Billy Donovan...

[Thunderhead]

And yes, I think Royce is guilty of making it up as he goes along.

[Balkman32]

Donovan fits in w/ Presti. I don't think there is a huge risk here. If they stay healthy they could be the best in the West.

From Royce Young's article on DT

One big area of difference: Brooks always resisted lineup data and advanced metrics to help aid decisions. Donovan has been one of the most forward-thinkers in college basketball in using advanced stats. The Thunder are a very data driven front office. That was always a disconnect with Brooks, and something Donovan will likely embrace.

Brooks ignoring this while having one of the worst producing starting lineups in the playoffs last season is hilarious. Everyone saw it but him.

I haven't even read his artical yet.

Perkins prob cost him his job. We needed perk to get through the west but, no need vs Miami. Brooks figured that out too late.

Looks like Donovan is the guy...

[bondom34]

Donovan fits in w/ Presti. I don't think there is a huge risk here. If they stay healthy they could be the best in the West.

From Royce Young's article on DT

One big area of difference: Brooks always resisted lineup data and advanced metrics to help aid decisions. Donovan has been one of the most forward-thinkers in college basketball in using advanced stats. The Thunder are a very data driven front office. That was always a disconnect with Brooks, and something Donovan will likely embrace.

Brooks ignoring this while having one of the worst producing starting lineups in the playoffs last season is hilarious. Everyone saw it but him.

And how does Royce know this ?

Since when did anyone inside the Thunder, start talking ?

Pure conjecture on Royce's part, which, if he did not do, he would have no readers.

Honestly if anyone knows its him and I don't think you need an inside source to know a coach's tendencies w/ analytics. After doing some reading and finding apparently KD is on board w/ this, I'm feeling much more optimistic. I'm still nervous, but I'll roll with this if Durant likes it.

[bondom34]

NewsOK article on him:

http://newsok.com/article/5414848

[spearsy23]

**** off, Presti.

To be clear, I don't like firing Brooks, but it's not that egregious of a decision. Firing Brooks to bring in your buddy is bulls**t, and supposedly setting that hiring up over the last year (meaning there is nothing Scott could have done to save his job) is even worse. I hope this works out, and I know Presti is a genius as a GM, but he's also a c*nt.

[HeartSouloma]

**** off, Presti.

Anyways, I'll stick to what I say regrading Donovan. I was hoping for Ettore Messina. I'll give Donovan a chance to prove himself, even though I have a bad feeling about it. I hope Presti add an experience coaching staff around Donovan. I still don't like Donovan as an ideal coach for this team. I was hoping for an experience coach. Donovan is SB 2.0 in my eyes.

[bwgood77]

This seems like an enormous risk. Brooks isn't equipped to do it but Donovan is? Donovan seems like a good college coach but it's going to be a huge adjustment going to the nba. The offensive philosophies are quite a bit different.

I don't know if he'd do it or if OKC would want him, but I think D'Antoni would be a good assistant to have to help with offensive philosophies. They have the personnel that is perfect to run that offense with stretch fours and shooters. Get that ball movement going, and Donovan focuses on D, it could work and be fun to watch.

But that might not be a popular opinion (since D'Antoni gets such a bad rap) and both sides might not want that.

From what I have researched,Donovan is better in offense than defense.
He likes motion offense and early offense concept where good post-up player who can run(hey Kanter) is essential.
http://coachingbetterbball.blogspot.com ... billy.html

He will be the new guy,but with good assistants who knows everything about NBA....I think he will be fine.
I mean,healthy Thunder team can win championship with even just solid coach.

Yeah, ultimately I don't know much about him either, but he's done well and won a couple of championships at Florida. Hope he is able to bring one to OKC.

[QPR]

2x championships, 4x finals four, 7x elite eight, 8x sweet 16 and 14 tournament appearances overall in 19 seasons, without the recruitment pulling power of the likes of Duke, Kentucky, UNC etc. It might not be a popular choice but let's not pretend it's just some no name who is Presti's buddy. He's one of the most successful college coaches of all time - it's funny that people would love Messina presumably due to his European success, but college success is a massive red flag.

It's true that of those who have gone straight from coaching in college to a HC role in the NBA haven't traditionally thrived, but I can't think of one who has taken over a contending roster either.

[QPR]

Should add that Pitino and Calipari are used as the two biggest examples of college coaches failing in the pros, but really neither were as bad as is made out. Pitino coached the Knicks to the playoffs in both years and an Atlantic crown in his second, while Calipari also made the playoffs with a pretty average Nets team in his second season.

