New Head Coach?

Moderators: Andre Roberstan, ThunderBolt

Stick with Billy or Go a new direction?

Poll ended at Wed Aug 5, 2020 6:14 am

Stick with Billy
3
43%
New Head Coach
4
57%
 
Total votes: 7

User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#81 » by bondom34 » Sun Aug 2, 2020 6:43 pm

And people who hang improvement of 30 year olds on his head and say he outcoached pop are quite a cheeky bunch themselves.

Its not irrational hate. I like the guy. He's not a great NBA coach. The weird attachment of Thunder fans toward mediocre role players and a bad coach I can't understand. And this:

Look, I've defended, or at least offered a different perspective on a lot of your opinions, and you have done the same, but you refuse to acknowledge my defense of Donovan or the circumstances he was operating within. It's easy to say he couldn't win it with 2 MVPs. It's harder to break down the why. And again, to see losing to a 73-win team as some kind of coaching failure is beyond me. To knock Donovan because of a single tweet by Durant when all other evidence points to the fact that Donovan is well-liked by players, is also beyond me.


Its not the 73 win team. Its that we saw the same faults in the Thunder as that were there under the guy they fired him for. Its not about a tweet by Durant (entirely), or a loss to Golden State. Though how many coaches are ever called out by a player anywhere? Its about looking objectively at the data we've got and seeing the offense remains the same, the passing remains the same, the development of players didn't improve, and the flaws stayed the same as they were before.

They still have a stagnant offense with poor shot quality, and I'm not convinced this team's future is terribly bright until something legitimately changes around SGA because right now it looks like he's it. And Donovan hasn't shown the ability to get anywhere higher. If you're giving significant credit for Shai, cool. I hope you admit Monty Williams is a great coach, so if he's in the same tier as Williams where's that? How about Gentry? Or Pierce in Atlanta? Seems the people saying the coach only gets blame and no credit are only willing to credit him without blame.

So far every point for him has been entirely debunked on a factual basis and every point for him has been some nebulous thing about players like Paul George or Abdel Nader having a career year (when Nader has just now shown he's a borderline NBA player). If you're going to try to put something on him, at least work with rational points. This is like the weird hope for Bazley being better than Shai, or Ferguson's hype, or Dort's hype, or any number of middling role players getting hype because for some reason there's an emotional attachment.

Oh and FTR I'm glad at least everyone can admit Durant was an issue. I know the apologists were out in force trying to shift blame there for a while too. Oh and for the love of all that's good the people saying this think Kerr didn't do anything in Golden State when we saw their entire culture and system change in a single season to create one of the best offenses ever.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#82 » by getrichordie » Sun Aug 2, 2020 6:52 pm

And we still aren't acknowledging that more passes doesn't equate to better offense. Where's the evidence?

The development of player's not improving is not factual. That's an opinion.

Your "debunking" is basically your opinion of why this or that happened. Basically, if it favor's Donovan, it can't be true.

And what's wrong with pointing to the fact that George had his best year under Donovan? That should be a notch in Donovan's belt, yet you find a way to not give him any credit.

And yes, let's critique Donovan for not doing better offensively when we had bad spacing. What is moving the ball going to do when you are passing it to guys who are inconsistent shooters or just plain bad? If you want to criticize Donovan for not getting through to Westbrook, fine, but many feel that few coaches could get through to him...
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#83 » by bondom34 » Sun Aug 2, 2020 6:55 pm

getrichordie wrote:And we still aren't acknowledging that more passes doesn't equate to better offense. Where's the evidence?

The development of player's not improving is not factual. That's an opinion.

Your "debunking" is basically your opinion of why this or that happened. Basically, if it favor's Donovan, it can't be true.

And what's wrong with pointing to the fact that George had his best year under Donovan? That should be a notch in Donovan's belt, yet you find a way to not give him any credit.

It doesn't. But that was the actual critique of the last coach, caused playoff losses, and part of why he was let go.

And no, player improvement is a thing that happens. Zach Lavine improved under Jim Boylen. So Boylen is a good coach now?

And no, Donovan isn't always wrong. I've not said that. He's a below average NBA coach and has flaws.

