Scott Brooks Fired

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
He does certain things well, he's just not a good in-game coach.
He develops young players very well though, one of the teams that was tanking should consider him.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
 
Andy Katz ‏@ESPNAndyKatz  2m2 minutes ago
FWIW: Sources: ADs at UConn/UF no indication/or sign Ollie or Donovan leaving for OKC. But until OKC makes hire, they are top candidates.
 
 
Andy Katz ‏@ESPNAndyKatz  59s59 seconds ago
Ollie and/or Donovan aren't going to leave current job unless they are 100 percent comfortable with management. Presti makes it possible.
 
 
 
Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojYahooNBA  44s44 seconds ago
Here's thing with Donovan and Ollie: If OKC talks to one of the coaches first, expect the other to pull out of consideration -- and fast.
 
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
On the surface the job appears to be intriguing but any coach walking in should be sure the Thunder can retain KD. There has been a lot of talk that he will pair up with another star (or stars) when he reaches free agency.
 

Blacken

Robespierre in a Cape
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2007
12,152
Cellar-Door said:
He does certain things well, he's just not a good in-game coach.
He develops young players very well though, one of the teams that was tanking should consider him.
Agreed. Orlando should go get him right fucking now.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Rudy Pemberton said:
Well, he's already paired up with a pretty great star. I don't know where they turn; they need to win big next year or they may lose KD. A college coach with a potentially long learning curve doesn't seem ideal, although Ollie has history there and is probably an attempt to keep KD long term. Who is the best NBA coach not currently coaching?

(Someone like a Jeff Van Gundy would be an interesting fit.)
Donovan has made it known he now wants an NBA job and has to be the #1 target. This makes too much sense not to happen.

I also heard somewhere that Ollie has some person reasons for not leaving Connecticut.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
The Thunder should wait.
Thibs is probably out in CHI no matter what, and he's a terrific coach, much much better than Ollie or Donovan.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
6,055
Cellar-Door said:
The Thunder should wait.
Thibs is probably out in CHI no matter what, and he's a terrific coach, much much better than Ollie or Donovan.
I dont know if thibs is player friendly enough for a team trying to convince durant and westbrook to stay
 

ALiveH

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,104
If they lose Brooks & get Thibs & there's no negative KD health surprises, they have to be the favorite to win it all next year.
 

Nick Kaufman

protector of human kind from spoilers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2003
13,410
A Lost Time
I thought the major problem with Brooks was that he didn't take as much advantage of his personnel in offense as much as he should have, defense has been fine. Thibs is coach known for his defensive schemes, not his offense. He's probably an upgrade, but does he really solve OKC's inability to leverage its superstars? Plus, they need shooters, don't they? it's hard to solve that puzzle without them.
 

Blacken

Robespierre in a Cape
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2007
12,152
Thibodeau alienates players, runs them into the ground--if KD gets hurt next year and feels like it's a team failure there's no way he stays)--and while he was a real innovator defensively his schemes have been picked apart and implemented by almost everybody under the sun. Watching him and Russ murder each other might be fun, but I can't see them being a good on-the-floor match at all.
 
I don't know how good Donovan is, but I'm also not sure it matters as far as keeping Durant (and thus keeping Westbrook). As Zach Lowe said today, having one year to round into shape is not a good place to be.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
ElUno20 said:
I dont know if thibs is player friendly enough for a team trying to convince durant and westbrook to stay
Which is sad to me.
It comes down to this:
Does Durant want to win a title more than he wants to take it easy and sell sneakers?
You can win a title with a mediocre easygoing coach (Hey Doc Rivers), but good coaches are a lot more likely to win titles.
 

moly99

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 28, 2007
939
Seattle
Cellar-Door said:
He does certain things well, he's just not a good in-game coach.
He develops young players very well though, one of the teams that was tanking should consider him.
 
Pete Carroll's career makes me think that he could still turn into a great coach. Particularly if he picks the right assistants the next time around.
 