[spearsy23]

2x championships, 4x finals four, 7x elite eight, 8x sweet 16 and 14 tournament appearances overall in 19 seasons, without the recruitment pulling power of the likes of Duke, Kentucky, UNC etc. It might not be a popular choice but let's not pretend it's just some no name who is Presti's buddy. He's one of the most successful college coaches of all time - it's funny that people would love Messina presumably due to his European success, but college success is a massive red flag.

It's true that of those who have gone straight from coaching in college to a HC role in the NBA haven't traditionally thrived, but I can't think of one who has taken over a contending roster either.

A lot of College coaching is about recruiting, it's pretty easy to piggyback off of Horford/Noah/Speights/Brewer/Green and win. Plus, if you're even a reasonably good coach in a major conference you should make the tournament 60+ percent of the time, and should win in round one more often than not. It's not like Donovan is a horrible coach or he wouldn't even be on the radar, but he's done nothing to suggest he should be the front runner for this job, especially if Presti wants a 'new NBA' offense. Last year the Gators were ranked 230+ in offense, it pretty much shows that he isn't some X's and O's genius, he'll have a successful offense the same way Brooks did, by letting players make plays. Donovan has a less successful resume than Messina, less experience than anyone, and his most redeeming quality is 'friends with Sam Presti.' It's blatantly obvious that nepotism is the reason he is being hired. That said, he can be the least qualified candidate and still do a good job. I hope he does, I just think it's f***ed the way he was hired.

[QPR]

Fair enough - can see I'm not going to change your opinion, just think it's pretty simplistic to say this is nepotism when he has a very impressive coaching record. The Gators have been one of the most efficient teams offensively in college basketball for a number of years, and have been top four defensively twice in the past three seasons.

Saying it's pretty easy to piggyback off Horford/Noah/Brewer/Speights etc is a bit simplistic too, given none were five star recruits out of HS.

[Thunderhead]

From Royce Young's article on DT




Brooks ignoring this while having one of the worst producing starting lineups in the playoffs last season is hilarious. Everyone saw it but him.

And how does Royce know this ?

Since when did anyone inside the Thunder, start talking ?

Pure conjecture on Royce's part, which, if he did not do, he would have no readers.

Honestly if anyone knows its him and I don't think you need an inside source to know a coach's tendencies w/ analytics. After doing some reading and finding apparently KD is on board w/ this, I'm feeling much more optimistic. I'm still nervous, but I'll roll with this if Durant likes it.

I think ya gotta be really deep into the inner workings of the team , to know this. And Presti's inner circle is tight, there's been no leaks from the Thunder about anything. Any inside view we get, always comes from people outside the organization who are dealing with Presti, or from agents.

If I have one problem with Royce, is that he talks like certain things are fact, when its pure conjecture on his part. Its a recurring thing with him. Gotta be careful, question his sources.

He also vascillates between being an opinion writer , or a columnist , and between being a reporter. But that is the problem with most bloggers. They need to be more clear, as to whether something is their opinion, or they are using a source.

[Podirk]

From Royce Young's article on DT




Brooks ignoring this while having one of the worst producing starting lineups in the playoffs last season is hilarious. Everyone saw it but him.

And how does Royce know this ?

Since when did anyone inside the Thunder, start talking ?

Pure conjecture on Royce's part, which, if he did not do, he would have no readers.

Honestly if anyone knows its him and I don't think you need an inside source to know a coach's tendencies w/ analytics. After doing some reading and finding apparently KD is on board w/ this, I'm feeling much more optimistic. I'm still nervous, but I'll roll with this if Durant likes it.

Yeah I'm pretty sure Brooks has said in several post game interviews that he doesn't read into advanced stats. It was obvious Brooks went with specific attributes at different positions and was consistent (which is good and bad).

[bondom34]

And how does Royce know this ?

Since when did anyone inside the Thunder, start talking ?

Pure conjecture on Royce's part, which, if he did not do, he would have no readers.

Honestly if anyone knows its him and I don't think you need an inside source to know a coach's tendencies w/ analytics. After doing some reading and finding apparently KD is on board w/ this, I'm feeling much more optimistic. I'm still nervous, but I'll roll with this if Durant likes it.

I think ya gotta be really deep into the inner workings of the team , to know this. And Presti's inner circle is tight, there's been no leaks from the Thunder about anything. Any inside view we get, always comes from people outside the organization who are dealing with Presti, or from agents.