And George having his best season wasn't because of Donovan, thats the whole issue lol. Durant had his best season under Brooks, thats not credit to Brooks. Do people not understand an age curve? You don't get credit for players coming into their prime while you coach.

Image

Edit:

And yes, let's critique Donovan for not doing better offensively when we had bad spacing. What is moving the ball going to do when you are passing it to guys who are inconsistent shooters or just plain bad? If you want to criticize Donovan for not getting through to Westbrook, fine, but many feel that few coaches could get through to him...


Well it took all of half a season, and surrounded with shooting someone did. Its not about Westbrook, its Donovan. And they're shooting nearly the same for 3 this year as last, and not shooting many 3s. They're 4th to last in 3 pointers per 100.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#84 » by bondom34 » Sun Aug 2, 2020 7:03 pm

Just so I know, if he can't be responsible for the offense, the rotations, the passing, the shot profile, lack of development of young role players (note: Mo Wagner, Thomas Bryant, Isaac Bonga all look useful), player criticism of him, or that players who have left have been willing to make these changes what is he doing? Because seems like a few people are just saying any of these don't matter and if that's the case great but I'd love to have a job where I'm not responsible for anything.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#85 » by getrichordie » Sun Aug 2, 2020 7:09 pm

And the Boylen - LaVine **** is a terrible example. LaVine was finally healthy, and got back to his normal self. Chicago brought him into be the guy. Pre-Boylen his USG% went up and he was already a good shooter. The only thing that has changed under Boylen for LaVine is he has increased his volume of 3s. You could say that Boylen does deserve some credit for pushing LaVine to ramp up his 3-ball volume.

Of course, people understand an age curve. So when does a coach get credit for a player playing really well under him? Is it always the age curve? If it is, then why do some players stagnate while others get better? How much of that is a credit to the player and how much of that is a credit to the coach putting him in the right position or ironing out some wrinkles?
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#86 » by getrichordie » Sun Aug 2, 2020 7:12 pm

Dort, Adams, Bazley, Grant, Nader, Diallo, all look useful.
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#87 » by bondom34 » Sun Aug 2, 2020 7:17 pm

getrichordie wrote:And the Boylen - LaVine **** is a terrible example. LaVine was finally healthy, and got back to his normal self. Chicago brought him into be the guy. Pre-Boylen his USG% went up and he was already a good shooter. The only thing that has changed under Boylen for LaVine is he has increased his volume of 3s. You could say that Boylen does deserve some credit for pushing LaVine to ramp up his 3-ball volume.

Of course, people understand an age curve. So when does a coach get credit for a player playing really well under him? Is it always the age curve? If it is, then why do some players stagnate while others get better? How much of that is a credit to the player and how much of that is a credit to the coach putting him in the right position or ironing out some wrinkles?

Oh.....so like how Paul George finally was healthy after he snapped a leg in half.

A coach gets credit if its a consistent theme with guys. Nader going from being almost out of the NBA to being a 15th man isn't really notable. PG coming back from injury isn't a coaching thing. Schroder still can't run an offense and struggles terribly when he's not with CP. Shai's been good, Dort's been good, other than that we've seen a few guys show flashes and burn out.

And Boylen is probably the worst coach in the NBA. And by all accounts should be fired.

I'll leave a link to Hollinger/Duncan. They have him at like 17th iirc. I'd probably have him a hair lower but its close enough. There are some worse (Boylen, Saunders, Walton are 3 quick ones that come to mind but they're just the bottom of the bottom) but they could do better.

https://pca.st/episode/2ebdb805-270d-4046-98cf-423170126618?t=792.0

Edit and sigh:

Dort, Adams, Bazley, Grant, Nader, Diallo, all look useful.


Adams looked useful before. Grant agree. Nader and Diallo should never see meaningful NBA minutes ever. They're dreadful. Dort's shown some things, Bazley I'm not terribly high on.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#88 » by getrichordie » Mon Aug 3, 2020 12:21 am

So after listening to Duncan & Hollinger...

Hollinger pretty much tied Donovan's ranking to Westbrook.

"I think he was very much hamstrung by his personnel — both the total lack of shooting and Russell Westbrook being enabled by the organization to do whatever the hell he wanted to."