Nick Kaufman said:
I thought the major problem with Brooks was that he didn't take as much advantage of his personnel in offense as much as he should have, defense has been fine.
 
A major part of this is probably due to the roster, though. He tried to use more motion when Westbrook went down. When Westbrook and Kendrick Perkins were playing together he was pretty much forced to run a simplistic system. I guess you could blame him for playing Perkins so much in the first place, but honestly that's on the Thunder ownership for being too cheap to amnesty him and acquire a replacement. Brooks didn't choose the players.
 

AMS25

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 29, 2008
3,121
Holland on the Plains
Nick Kaufman said:
I thought the major problem with Brooks was that he didn't take as much advantage of his personnel in offense as much as he should have, defense has been fine. 
 
Nah, once Ibaka went down, the Thunder defense was awful. OKC was reduced to trying to outscore the other team, which sort-of worked when Kanter was healthy. Once his health started to break down, the offense suffered and became heavily reliant on the mercurial Dion Waiters as a second scoring option to Westbrook. (To be fair, Dion had a few good games in there.)
 

moly99

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 28, 2007
939
Seattle
AMS25 said:
Nah, once Ibaka went down, the Thunder defense was awful. OKC was reduced to trying to outscore the other team, which sort-of worked when Kanter was healthy. Once his health started to break down, the offense suffered and became heavily reliant on the mercurial Dion Waiters as a second scoring option to Westbrook. (To be fair, Dion had a few good games in there.)
 
But again, a big part of that is the roster. Dion Waiters and Enes Kanter are both turnstiles on defense.
 
I think people need to remember their financial situation compared to other contending teams. Most contending teams are willing to spend into the luxury tax to put role players around their stars. The Thunder aren't willing to do that. So when Durant, Westbrook or Ibaka go down Brooks doesn't have a bunch of quality bench guys to turn to.
 

Nick Kaufman

protector of human kind from spoilers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2003
13,410
A Lost Time
There was no reason to fire Brooks for what happened this season. But again, as Lowe details, he made some bad choices:
 
 
There are members of the Miami Heat who will whisper to you, in honest moments, that they literally could not believe their good luck that Scott Brooks just kept rolling out Kendrick Perkins during the 2012 Finals. When they realized the Thunder would not change — that Perkins would start in big lineups that couldn’t scamper with Miami’s small-ball groups — the Heat knew they had a ring in the bag.

It’s tempting to suggest that the Thunder should have fired Brooks then, instead of signing him to an extension a few weeks after that series ended. He just didn’t appear to have the in-the-moment strategic vision that becomes more important in the playoffs. Coaches reserve sneak attacks for specific opponents, pick on weak spots until they gush blood, and go to more creative lengths to hide the deficiencies on their own rosters. Being two minutes late finding the right countermove can cost you a game, a series, a championship. The margin for error is that small, and Brooks seemed not to have the goods.
 
 

 
The Thunder offense that season was powerful but predictable. It wasn’t a system that flowed, a shape-changing organism in which the players were free to improvise reads. It was a rigid set of plays — a pin-down for Kevin Durant, then a Russell Westbrook–Serge Ibaka pick-and-roll, and then a Durant-Westbrook two-man action. Any thinking team could see what was coming, craft the best possible response, and execute it until the Thunder retreated into another set piece.

They had the talent to put up explosive regular-season numbers within that rote non-system — they always did — but postseason defenses in 2013 and 2014 ground it down. Those defenses were more prepared to pounce on the Thunder’s pet sets. They took an extra step or five away from Perkins and Thabo Sefolosha, to the point that the Thunder’s starting lineup became borderline unplayable. Predictability can win in February, but not in June — not in a smarter NBA more attuned to spacing and shooting on both sides of the ball. The Thunder under Brooks were doomed, and they should have known it after those 2012 Finals.
 
