Scott Brooks underrated?

This topic contains 16 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by Mr. HookShot 10 years, 1 month ago.

Author
Posts
Posted on: Fri, 04/22/2016 - 10:21pm #63478

ChicagoCasey
Participant
I really believe Scott Brooks have become underrated. The problems the Thunder are having now is the same struggles they had with him, exept they are worse. The problem with Brooks that I been hearing the most these past years are they have problems with playcalling in late game situations, their offense is stagnant, and is very iso-heavy. You see the same things wrong with this year Thunder team. What if the problem is with Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook, not Scott Brooks?
I really like the hire by the Wizards in getting Scott Brooks, but I also hate that they retain Grunfeld (awful GM). I believe Brooks have became very underappreciated given that he had Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, James Harden, and Serge Ibaka w/ Reggie Jackson. People fail to realize that he is a main factor in developing those players and it’s pretty hard to coach a team that talented and get them to buy in. The fact that he took those players when they were young to a championship is pretty impressive. Also, imagine if they stayed healthy throughout that stretch, he might have been to more championships. Remember, they had like 3 straight years when they missed a key piece in the playoffs (Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, and Serge Ibaka).
I believe this is the best hire the Wizards could make and they might have got the best coach available, most would go Thibs, they definitely got the most accomplished coach. Even if the Wizards don’t get Kevin Durant this is a great hire. I believe this hire could be great for the futures of Kelly Oubre, Brandly Beal, and Otto Porter. Also, a new offense for John Wall is needed badly. With Brooks as coach and with his ability to develop young players, the Wizards fount a coach that can help their future without getting Durant.
Finally, why can’t Scott Brooks improve on his mistakes that he made in OKC? I see lots people bring up his failures like he can’t improve and the year off didn’t make him more aware of his mistakes? Same goes with Thibs. People need to realize that there are a very few amount of coaches with the resume of Brooks have in the league. His career wins average is above 50 and the last 5 or so seasons coaching his team have been in the top 10 in offense (w/ the bad ball movement and stagnant offense) and top 15 in defense (lots of years in the top 10). The Wizards made a great hire.

0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 6:45am #1056837

Magic Jordan
Participant
Meanwhile Byron Scott is still employed. What the fuck!!!
0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 6:45am #1056717

Magic Jordan
Participant
Meanwhile Byron Scott is still employed. What the fuck!!!
0
- Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 8:46am #1056845
  
  Bankroll PJ
  Participant
  Byron Scott may or may not be a great coach but what exactly did he do wrong this year? Going into the season the team goals were to let the young core develop, manage Kobe’s minutes so he could go out without injury, and put the team in position to keep this year’s draft pick. I’d say he accomplished all 3 of those. Some critics didn’t like the way he handled Russell and Randle and thinks he should have given the more responsibility, but I appreciated the tough love he gave them. They began playing much harder and smarter on both ends of the court as the season went on. I think he earn the right to keep the job for at least one more year. After that is to be determined.
  0
- Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 8:46am #1056725
  
  Bankroll PJ
  Participant
  Byron Scott may or may not be a great coach but what exactly did he do wrong this year? Going into the season the team goals were to let the young core develop, manage Kobe’s minutes so he could go out without injury, and put the team in position to keep this year’s draft pick. I’d say he accomplished all 3 of those. Some critics didn’t like the way he handled Russell and Randle and thinks he should have given the more responsibility, but I appreciated the tough love he gave them. They began playing much harder and smarter on both ends of the court as the season went on. I think he earn the right to keep the job for at least one more year. After that is to be determined.
  0
  - Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 10:53am #1056867
    
    Magic Jordan
    Participant
    Tough love is great and all, but he’s a terrible basketball coach. I can’t help you see that if you don’t see it already. He does not one thing well from a coaching perspective besides "Manning up". Terrible rotations. Terrible offensive and defensive schemes. Terrible with the media. Throws his players under the bus. The list goes on and on. His historical record more than backs up his incompetence.
    Nothing he did deserves another year. Whether he was given a fair shake is also irrelevant. Life is not fair. The team has never shown even incremental improvement in either season he has coached.
    