"I think [Donovan] has a good understanding of what you should be doing or trying to do, and I think, freed from Westbrook, I've moved him up a little bit then where I would have had him before, because I think there's only so much you could've done with Russell Westbrook and a bunch of guys who can't shoot in OKC."

"I thought Billy coached a really nice series in 2016 against the Spurs and the Warriors. I do agree he got out-coached by Quin Snyder and Terry Stotts these past couple of years."

You could also make the case that Donovan was hamstrung w/ Anthony against the Jazz and Blazers. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Presti made it a priority to make sure that Anthony was treated really well as he is big on making player's happy. It also wouldn't surprise me if the organization as a whole was worried about bringing Anthony off the bench due to his pre-season comments and in an attempt to not ignite a distraction from a team that was chasing a championship. Both are plausible arguments.

I think we agree that Anthony would've been better off the bench. It's so easy to see. Why didn't Donovan do it? Those are the only possible things I could think of that prevented him from bringing him off the bench. Presti deserves a lot of blame here as well. Anthony wasn't a good fit at all.
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
QPR
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,842
And1: 2,302
Joined: Mar 02, 2011

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#89 » by QPR » Mon Aug 3, 2020 1:28 am

bondom34 wrote:Oh.....so like how Paul George finally was healthy after he snapped a leg in half.


Not sure George had ever been or showed the likelihood of being a top tier, MVP calibre star. That was a season out of the box IMO.
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#90 » by getrichordie » Mon Aug 3, 2020 1:51 am

QPR wrote:
bondom34 wrote:Oh.....so like how Paul George finally was healthy after he snapped a leg in half.


Not sure George had ever been or showed the likelihood of being a top tier, MVP calibre star. That was a season out of the box IMO.


Career-high share of MVP votes last year for George. Finished 3rd behind Harden and Antetokounmpo.
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#91 » by bondom34 » Mon Aug 3, 2020 2:54 am

QPR wrote:
bondom34 wrote:Oh.....so like how Paul George finally was healthy after he snapped a leg in half.


Not sure George had ever been or showed the likelihood of being a top tier, MVP calibre star. That was a season out of the box IMO.

I'm genuinely starting to think people here watch only the Thunder and nothing else, because 2015 Paul George was in the playoffs competing at a level with Lebron. Even in a small sample he was amazing and the leap wasn't that much greater than Lavine. This after hearing Gallo wasn't a difference maker when he's been one of the best non-all stars the last few years.

Lavine went up 1.7 points via BPM. George 2.2 from his prior career high. Heck you can add in Ingram this year and Gentry's not a great coach either. Players improving in their physical prime isn't abnormal. The reason he wasn't at that level before is because he actually snapped a leg. This level of improvement happens, and its absolutely not a coaching thing. Its age curve and health. Just like Harden becoming Harden isn't a credit to McHale.

getrichordie wrote:So after listening to Duncan & Hollinger...

Hollinger pretty much tied Donovan's ranking to Westbrook.

...

You could also make the case that Donovan was hamstrung w/ Anthony against the Jazz and Blazers. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Presti made it a priority to make sure that Anthony was treated really well as he is big on making player's happy. It also wouldn't surprise me if the organization as a whole was worried about bringing Anthony off the bench due to his pre-season comments and in an attempt to not ignite a distraction from a team that was chasing a championship. Both are plausible arguments.

I think we agree that Anthony would've been better off the bench. It's so easy to see. Why didn't Donovan do it? Those are the only possible things I could think of that prevented him from bringing him off the bench. Presti deserves a lot of blame here as well. Anthony wasn't a good fit at all.


And after this, said he was Scott Brooks version 2. So....we're back to the guy they fired him for. And we've admitted he has coached 1 good series in the playoffs in 4 years while being outcoached by 2 more coaches. And there's no excuse for Melo . That was just playing a worse player and writing it off is exactly why I can't see anything to take seriously here. I'll openly say he's not the worst coach in the NBA but when everything he clearly did wrong is even being made to be excused its just not possible. That's a coach's job. Seems ranking him as a below average NBA coach is then pretty fair.

Though you make a strong case Presti should be fired I do admit.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
QPR
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,842
And1: 2,302
Joined: Mar 02, 2011

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#92 » by QPR » Mon Aug 3, 2020 3:26 am

bondom34 wrote:I'm genuinely starting to think people here watch only the Thunder and nothing else, because 2015 Paul George was in the playoffs competing at a level with Lebron. This after hearing Gallo wasn't a difference maker when he's been one of the best non-all stars the last few years.