 

 
And even so, this is a fair decision. Brooks evolved after those 2012 Finals, but he was never a coach who could tilt the odds in Oklahoma City’s favor during a playoff series. The same issues always cropped up: He overplayed Perkins, underplayed lineups featuring Durant at power forward, favored aging veterans who couldn’t play anymore, failed to stagger the minutes of his stars, bizarrely had his big men hedge out 35 feet from the basket on nonthreatening pick-and-rolls, and waited a game or a quarter too long to yank lineups that just weren’t working. Brooks’s hook was faster in 2014 than it had been in 2012, but it wasn’t fast enough.
 
The difference in quality among teams at the highest level is minuscule. Everyone is really freaking good. When you reach that point, the smallest decisions take on a greater importance, and you never got the feeling Brooks could nail enough of them — that he could compete with Gregg Popovich, Erik Spoelstra, and Rick Carlisle.
 
 
https://grantland.com/the-triangle/scott-free-the-thunder-imagine-a-future-without-scott-brooks/
 

67YAZ

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2000
8,730
Blacken said:
Thibodeau alienates players, runs them into the ground...
 
This is an old trope that people threw around before Thibs got the Bulls job and has not been bourn out by his time in Chicago.  Alienates players?  Carlos Boozer was disgruntled because Thibs would bench him at the end of games in favor of Taj Gibson, a player who could actually play the required defensive role.  Otherwise, which Bulls players are complaining and asking off the team?  Runs players into the ground?  Derrick Rose's knees can't seem to hold up no matter how deliberately the Bulls ease him back, and Luol Deng's wrist and botched spinal tap problems raise serious questions about the medical staff.  Maybe Thibs would alienate guys if his teams weren't winning, but with the Bulls he's won at a .647 clip and made the playoffs 5 straight years despite Roses' continually issues.
 
It would be something to watch Thibs rework OKC according to his principles.  Things would hinge on Ibaka doing a reasonable approximate the KG/Noah role.
 

Blacken

Robespierre in a Cape
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2007
12,152
Persistent reports that the Bulls' front office is fighting Thibs to reduce his players' minutes to not literally kill them at the end of a season. Jimmy Butler playing 38+ minutes a game (and looking it) and both Deng and Noah breaking down repeatedly after playing a hojillion minutes. Other teams in the league literally saying that Deng in particular was "run into the ground", with those exact words (that was in the scouting report from the Hawks that got Ferry in trouble!).
 
But no, it's not Thibs at all. He'd get along super well with guys who've had a relaxed, supportive coach for their entire careers. There is no way whatsoever that he'd rub Durant the wrong way and make him book, no way.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
CaptainLaddie said:
I feel like the perfect coach for OKC is probably the one on the sideline in Boston.
 
Yeah, and the perfect players for Boston are currently watching the playoffs in OKC.
 
One can only dream.
 

AMS25

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 29, 2008
3,121
Holland on the Plains
moly99 said:
 
I think people need to remember their financial situation compared to other contending teams. Most contending teams are willing to spend into the luxury tax to put role players around their stars. The Thunder aren't willing to do that. So when Durant, Westbrook or Ibaka go down Brooks doesn't have a bunch of quality bench guys to turn to.
 
The Thunder were trying to draft and develop role players. For example, OKC let Thabo Sefalosha (defensive specialist) go to the Hawks because Andre Roberson was supposed to be the "new" Thabo. Roberson is good on the defensive end, but he was also injured this year, on and off. (Near the end of the season, for instance, he was out for about two weeks with a sprained ankle.) So, yes the Thunder are cheap, but it's not like they don't think about acquiring role players.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
AMS25 said:
 
The Thunder were trying to draft and develop role players. For example, OKC let Thabo Sefalosha (defensive specialist) go to the Hawks because Andre Roberson was supposed to be the "new" Thabo. Roberson is good on the defensive end, but he was also injured this year, on and off. (Near the end of the season, for instance, he was out for about two weeks with a sprained ankle.) So, yes the Thunder are cheap, but it's not like they don't think about acquiring role players.
Sure, but the only reason you  replace a proven vet with a rookie who has a ceiling of at best what the vet is now, when you are a championship contender is that you want to save a few million.
 
