Scott Brooks / Coaching Thread

Post #1 » by **slick_watts** » Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:18 am

I'm making this thread because I think there's a lot to discuss about the Thunder coaching.

The last three games in close games during the fourth quarter Brooks has gone to an ultra small lineup with Thabo Sefolosha at PF. All three of those times the other team has gone on a run to either close the gap or build a sizable lead.

Small ball is usually used by teams to open up an offense and space the floor. The problem is that our small ball lineups do not feature any shooters except James Harden, and nobody to run a pick and roll. When you play small you are conceding a larger advantage to the opponent in the paint - yet we're not able to reap any traditional benefits (spaced floor offensively, etc.) that go with small ball. It's an utterly inexplainable lineup to put out there, and I can't think of any advantages it affords this team.

This team's obviously playing a lot differently from last season. With the same players for the most part in there, it makes you wonder what's going on with the coaching and what the coaching staff is working on exactly with this team.

HeartSouloma · Post #2 » by **HeartSouloma** » Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:34 am

I say next season we fire Brooks, and get JVG. But i doubt we would get him. Some times i wish we can trade for a coach. Next season i hope we get a really good defensive coach too....

wiff · Post #3 » by **wiff** » Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:35 am

Well, I have been wanting this guy to be the coach ever since Nate went to Portland.

I hated him as a player but there is no denying this guy has had great success as a coach.

Plus he was coached by one te the very best.

See if you can find his coah in this picture.

I think he would be a fantastic fit with the players OKC has.

BIG EDDIE · Post #4 » by **BIG EDDIE** » Mon Nov 15, 2010 7:01 pm

Bill Laimbeer would be HUGE for the Thunder!
Please, please make him become our coach!!!

PS: and Rodman could be the assistant coach

Joel Embust · Post #5 » by **Joel Embust** » Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:30 pm

Not even the average NBA fan would put Maynor, Westbrook, Harden, Sefolosha and Ibaka on the floor at once. Ever.

His timeout speeches are also very random and even I could fill in and say the crappiest cliches to the team. PLAY HARD GUYS! If they win the game, I'm a great coach. 8-)

Envelopes · Post #6 » by **Envelopes** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:33 pm

These line ups would usually have Green in them when Durant is on the bench. Green and Collison injured means we have to play someone in the small ball line up. I think these line ups work if Green or Durant are in at PF.

Trip · Post #7 » by **Trip** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:03 am

I think its clear that our offensive playbook is made up of a KD and Westbrook ISO. The defense doesn't look nearly as good as last year but i can't tell if its just because we are getting burned or if losing Adams really is the primary reason for the drop off we have seen.

Jimmy76 · Post #8 » by **Jimmy76** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:08 am

Envelopes wrote:These line ups would usually have Green in them when Durant is on the bench. Green and Collison injured means we have to play someone in the small ball line up. I think these line ups work if Green or Durant are in at PF.

except that aldrich guy could use some minutes and would help the size of that lineup significantly

Post #9 » by **slick_watts** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:24 pm

Yeah I'd rather have Aldrich in than some of the small ball we've been playing. I'm not so adverse to Thabo playing SF. i.e. a lineup of Westbrook-Harden-Thabo or Maynor-Harden-Thbo doesn't bug me because Thabo's big enough to play there. But bringing that fourth guard in like we did in those three games doesn't work, and it's stupid considering we have Aldrich on the bench.

We did not do any four guard lineups against Utah, and small ball was only -4 for the evening. Aside from the strong start and early lead, we kept up with Utah most of the way aside from our big run. If we had gone to the ultra small ball I don't think we win the game.

Brooks is testing a lot of different lineups and combinations with Green out. That's fine, but he's getting a little to mad scientist with some of the crazier ones.

holdmymartian · Post #10 » by **holdmymartian** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:08 am

So we are 7th in offensive rating at 109.3. I'm not very knowledgeable of Offensive Rating. Is this good?

Post #11 » by **slick_watts** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 5:06 am

holdmymartian wrote:So we are 7th in offensive rating at 109.3. I'm not very knowledgeable of Offensive Rating. Is this good?

It's better than last year, and it's extremely good considering how bad we shoot.

Brooks the last two games has gone away from super small and has given DJ White some minutes instead. Props to Brooks!

IanChang · Post #12 » by **IanChang** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:51 am

I have to say that playing DJ White is a very good move, Aldrich still needs time to learn and improve. GJ Brooks!

dream_catcher_9 · Post #13 » by **dream_catcher_9** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:52 pm

I wonder if our defense will just turn the switch like last year during the playoffs? If you all remember we started to play bad defense to end the season until the playoffs then we played the best defense of the season. Although our offense went back to bad.