Yes he was great in the 2014 playoffs, then broke his leg. The two seasons after he recovered he was an All-Star and a pretty consistent 20/6/3 guy but I don't think suddenly jumping to 28/8/4, and being in the MVP conversation was on any sort of a trend. Who knows what sort of player he would have been if he hadn't broken his leg, but he did, and last season he was both a genuine MVP and Most Improved candidate, not to mention a DPOY candidate too.

I don't know how much of it was coaching though - from memory he asked Donovan to stop running plays for him so he could let the game come to him more, which obviously worked. But let's not pretend PG's season was just natural progression - pretty rare for a player to be in the MIP conversation in their 9th season, especially when they have been a multiple All-Star.

You're also deliberately misconstruing things. No one has said a healthy Gallo isn't a difference maker, rather a team with him as the primary scoring option and second best player is a bit of a unknown in terms of where they would be.
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#93 » by bondom34 » Mon Aug 3, 2020 3:39 am

QPR wrote:
Yes he was great in the 2014 playoffs, then broke his leg. The two seasons after he recovered he was an All-Star and a pretty consistent 20/6/3 guy but I don't think suddenly jumping to 28/8/4, and being in the MVP conversation was on any sort of a trend. Who knows what sort of player he would have been if he hadn't broken his leg, but he did, and last season he was both a genuine MVP and Most Improved candidate, not to mention a DPOY candidate too.

So almost like he never fully recovered and it took some time, along with him reaching his prime?

The 2015 playoffs he was even better, then snapped a leg, and took a few years to even get healthy.


QPR wrote:I don't know how much of it was coaching though - from memory he asked Donovan to stop running plays for him so he could let the game come to him more, which obviously worked. But let's not pretend PG's season was just natural progression - pretty rare for a player to be in the MIP conversation in their 9th season, especially when they have been a multiple All-Star.


Your first sentence is the point I'm making. Pretty rare for a player to have his level of injury where he's remotely that bad. Rose this season would be in a similar boat at a lower level. Oladipo did it as a veteran. Ingram wasn't as old, but a veteran (and PG wasn't really in MIP discussions). Also PG got a few DPOY votes in 2014.

QPR wrote:You're also deliberately misconstruing things. No one has said a healthy Gallo isn't a difference maker, rather a team with him as the primary scoring option and second best player is a bit of a unknown in terms of where they would be.


First, he was the Clippers best player last year and they were a playoff team. Second, the quote was:

Paul yeah, not sure Gallo has ever been a significant needle-mover while healthy


He has been, for multiple years.

And third, though not my favorite metric, this is 538s RAPTOR projection for OKC's full strength lineup. They've performed exactly to their level pretty much.

Image
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
QPR
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,842
And1: 2,302
Joined: Mar 02, 2011

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#94 » by QPR » Mon Aug 3, 2020 3:59 am

Sorry you mean the 2016 playoffs. PG was great in them and the following year too, but never managed that sort of level consistently over a season.

Fair enough re: Gallo, although I also reckon they had a very even roster last season and Doc coached superbly.
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#95 » by getrichordie » Mon Aug 3, 2020 4:28 am

Not sure who said that about Gallo, but it was not I. Wouldn't take 1 fans view of Gallo and run with it so hard.

Just like I wouldn't take 1 player's view of Donovan and run with it so hard.
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#96 » by bondom34 » Mon Aug 3, 2020 4:44 am

And yet crediting him for everything over a 4 year span and excusing clear errors is fine. Or posting small samples, or naming awful players as ones who have developed, or generally saying over this entire time he wasn't to blame for things that a coach does (rotations were a big one). Every season was never Donovan's fault when these screwups happened and we had these conversations right here.


As well, posted Gallo's APM numbers last year. He's been like a top 40 player. This team's got a few really outstanding vets that nobody paid attention to or have been injured.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#97 » by getrichordie » Mon Aug 3, 2020 5:35 am

bondom34 wrote:And yet crediting him for everything over a 4 year span and excusing clear errors is fine. Or posting small samples, or naming awful players as ones who have developed, or generally saying over this entire time he wasn't to blame for things that a coach does (rotations were a big one). Every season was never Donovan's fault when these screwups happened and we had these conversations right here.