If I have one problem with Royce, is that he talks like certain things are fact, when its pure conjecture on his part. Its a recurring thing with him. Gotta be careful, question his sources.

He also vascillates between being an opinion writer , or a columnist , and between being a reporter. But that is the problem with most bloggers. They need to be more clear, as to whether something is their opinion, or they are using a source.

I'd agree w/ that, but honestly I don't think it needs to be an insider to find out a coach's tendencies toward analytics. A lot of coaches are known for what they do or don't use statistically speaking w/o having knowledge inside the front office.

[Thundestruck]

Sorry, but you don't have to be in anyone's inner circle to know Brooks didn't take a lot of the analytics to heart. You don't trot out the lineups he did if you take that stuff into consideration.

[Thundestruck]

2x championships, 4x finals four, 7x elite eight, 8x sweet 16 and 14 tournament appearances overall in 19 seasons, without the recruitment pulling power of the likes of Duke, Kentucky, UNC etc. It might not be a popular choice but let's not pretend it's just some no name who is Presti's buddy. He's one of the most successful college coaches of all time - it's funny that people would love Messina presumably due to his European success, but college success is a massive red flag.

It's true that of those who have gone straight from coaching in college to a HC role in the NBA haven't traditionally thrived, but I can't think of one who has taken over a contending roster either.

A lot of College coaching is about recruiting, it's pretty easy to piggyback off of Horford/Noah/Speights/Brewer/Green and win. Plus, if you're even a reasonably good coach in a major conference you should make the tournament 60+ percent of the time, and should win in round one more often than not. It's not like Donovan is a horrible coach or he wouldn't even be on the radar, but he's done nothing to suggest he should be the front runner for this job, especially if Presti wants a 'new NBA' offense. Last year the Gators were ranked 230+ in offense, it pretty much shows that he isn't some X's and O's genius, he'll have a successful offense the same way Brooks did, by letting players make plays. Donovan has a less successful resume than Messina, less experience than anyone, and his most redeeming quality is 'friends with Sam Presti.' It's blatantly obvious that nepotism is the reason he is being hired. That said, he can be the least qualified candidate and still do a good job. I hope he does, I just think it's f***ed the way he was hired.

Honestly, it is okay to just be upset with hiring a college guy and not throw out a bunch of stuff you really don't know about it.

You threw out a bunch of names of guys that actually prove a strong point about Donovan. Not one guy you listed was a 5-star, can't miss NBA lock. They were good solid recruits (mostly 4 stars) and Donovan helped develop them into first round picks and NCAA Champions.

Speights was offered by Memphis, Miami and South Florida
Brewer was offered by Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt and W. Kentucky
Noah was ranked No. 75 in the country (solid but not a slam dunk)
Brewer was ranked No. 35

A lot of NBA teams have come calling for Donovan over the years so to act like he is just Sam's friend is silly. You might not like the hire and think the Thunder could have done better but to call this a nepotism to hire is pretty baseless. You think Presti is going to risk his job and future of the franchise to hire his friend? What about anything Presti has ever done makes you think that?

[KD35Brah]

Donovan fits in w/ Presti. I don't think there is a huge risk here. If they stay healthy they could be the best in the West.

From Royce Young's article on DT

One big area of difference: Brooks always resisted lineup data and advanced metrics to help aid decisions. Donovan has been one of the most forward-thinkers in college basketball in using advanced stats. The Thunder are a very data driven front office. That was always a disconnect with Brooks, and something Donovan will likely embrace.

Brooks ignoring this while having one of the worst producing starting lineups in the playoffs last season is hilarious. Everyone saw it but him.

And how does Royce know this ?

Since when did anyone inside the Thunder, start talking ?

Pure conjecture on Royce's part, which, if he did not do, he would have no readers.

Article on ESPN about teams who support the Sports Analytics movement somewhat confirms this too.


http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_ ... gs#nba-okl

The tight-lipped Thunder say little publicly about analytics, but their track record demonstrates they are, on the whole, believers. GM Sam Presti, a panelist at the inaugural MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference in 2007 while working in the San Antonio Spurs' front office, established an analytics department when he joined the then-Seattle SuperSonics later that year.

Presti's first analytics hire was Ben Alamar, who later worked for the Cleveland Cavaliers and is now director of production analytics at ESPN and the author of "Sports Analytics." These days, Oklahoma City employs Jesse Gould as director of basketball research and analysis with another analyst below him. Financial resources have been a limitation for the Thunder's analytics efforts, though they were one of the original four subscribers to SportVU camera tracking.

