Apologies due/Kudos

Post #1 » by **bondom34** » Thu Nov 7, 2013 4:38 am

To Scott Brooks. Didn't think I'd be saying this, but he's been really good this season. I'm watching Lamb/Adams/PJIII all get real solid meaningful minutes, and tonight shows what the team saw in these guys. There's a good starting C, and some solid bench scoring. He's inserted some new lineups since Westbrook is back and I honestly must say its pretty cool seeing the improvement. With a lot of teams complaining about coaching, I think OKC shouldn't be one of them right now, I'm actually impressed (and didn't think I would be).

Balkman32 · Post #2 » by **Balkman32** » Thu Nov 7, 2013 3:07 pm

Tweet of the night: James Harden tonight for the Thunder: 19 points, 12 rebounds and three assists in 40 minutes.(Those were Adams' and Lamb's numbers combined. Think about it, you guys.)

@royceyoung

Devilanche · Post #3 » by **Devilanche** » Fri Nov 8, 2013 1:10 am

I like how he been mixing up his minutes thus far, so brooks has that going for him.

Post #4 » by **wizkid27** » Fri Nov 8, 2013 3:19 am

His willingness to adapt the rotation to game situations (and doing so correctly) has definitely improved. And I didn't think it would. The bad thing is, to offset that, his ability to setup a decent offensive system has not. And I did think it would. Those were the two big things he needed to do, and he seems to have tackled one of the two. If he can find a way to work a few more wrinkles into the offense, then I'll be thrilled. I was never really on the fire Brooks if we don't win a championship bandwagon because I don't believe there are better realistic options available, but I've been down on him more than a couple of times.

Post #5 » by **bondom34** » Fri Nov 8, 2013 4:21 am

That's pretty much how I felt wizkid, but I think tackling the rotation issue for me was the bigger hurdle for now. The younger players really need to get time, and now I'm hoping that the offense with diversify a bit. I just see a lot of "Fire Coach X" threads on team/general boards and am really happy with Brooks right now.

ThunderUp1234 · Post #6 » by **ThunderUp1234** » Fri Nov 8, 2013 5:47 am

Has Brooks not played younger players?

It does look like he's slowly but surely going to eventually give Adams the starting job.

Thunderhead · Post #7 » by **Thunderhead** » Sun Nov 10, 2013 5:59 pm

What's different from last season ?

At the end of last season he played Fisher, but that was to help Fisher get his game back for the playoffs, and it paid off.

But before Fisher was resigned, he came off the bench with Martin, Nick, Jackson, and Thabeet.

This year, its Lamb getting Martin's minutes, and Adams getting Thabeet's minutes + some minutes from Perk.

Except for Adams getting more of Perks minutes, the only difference this year is Jones getting PT. And I have to think that may have more to do with showcasing him for a trade, than developing him for a role in the Thunder rotation, cause I don't see how Jones fits, especially come playoff time.

Post #8 » by **wizkid27** » Mon Nov 11, 2013 3:02 am

Thunderhead wrote:...the only difference this year is Jones getting PT. And I have to think that may have more to do with showcasing him for a trade, than developing him for a role in the Thunder rotation, cause I don't see how Jones fits, especially come playoff time.

I don't get this part... I mean, they drafted him, obviously saw something, and he's finally starting to play decent. He's got a lot of potential, very little league-wide value and has a combination of skill that the Thunder really need (backup SF with athleticism, size, shooting).

Devilanche · Post #9 » by **Devilanche** » Mon Nov 11, 2013 3:15 am

Yea, his value won't be that high anyway. he's a role player we're keeping or a small incentive to a deal.

Thunderhead · Post #10 » by **Thunderhead** » Mon Nov 11, 2013 4:31 am

wizkid27 wrote:
Thunderhead wrote:...the only difference this year is Jones getting PT. And I have to think that may have more to do with showcasing him for a trade, than developing him for a role in the Thunder rotation, cause I don't see how Jones fits, especially come playoff time.

I don't get this part... I mean, they drafted him, obviously saw something, and he's finally starting to play decent. He's got a lot of potential, very little league-wide value and has a combination of skill that the Thunder really need (backup SF with athleticism, size, shooting).

Ohhh really, its just an honest question , he's a 3 - 4, that puts him behind KD, and with KD getting 40 plus minutes per night, there's not much for him.