As well, posted Gallo's APM numbers last year. He's been like a top 40 player. This team's got a few really outstanding vets that nobody paid attention to or have been injured.


Flip it and reverse it. NOT giving him credit for guys like Adams is downright unfair when evaluating Donovan. Adams was only in his second year in the league when Donovan came in and hasn't done anything but improve.

What screwups/errors are you referring to? Be specific. I've given ample reason to why we were unable to piece together an offense to your liking. I've even given PLAUSIBLE reasons as to why Anthony was played over Grant (who Donovan developed BTW).

Carmelo? It was pretty clear to everyone that he wasn't going to co-exist well with the ball-dominant Westbrook. This happens so often. Two ball-dominant guys come together and they don't exactly work well together. This was an example of an extreme form of that due to Westbrook being ball-dominant on an outlier level. Fault Presti for that. Not Donovan.

And I don't credit Donovan for everything. Clearly he inherited some players that were already really good and shouldn't be knocked for that. But he has handled what he has been given about as well as you can expect.

The problem is a lot of people were expecting him to turn water into wine. He's not Jesus. He was never going to be OKC's savior. If anything Donovan has been working through having to deal with poor roster construction and prospects who aren't very skilled on the offensive end, yet we expect him to revamp the offense when he wasn't given the personnel to do so.

But sure, take comfort in Duncan calling Donovan a second Brooks, but I thought Hollinger was clearly more apprised of the situation.

And even awful players who develop into guys who can fill minutes is still a win unless your expectation is that he turn a 58th pick into Isaiah Thomas or a Manu Ginobili...

Given Diallo's skillset, I'm not sure what else you are wanting to see from him. It's not on Donovan to make him a good shooter. It's on Donovan to use his skill-set accordingly and maximize it and he has done that thus far. That's a win. And that's true for the large majority of players he has coached.

You are clearly failing to recognize the wins (however small) that happened under Donovan's watch and you ignore the set of circumstances and players that "hamstrung" him for the first 4 years of his tenure. You've written things off by stating things like "oh well, that was expected, or this player was already good" instead seeing how the player grew under Donovan. You see Donovan giving George freedom as a weakness when that freedom is what helped earn him 3rd place in MVP voting. Instead of seeing Donovan as a player's coach and seeing the positives, all you see is weakness.

AND YOU STILL haven't answered my question about what teams have succeeded (won a Finals or Conference Finals as a goal) with a team that has 3 starters who can't or won't shoot it from outside.

You haven't acknowledged that Donovan has had worse prospects to work with either (relative to Brooks)... and the solid ones he's had, they have looked solid under him. You even incorrectly thought that Noel had a positive impact in his first season w/ OKC.

Bulls couldn't revive Payne after his injuries. Cavs took a quick look, and didn't like what they saw. Presti cut his loss.

We all agree, for the most part, that Ferguson should have never been selected as high as he was. He's clearly a head case, IMO.

Abrines was weird and bad and just inconsistent. Hard to develop shooters anyway next to ball-dominant guys, IMO.

Hell, you'll probably even knock him not developing a 20 y.o. Sabonis in one year where he was pigeon-holed into the 4 spot with Kanter/Adams manning the 5.

The point is, the starting lineup was less than ideal from an offensive standpoint and from a developmental context with ball-dominant Westbrook at the helm. Guys kind of need to get the ball in order to develop if they are going to improve on O... :roll:
It's not Donovan's fault we had guys like Singler, Patterson (who still looks bad in LAC), Felton, Huestis, Brewer, Abrines, Lauvergne, Payne, etc. That's on Presti.

I really don't know how I can paint a clearer picture for you. It can be summed up by 3 things:

1. Westbrook's ball-dominance is way less-than-ideal for developing perimeter players from an offensive standpoint.
2. Given the roster construction, what more would you expect on offense given the lack of shooting/spacing?
3. Presti has brought talent that was questionable at best to OKC in Billy's first 4 years.
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#98 » by bondom34 » Mon Aug 3, 2020 5:46 am

getrichordie wrote:
bondom34 wrote:And yet crediting him for everything over a 4 year span and excusing clear errors is fine. Or posting small samples, or naming awful players as ones who have developed, or generally saying over this entire time he wasn't to blame for things that a coach does (rotations were a big one). Every season was never Donovan's fault when these screwups happened and we had these conversations right here.