This is a team that played Derek Fisher significant minutes in the playoffs in his age 37-39 seasons because they wouldn't pay more than the minimum for their backup PG.
It's also a team that refused to amnesty Perkins to free up cap space because the owner didn't want to write a check.
 
That more than anything else is why I'd be wary of returning if I was Durant. The team has consistently shown it isn't going to spend to win, that's a tough sell for a superstar. Cheap team in a shitty city in the tough conference, and the two other best players will be on expiring deals when he has to make the decision. I don't at all think it's crazy to think Durant leaves.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
AMS25 said:
 
The Thunder were trying to draft and develop role players. For example, OKC let Thabo Sefalosha (defensive specialist) go to the Hawks because Andre Roberson was supposed to be the "new" Thabo. Roberson is good on the defensive end, but he was also injured this year, on and off. (Near the end of the season, for instance, he was out for about two weeks with a sprained ankle.) So, yes the Thunder are cheap, but it's not like they don't think about acquiring role players.
Presti knew Harden wasn't here for long and same with Sefalosha.....he wasnt necessarily looking to develop role players as much as he was looking to replace certain skill sets in the rotation with Kevin Martin for Harden, Adams for Perkins, etc. That's what he supposed to do.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,470
Somewhere
Although I wish he'd wind up with the Celtics somehow, seeing Durant play with Wall would be quite a treat. Of course, Wittman has to go.
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,676
Return of the Dewey said:
Donovan's job to lose according to Marc Stein.
 
It would be tough to turn this job down especially with Durant and Westbrook on the roster. He won't get a better NBA situation to get into.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,205
jsinger121 said:
 
It would be tough to turn this job down especially with Durant and Westbrook on the roster. He won't get a better NBA situation to get into.
Its not as much of a layup as you think. Durant is a FA next year and the team's recent track record suggests that they aren't inclined to pay up to field a contender. Westbrook is great but the Thunder stand to lose him in 2017 and I bet he is gone for sure if KD leaves. Plus their current bench is weak.

If I am a high profile coach I am getting some assurances or at least a short contract for large dollars to step in there.
 

Return of the Dewey

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 17, 2001
3,108
Pants Party
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
Its not as much of a layup as you think. Durant is a FA next year and the team's recent track record suggests that they aren't inclined to pay up to field a contender. Westbrook is great but the Thunder stand to lose him in 2017 and I bet he is gone for sure if KD leaves. Plus their current bench is weak.

If I am a high profile coach I am getting some assurances or at least a short contract for large dollars to step in there.
 
That being said, I think Donovan has basically done everything that he could do at FL.  Multiple Final Fours, and 2 National Championships at a football-first school.  He will at least have Westbrook for 2 year and KD for 1 year, and can use that time to build up his rep as NBA caliber coach.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
Not precisely on topic, but fits here better than anywhere else.
I was thinking about what the skills of a great NBA coach are, and how many you really need to be a good NBA coach.
1. Dealing with the media
2. Dealing with players
3. Front office/GM communication
4. Rotations/Player usage
5. Structuring offenses/defenses/plays/adjustments.
6. Developing players/draft picks.
 
So Pop probably hits on all 6. Thibs is strong on 5,6, maybe 4, seems okay at 2, terrible at 1 and 3.
Doc Rivers, one of the best in the league at 1, 2. Not bad at 3 (though now as a GM he's terrible at the job), Not very good at 4, bad at 5, bad at 6.
 
The thing is, what are the most important, an the least.
In some ways 5 can be the least if you are willing to lean on a great assistant and are good at finding them (Doc leaning on Thibs comes to mind). Or 1, if you are good at the other 5, but it means your rope is often short, where guys the media likes get longer rope.
 
2 is probably the most important overall, it's a player's league and you need stars and to keep them moderately happy.