With this team it seems we either play good offense and bad defense, or bad offense and good defense. I think we are still growing through the growing pains of putting those 2 together, which is normal since our core players are so young.

the great sign is that we are still finding ways to win, and that's a trait that only the mentally tough teams have. Our mental toughness has improved.

Post #14 » by **slick_watts** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 5:02 pm

Up until the playoffs we were playing some poor defense to end the year last season, as well.

Just seems like a question of focus and motivation on that end. Not surprising considering the age of the group.

BIG EDDIE · Post #15 » by **BIG EDDIE** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 7:03 pm

Yes and to me it's also amazing how we can play like a complete different team from one day to the other.
Example: We had terrible ball movement for the first 10 games of the season, having the absolute worst assist average at 16 per game. Then coach brooks tells the team to move the ball more and tells them they will get a day of rest (with no practice) before the Celtics game, IF they have at least 20 assists against the Rockets.
What happens? They have 26 assists and play very nice on offense, move the ball like I was wishing them to do in their first 10 games.

It really seems like they just need a coach who can tell them what to do and they will do it. I mean, they have all the tools, all the talent, all the work ethic to play championship-caliber offense AND defense.
Hopefully coach Brooks can handle that and has more often good ideas like that in the future lol

holdmymartian · Post #16 » by **holdmymartian** » Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:23 pm

BIG EDDIE wrote:Yes and to me it's also amazing how we can play like a complete different team from one day to the other.
Example: We had terrible ball movement for the first 10 games of the season, having the absolute worst assist average at 16 per game. Then coach brooks tells the team to move the ball more and tells them they will get a day of rest (with no practice) before the Celtics game, IF they have at least 20 assists against the Rockets.
What happens? They have 26 assists and play very nice on offense, move the ball like I was wishing them to do in their first 10 games.

It really seems like they just need a coach who can tell them what to do and they will do it. I mean, they have all the tools, all the talent, all the work ethic to play championship-caliber offense AND defense.
Hopefully coach Brooks can handle that and has more often good ideas like that in the future lol

I like what Brooks did there. He rewarded them for accomplishing a goal AND they won. I think that will engrave that if they move the ball they have better chances of winning. Now if only they can do that with the defense...

Post #17 » by **sonictecture** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 3:11 am

With 3 minutes to go in the game at Boston, Hubie Brown asks, "where are the plays? Why isn't there any movement? Why is Westbrook playing 1 on 5?"

Head scratching rotations deserve our attention, but we can't let it mask the fact that Brooks doesn't seem to run an offense that is any way recognizable beyond the isolation. How can you take advantage of the talent on your roster when your entire offensive scheme is give the ball to Durant or Westbrook and wait for them to make something happen?

Didn't we just see this strategy fail with Mike Brown in Cleveland?

It's not like Durant and Westbrook bring egos to the team that prevent Brooks from installing an offense that actually has movement or structure. Even when the team wins, the play is usually ugly.

Post #18 » by **slick_watts** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 3:20 am

The maddening part about the offense is that for three quarters tonight we moved the ball around well and guys were moving without the ball too. We got to the rim, drew fouls. That third quarter where we cooled off a bit, but attacked and got the line was great.

In the first half I saw Thabo running of curls to the lane, almost like a Princeton offense. DJ White and Serge Ibaka were moving around without the ball.

It's only at the end of games and crucial spots where we go to the stupid, dribble the clock down isolation offense that just stinks. Boston just kept trapping Westbrook over and over again. I don't understand, especially when we were running such a successful offense for the rest of the game.

According to Synergy, over 20% of our plays this year are isolations. That's just ridiculous...

BIG EDDIE · Post #19 » by **BIG EDDIE** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 3:27 pm

slick_watts wrote:According to Synergy, over 20% of our plays this year are isolations. That's just ridiculous...

Really hope that ends at some point soon. I mean, if we all see the problem and HUbie Brown sees it and everyone sees it, then why doesn't Brooks see it? Can someone just tell him that what they are doing in those situation are not....well, not proseffional basketball, no basketball a all, and have absolute NO success.

wiff · Post #20 » by **wiff** » Tue Dec 21, 2010 3:30 am

I think I found Scott Brook's dream starting line up.

I just don't get Brooks infatuation with playing small ball. Why simply give up every physical advantage you have?

Sometimes it's nice to have a couple inches and 25 pounds on an opposing player. Why swim up stream unless you have to?

Hell last night Green was playing Center. He has a hard enough time at PF why compound the problem at C?