As well, posted Gallo's APM numbers last year. He's been like a top 40 player. This team's got a few really outstanding vets that nobody paid attention to or have been injured.


Flip it and reverse it. NOT giving him credit for guys like Adams is downright unfair when evaluating Donovan. Adams was only in his second year in the league when Donovan came in and hasn't done anything but improve.

What screwups/errors are you referring to? Be specific. I've given ample reason to why we were unable to piece together an offense to your liking. I've even given PLAUSIBLE reasons as to why Anthony was played over Grant (who Donovan developed BTW).

Carmelo? It was pretty clear to everyone that he wasn't going to co-exist well with the ball-dominant Westbrook. This happens so often. Two ball-dominant guys come together and they don't exactly work well together. This was an example of an extreme form of that due to Westbrook being ball-dominant on an outlier level. Fault Presti for that. Not Donovan.

And I don't credit Donovan for everything. Clearly he inherited some players that were already really good and shouldn't be knocked for that. But he has handled what he has been given about as well as you can expect.

The problem is a lot of people were expecting him to turn water into wine. He's not Jesus. He was never going to be OKC's savior. If anything Donovan has been working through having to deal with poor roster construction and prospects who aren't very skilled on the offensive end, yet we expect him to revamp the offense when he wasn't given the personnel to do so.

But sure, take comfort in Duncan calling Donovan a second Brooks, but I thought Hollinger was clearly more apprised of the situation.

And even awful players who develop into guys who can fill minutes is still a win unless your expectation is that he turn a 58th pick into Isaiah Thomas or a Manu Ginobili...

Given Diallo's skillset, I'm not sure what else you are wanting to see from him. It's not on Donovan to make him a good shooter. It's on Donovan to use his skill-set accordingly and maximize it and he has done that thus far. That's a win. And that's true for the large majority of players he has coached.

You are clearly failing to recognize the wins (however small) that happened under Donovan's watch and you ignore the set of circumstances and players that "hamstrung" him for the first 4 years of his tenure. You've written things off by stating things like "oh well, that was expected, or this player was already good" instead seeing how the player grew under Donovan. You see Donovan giving George freedom as a weakness when that freedom is what helped earn him 3rd place in MVP voting. Instead of seeing Donovan as a player's coach and seeing the positives, all you see is weakness.

AND YOU STILL haven't answered my question about what teams have succeeded (won a Finals or Conference Finals as a goal) with a team that has 3 starters who can't or won't shoot it from outside.

You haven't acknowledged that Donovan has had worse prospects to work with either (relative to Brooks)... and the solid ones he's had, they have looked solid under him. You even incorrectly thought that Noel had a positive impact in his first season w/ OKC.

Bulls couldn't revive Payne after his injuries. Cavs took a quick look, and didn't like what they saw. Presti cut his loss.

We all agree, for the most part, that Ferguson should have never been selected as high as he was. He's clearly a head case, IMO.

Abrines was weird and bad and just inconsistent. Hard to develop shooters anyway next to ball-dominant guys, IMO.

Hell, you'll probably even knock him not developing a 20 y.o. Sabonis in one year where he was pigeon-holed into the 4 spot with Kanter/Adams manning the 5.

The point is, the starting lineup was less than ideal from an offensive standpoint and from a developmental context with ball-dominant Westbrook at the helm. Guys kind of need to get the ball in order to develop if they are going to improve on O... :roll:
It's not Donovan's fault we had guys like Singler, Patterson (who still looks bad in LAC), Felton, Huestis, Brewer, Abrines, Lauvergne, Payne, etc. That's on Presti.

I really don't know how I can paint a clearer picture for you. It can be summed up by 3 things:

1. Westbrook's ball-dominance is way less-than-ideal for developing perimeter players from an offensive standpoint.
2. Given the roster construction, what more would you expect on offense given the lack of shooting/spacing?
3. Presti has brought talent that was questionable at best to OKC in Billy's first 4 years.

Adams was drafted in 2013, Donovan came in 2016.