    0
  - Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 10:53am #1056747
    
    Magic Jordan
    Participant
    Tough love is great and all, but he’s a terrible basketball coach. I can’t help you see that if you don’t see it already. He does not one thing well from a coaching perspective besides "Manning up". Terrible rotations. Terrible offensive and defensive schemes. Terrible with the media. Throws his players under the bus. The list goes on and on. His historical record more than backs up his incompetence.
    Nothing he did deserves another year. Whether he was given a fair shake is also irrelevant. Life is not fair. The team has never shown even incremental improvement in either season he has coached.
    
    0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 7:14am #1056839

ballislyfe25
Participant
Scott Brooks got results when his teams were healthy and his head coaching record deserves him of another chance to lead a team. A coach that exeed expectations and has the endorsement of his players deserves another chance. It will be interesting to see what he can do in Washington.
Brooks has his flaws and I would not count well-rounded player development as one of his strengths. His Thunder teams won with their elite athleticism, which was not restricted by Brooks but also wasn’t harnessed into efficient schemes and didn’t foster intelligent play. Everything was, and largely still is under Billy Donovan, isolations and high screen and roll. Why not run/try continuous sets like the flex or 4 around 1 offenses? The movements of these offenses become second nature and variations are easy to implement, learn, and execute and naturally create so many different looks (backdoors, attacking scrambling defenses, post ups, running off screens, offball screens, etc.). Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka improved as shooters but none of them have developed an effective post game. Westbrook and Durant try it once in a while, and Ibaka has all but regressed on the low block. Flip Saunders prioritized Andrew Wiggins post game during his rookie season and it is now a legitimate weapon available to him for the rest of his career. Westbrook and Ibaka look largely clueless off ball, aside from spotting up. None of these players have developed into All-Defensive talents, which is hard to believe given their athleticism, dedication, and versatility. Players were often out of position on and off the ball and not "on-a-string" as proper defensive play is often describe as.
I am being harsh on Brooks but expectations, in terms of schemes and high quality X’s and O’s, must be high when you have two of the top 5 or 6 players and perinnial MVP candidates in the league in their primes. Obviously there are factors in the everyday process that we do not see but there were many obvious flaws on film throughout Brooks tenure that seemedobvious and simple to correct. Nonetheless, he is deserving of another job and deserves a great deal of credit for meeting expectations quicker than they thought and establishing the winning culture of the Thunder.
0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 7:14am #1056719

ballislyfe25
Participant
Scott Brooks got results when his teams were healthy and his head coaching record deserves him of another chance to lead a team. A coach that exeed expectations and has the endorsement of his players deserves another chance. It will be interesting to see what he can do in Washington.
Brooks has his flaws and I would not count well-rounded player development as one of his strengths. His Thunder teams won with their elite athleticism, which was not restricted by Brooks but also wasn’t harnessed into efficient schemes and didn’t foster intelligent play. Everything was, and largely still is under Billy Donovan, isolations and high screen and roll. Why not run/try continuous sets like the flex or 4 around 1 offenses? The movements of these offenses become second nature and variations are easy to implement, learn, and execute and naturally create so many different looks (backdoors, attacking scrambling defenses, post ups, running off screens, offball screens, etc.). Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka improved as shooters but none of them have developed an effective post game. Westbrook and Durant try it once in a while, and Ibaka has all but regressed on the low block. Flip Saunders prioritized Andrew Wiggins post game during his rookie season and it is now a legitimate weapon available to him for the rest of his career. Westbrook and Ibaka look largely clueless off ball, aside from spotting up. None of these players have developed into All-Defensive talents, which is hard to believe given their athleticism, dedication, and versatility. Players were often out of position on and off the ball and not "on-a-string" as proper defensive play is often describe as.
I am being harsh on Brooks but expectations, in terms of schemes and high quality X’s and O’s, must be high when you have two of the top 5 or 6 players and perinnial MVP candidates in the league in their primes. Obviously there are factors in the everyday process that we do not see but there were many obvious flaws on film throughout Brooks tenure that seemedobvious and simple to correct. Nonetheless, he is deserving of another job and deserves a great deal of credit for meeting expectations quicker than they thought and establishing the winning culture of the Thunder.
0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 10:01am #1056857