As well-versed as Presti is in analytics concepts, his draft picks have run the gamut statistically. Andre Roberson, a surprising first-round pick in 2013, was a statistical darling. But Presti has also been willing to draft players with limited statistical profiles, such as 2010 second-round pick Ryan Reid and 2014 first-rounder Josh Huestis.

In contrast to Presti, coach Scott Brooks does not rely on statistical concepts. In particular, Oklahoma City has been more willing to concede 3-point attempts on defense than other analytics believers. Still, Brooks recently told Bleacher Report, "I'm getting more into analytics -- I think it's important."

The Bleacher Report article they talking about:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2333 ... s-and-more

SB: That's where the eye test tells you, like, come on, pass the ball, but offensive numbers can help that, too. I'm getting more into analytics—I think it's important—but the only thing I always question is the plus-minus. Some [writers] say, "Why did you play this guy? He was a minus-15." I'm, like, "How did I know he was going to be a minus-15 until the game was over," or, "It's Kevin Durant and he had a bad game. What are you going to do, not play him?" I think [five-man] units are more important than one guy.

[Thunderhead]

Sorry, but you don't have to be in anyone's inner circle to know Brooks didn't take a lot of the analytics to heart. You don't trot out the lineups he did if you take that stuff into consideration.

Except moving Serge out beyond the 3P line ???

Nobody knows what went on between Presti and Brooks.

And you can not use this past season as an indication of anything, it was a cluster from the on set. Any plans to implement more offense, or what they did defensively, got lost in the shuffling of line-ups on almost a game to game basis.

I'm sorry, Royce makes a lot of statements, that are pure conjecture, believe them if you will, but I remain skeptical.

[Thunderhead]

From Royce Young's article on DT




Brooks ignoring this while having one of the worst producing starting lineups in the playoffs last season is hilarious. Everyone saw it but him.

And how does Royce know this ?

Since when did anyone inside the Thunder, start talking ?

Pure conjecture on Royce's part, which, if he did not do, he would have no readers.

Article on ESPN about teams who support the Sports Analytics movement somewhat confirms this too.


http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_ ... gs#nba-okl

The tight-lipped Thunder say little publicly about analytics, but their track record demonstrates they are, on the whole, believers. GM Sam Presti, a panelist at the inaugural MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference in 2007 while working in the San Antonio Spurs' front office, established an analytics department when he joined the then-Seattle SuperSonics later that year.

Presti's first analytics hire was Ben Alamar, who later worked for the Cleveland Cavaliers and is now director of production analytics at ESPN and the author of "Sports Analytics." These days, Oklahoma City employs Jesse Gould as director of basketball research and analysis with another analyst below him. Financial resources have been a limitation for the Thunder's analytics efforts, though they were one of the original four subscribers to SportVU camera tracking.

As well-versed as Presti is in analytics concepts, his draft picks have run the gamut statistically. Andre Roberson, a surprising first-round pick in 2013, was a statistical darling. But Presti has also been willing to draft players with limited statistical profiles, such as 2010 second-round pick Ryan Reid and 2014 first-rounder Josh Huestis.

In contrast to Presti, coach Scott Brooks does not rely on statistical concepts. In particular, Oklahoma City has been more willing to concede 3-point attempts on defense than other analytics believers. Still, Brooks recently told Bleacher Report, "I'm getting more into analytics -- I think it's important."

The Bleacher Report article they talking about:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2333 ... s-and-more

SB: That's where the eye test tells you, like, come on, pass the ball, but offensive numbers can help that, too. I'm getting more into analytics—I think it's important—but the only thing I always question is the plus-minus. Some [writers] say, "Why did you play this guy? He was a minus-15." I'm, like, "How did I know he was going to be a minus-15 until the game was over," or, "It's Kevin Durant and he had a bad game. What are you going to do, not play him?" I think [five-man] units are more important than one guy.

Direct quotes from Brooks, mean a lot to me.

And Presti says the +/- is bogus, he was quoted as saying plus/minus might have some value if you had three years of games .......... and I'm not gonna bother going to dig that quote out, it was sometime over this past season.

[Thundestruck]

I'm not using this past season as a basis for anything. You are right I have no clue what went on between Brooks and Presti. Maybe Brooks was the biggest analytic fiend in the world. However, if he was not much of that filtered to the court. For the part you don't have to be an insider.