From a brilliant new star to everyone s beating, why does the Thunder team s reputation reversal in two levels?

The rise of the Thunder this season and the collapse of public opinion comments can be regarded as a ironic modern sports culture anatomy class. When a young army stirs up the league structure with a dark horse, it not only touches on record rankings, but also the power structure and emotional undercurrents in the fan circle. The decline in Thunder’s reputation in 2025 is by no means accidental, but the result of multiple contradictions and resonance.

Referee dispute and "beneficiary" tag: The amplified original sin

Alexander (SGA)'s free throw issue has become the eyes of the Thunder's public opinion storm. Even if he only won four free throws in a certain game, public opinion will inertia accuse the referee of favoritism after the game, and even compare it with the controversy of peak Harden's "smashing" to trigger a collective rebound of Harden's fan group.

After the narrative of "referee beneficiary" has been repeatedly strengthened, selective blindness has been formed: the Thunder opponent's free throw advantage is ignored, and every time SGA stands on the free throw line, it is interpreted as "privileges". What's even more fatal is that US media and other platforms have released clips of controversial punishment, further solidifying prejudice and putting Thunder into a passive cycle of "self-proving innocence".

"Original Sin" in the Defensive Style: Dirty Action or Tactical Wisdom?

Dort's defensive actions and Caruso's "scrub-style defense" were labeled as "dirty" by opponent fans. Although the referee is relatively tolerant of the size of a small defender, once a negative impression is formed, it will spread like a flame. Especially when such defenses successfully restrict the opponent's stars (such as locking the core of a traffic team), its tactical value will be deliberately distorted into "winning without force". Elevating individual actions to the team's cultural level and eventually evolved into a collective trial of the Thunder's professional ethics.

Thunders topped the West this season +6 consecutive victories, defeating traffic teams such as the Lakers and Warriors, and directly contacting their fans' "playoff interests". When these teams were out early, the frustration of their fans quickly translated into a retaliatory bad review of the Thunder. The rise of Thunder essentially influences the cheese of the alliance's right to speak.

Linear defects and "pseudo-strong team" questioned: The series of high-end games against the Pacers exposed deadly shortcomings: insufficient forward height leads to rebounds losing control (G3 lost 12), and lack of inside offenses relying on jump shots. When Degnott admitted that he "didn't understand why free throws are abnormal" (G3 is only 76.7%), this honesty was interpreted as evidence of the coaching staff's incompetence. Critics use this to strengthen the narrative of "Thunder rely on referees rather than strength" and ignore the system value reflected in the fifth assists and first steals data in the league. The lineup's shortcomings were targeted in the playoffs, becoming the technical rationality basis for "resential comments backlash". The key to self-rescue of style evaluation - blocking everyone's mouth with the champion

Thunder's style evaluation dilemma is essentially a microcosm of the alienation of basketball culture: when competitive analysis gives way to the struggle of the fan team, and when technical discussions become emotional catharsis, a team without "original sin" can also be created. If you want to break the deadlock, Thunder can only fight back in the most classic way - win the championship. As coach Dagnot said: "Losing is the responsibility of the whole team" - then winning will eventually be the ultimate weapon to tear the bias. Until then, all arguments were meaningless noise.