organization will have a major decision to make.
Should the Thunder stick with the three-star model with SGA, Williams and Holmgren and likely give up depth as a direct result, or should they perhaps be willing to take calls on Holmgren if he’s disinclined to accept a deal that allows them to retain depth?
That’s a conversation for 12 months from now, but make no mistake, it’s lurking.
Read the full article here