Biggysmalls
Participant
I still don’t think Scott Brooks is a great coach, but I have started to wonder the same thing. Is his offense stagnant or is it just the player’s he had play a certain way?
Similar to Blatt in Cleveland where everyone knew they didn’t run the offense he really wanted to install because of the iso-heavy players. I don’t know if Brooks has that in him as a coach but I do think he’s earned maybe some benefit of the doubt.
On the flip side of that, how is he going to look coaching a team without two of the best 5 or 6 players in the league? Is he good enough to scheme a decent or okay team to wins where another coach might not be able? I don’t know. I don’t know if he can. I don’t know if he can’t.
He’s proven in that he held a job with a really good team for a long time. We’ll see if he was along for the ride in OKC or if there’s more to him than what OKC showed.
Sometimes having star players can be a burden for a coach. You have to cater to them in the NBA more than any other league. In Cleveland, the coach is going to win a lot of games, but there’s always a shelf life because of LeBron. It might be a similar thing in OKC with those gys.

0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 10:01am #1056737

Biggysmalls
Participant
I still don’t think Scott Brooks is a great coach, but I have started to wonder the same thing. Is his offense stagnant or is it just the player’s he had play a certain way?
Similar to Blatt in Cleveland where everyone knew they didn’t run the offense he really wanted to install because of the iso-heavy players. I don’t know if Brooks has that in him as a coach but I do think he’s earned maybe some benefit of the doubt.
On the flip side of that, how is he going to look coaching a team without two of the best 5 or 6 players in the league? Is he good enough to scheme a decent or okay team to wins where another coach might not be able? I don’t know. I don’t know if he can. I don’t know if he can’t.
He’s proven in that he held a job with a really good team for a long time. We’ll see if he was along for the ride in OKC or if there’s more to him than what OKC showed.
Sometimes having star players can be a burden for a coach. You have to cater to them in the NBA more than any other league. In Cleveland, the coach is going to win a lot of games, but there’s always a shelf life because of LeBron. It might be a similar thing in OKC with those gys.

0
- Posted on: Sun, 04/24/2016 - 2:53am #1056804
  
  220
  Participant
  I can’t help but wonder if Scott Brooks has more than he showed in OKC especially since the Thunder are basically the same team with Billy Donovan as it was with Brooks. Brooks had a long career as a journeyman point guard so it’s hard to imagine that he doesn’t know how to run an offense. He deserved a second chance and I hope he succeeds for his and Washington’s sake.
  0
- Posted on: Sun, 04/24/2016 - 2:53am #1056925
  
  220
  Participant
  I can’t help but wonder if Scott Brooks has more than he showed in OKC especially since the Thunder are basically the same team with Billy Donovan as it was with Brooks. Brooks had a long career as a journeyman point guard so it’s hard to imagine that he doesn’t know how to run an offense. He deserved a second chance and I hope he succeeds for his and Washington’s sake.
  0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 3:15pm #1056768

Hitster
Participant
Scott Brooks is a very good coach at developing younger players and making them stars, he was moved on by the Thunder as he couldn’t get them over the line to a title. One Conference Title, two losing Conference Finals and four Divisional Titles is a good resume.
In some ways I feel that him and Thibs should almost have taken each others’ jobs. Thibs having the more experienced Washington roster and Scott Brooks the younger T-Wolves talent.
Hiring Scott gives the Wizards a slightly better shot at getting KD too.

0
Posted on: Sat, 04/23/2016 - 3:15pm #1056889

Hitster
Participant
Scott Brooks is a very good coach at developing younger players and making them stars, he was moved on by the Thunder as he couldn’t get them over the line to a title. One Conference Title, two losing Conference Finals and four Divisional Titles is a good resume.
In some ways I feel that him and Thibs should almost have taken each others’ jobs. Thibs having the more experienced Washington roster and Scott Brooks the younger T-Wolves talent.
Hiring Scott gives the Wizards a slightly better shot at getting KD too.

0
Posted on: Mon, 04/25/2016 - 4:24am #1057114

Mr. HookShot
Participant
In terms of his weaknesses; maybe hire an experienced offensive assistant? Someone along the lines of D’Antoni or Nate McMillan?
0
Posted on: Mon, 04/25/2016 - 4:24am #1056995

Mr. HookShot
Participant
In terms of his weaknesses; maybe hire an experienced offensive assistant? Someone along the lines of D’Antoni or Nate McMillan?
0
Author
Posts

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.