Melo lineups, Schroder lineups, Waiters lineups. Every year had a crutch that was a terrible lineup that he went to almost every game. Splits were posted here.

And the offense is fine if it works. The issue is it doesn't in the postseason, and thats why the last guy was fired!

And if its so odd Melo didn't fit, then don't play those lineups. Or fire Presti.

And yes, you've credited him for PG and freakin Nader. I'm sorry this is ridiculous, you've been nothing but an apologist for him since his hire.

He's been worse than Brooks. Turn water into wine isn't what is asked.

And Hollinger said he was Brooks 2.0 and ranked him 17th ffs.

Diallo has been awful, by every measure you can find. He's literally not an NBA caliber player and saying that much speaks volumes. He's bad at offense and defense.

You are clearly failing to recognize the wins (however small) that happened under Donovan's watch and you ignore the set of circumstances and players that "hamstrung" him for the first 4 years of his tenure. You've written things off by stating things like "oh well, that was expected, or this player was already good" instead seeing how the player grew under Donovan. You see Donovan giving George freedom as a weakness when that freedom is what helped earn him 3rd place in MVP voting. Instead of seeing Donovan as a player's coach and seeing the positives, all you see is weakness.

A player saying he doesn't want coaching, so the coach letting him do whatever he wants only to play better doesn't mean the coach did something. It means he actively did nothing.

AND YOU STILL haven't answered my question about what teams have succeeded (won a Finals or Conference Finals as a goal) with a team that has 3 starters who can't or won't shoot it from outside.


FIre Presti, agreed. This wasn't even the goal. I never had the expectation they'd make it that far, and he still failed.

You haven't acknowledged that Donovan has had worse prospects to work with either (relative to Brooks)... and the solid ones he's had, they have looked solid under him. You even incorrectly thought that Noel had a positive impact in his first season w/ OKC.


Well I could look to Brooks now with prospects and see them doing well. And IDK what you're on about with Noel, but he was a backup.

Bulls couldn't revive Payne after his injuries. Cavs took a quick look, and didn't like what they saw. Presti cut his loss.

We all agree, for the most part, that Ferguson should have never been selected as high as he was. He's clearly a head case, IMO.

Abrines was weird and bad and just inconsistent. Hard to develop shooters anyway next to ball-dominant guys, IMO.

Hell, you'll probably even knock him not developing a 20 y.o. Sabonis in one year where he was pigeon-holed into the 4 spot with Kanter/Adams manning the 5.


Abrines only. I don't blame him for any but Abrines.

And not blame, but admit he didn't develop him because thats his freakin job.

The point is, the starting lineup was less than ideal from an offensive standpoint and from a developmental context with ball-dominant Westbrook at the helm. Guys kind of need to get the ball in order to develop if they are going to improve on O... :roll:
It's not Donovan's fault we had guys like Singler, Patterson (who still looks bad in LAC), Felton, Huestis, Brewer, Abrines, Lauvergne, Payne, etc. That's on Presti.


They had a better offense under Brooks. Westbrook wasn't the issue on offense no matter how hard you try to make it happen.

And again, great fire presti. Start a thread there and see because clearly he's a terrible GM.

I really don't know how I can paint a clearer picture for you. It can be summed up by 3 things:

1. Westbrook's ball-dominance is way less-than-ideal for developing perimeter players from an offensive standpoint.
2. Given the roster construction, what more would you expect on offense given the lack of shooting/spacing?
3. Presti has brought talent that was questionable at best to OKC in Billy's first 4 years.

Given 1 isn't true (see Reggie Jackson).

2. Better shot selection and movement.

3. Fire Presti.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
getrichordie
General Manager
Posts: 8,947
And1: 2,091
Joined: Oct 22, 2015
 

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#99 » by getrichordie » Mon Aug 3, 2020 5:49 am

Duncan called him another Brooks. Hollinger is who said what I quoted, ya know... the former VPOBP for the Grizzlies?
:basketball: 2020 BIG BOARD
[twitter] @thunderdustin
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 64,100
And1: 48,328
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: New Head Coach? 

Post#100 » by bondom34 » Mon Aug 3, 2020 5:55 am

And said he was below average...
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO

Return to Oklahoma City Thunder