I think Presti drafted him , because he was surprised that Jones fell that far and Presti saw value there. He wasn't really a need , as much as acquiring an asset. I've suspected for some time, that he would be traded.

I think Thunder need three point shooting right now, more than Perry Jones, but that said, I don't know how you work a pure three point shooter into the rotation, unless he's a 3D guy.

So that pretty much is how I see Jones, he's an enigma to me.

comingbacktousa · Post #11 » by **comingbacktousa** » Mon Nov 11, 2013 8:41 am

Thunderhead wrote:
Ohhh really, its just an honest question , he's a 3 - 4, that puts him behind KD, and with KD getting 40 plus minutes per night, there's not much for him.

I highly doubt the plan is to play Kevin Durant 48 minutes a game. He needs a back up. Collison is also coming to the end of his career, so there needs to be a back up there in the future. The thunder look pretty good when they can space the floor and go small. Any player fit that better who is cheaper or can be acquired by trading PJ3?

Presti is one of the best drafters in the NBA, I doubt he picks a guy based on where he is projected by mock drafts.

As far as needing better 3 point shooting, I posted about that in a different thread but here it is again. OKC was 3rd last year in 3 point fg%, only difference in lineups is Lamb in for Martin. Lamb from Martin hasn't been a big drop off in 3 point shooting at all. Durant and Thabo, high % shooters are both shooting at a much lower rate so far. That will likely return to normal as the season goes on.

mbruty · Post #12 » by **mbruty** » Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:14 am

Have been pleased with Brooks for his actual in game coaching. He is running with matchups that work and making changes when they don't. This has been a real issue for his as Head Coach. The fact that Lamb / Adams and crew are actually playing within themselves and the team is terrific too.

The glaring problem is still that we are far too iso heavy and we have no real offensive structure. We need to enlist an offensive coach who can run a few basic plays. If we could actually hit a long range shot that might help, but we need to get the ball moving and the systems in place to get easier shots too.

It's a step in the right direction, we just need more steps!

comingbacktousa · Post #13 » by **comingbacktousa** » Sun Nov 17, 2013 10:36 am

I still don't get why Fisher players over PJ3. Seeing Westbrook, PJ3, or Lamb playing the 3 so Fisher can be out there is idiotic. The reason can't be to stretch the floor, PJ3 has more 3's this year. Can't be defense, Pj3 is a far superior defender from what I've seen this season and of course not playing incredibly small is going to improve the defense in general. I don't get it from any standpoint at all.

Post #14 » by **wizkid27** » Sun Nov 17, 2013 5:04 pm

comingbacktousa wrote:I still don't get why Fisher players over PJ3. Seeing Westbrook, PJ3, or Lamb playing the 3 so Fisher can be out there is idiotic. The reason can't be to stretch the floor, PJ3 has more 3's this year. Can't be defense, Pj3 is a far superior defender from what I've seen this season and of course not playing incredibly small is going to improve the defense in general. I don't get it from any standpoint at all.

I agree that seeing Fisher out there last night in the first half instead of pj3 was kind of frustrating. But honestly, I think for the most part Brooks' usage of Fisher has been pretty acceptable this season. Fisher has had some very solid moments especially on D and hasn't been playing a crazy amount like 20mpg every game or something either.

Post #15 » by **bondom34** » Wed Feb 12, 2014 7:56 pm

This is old, but wanted to bump it for something interesting from APBR. Someone ran an RAPM for coaches, and guess who came up on top, Scott Brooks. Followed by Hornacek, Shaw, Pop, Vogel, and Thibs. They do say its probably mostly due to the player development staff, but still kinda cool and I really do think Brooks is a good coach who's learned a ton over the last few years.
http://www.apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8485

Space Dracula · Post #16 » by **Space Dracula** » Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:51 am

Scott Brooks is a terrific coach and always has been. It's easy to forget that rookie coaches have an inherent development process just like rookie players do. Brooks's willingness to be a total proponent for Presti's vision in OKC is a significant factor in the success of young players on the team, and is often overlooked by casual observers. Speak to anyone within the Thunder organization or rival organizations and they will sing Brooks' praise. An excellent motivator of young and veteran talent, a developing tactician, and a coach who is able to straddle the line between disciplinarian and self-deprecating lug. It's about time Brooks received credit for the work he's done with the team.