Oklahoman: Sampson candidate for Bucks & Bobcats jobs

[DenverSooner]

His seat is going to be really warm if they get bounced by Houston.

It shouldn't be. He got the number 1 seed this year after losing Hardin. It is not his fault that Westbrook got hurt. This is fan logic, not ownership logic. The front office and owners understand that the Westbrook injury is a very big deal. They undersand losing Hardin was a very big deal. I susupect the owners are quite happy with Presti and Brooks at this point. Those guys had a tough situation with Hardin. The team couldn't afford to keep Durant, Westrbrook, Hardin and Ibaka. They made a solid deal and still had the best record in the West. Some of you just aren't logical. It will suck if OKC loses this series but to suggest a coaching change is needed is crazy in my opinion. The players like each other, they like Brooks and they are winning when healthy. Don't change something that is working.

 

[AdaSooner]

Perkins is the guy they should have moved. And I'm probably in the minority here, but I think they'd be better with a pass-first pg and Harden/KD, than Westy as the pg with KD, and two black holes in the starting rotation (Perkins and Sef).

It's good to know that I'm not the only one who thinks Perkins is the weak link. The only thing he does well is scowl and complain about the officiating.

 

[TheGimper]

It shouldn't be. He got the number 1 seed this year after losing Hardin.

Losing Harden didn't hurt the Thunder in the regular season. That's an ill conceived notion. Kevin Martin took over Harden's role just fine in the regular season. We saw improvements from Durant, Westbrook, and Ibaka. The backup PG role got upgraded as Reggie this year is better than Fisher last season. And Thabeet is an upgrade over Nazr. Not to mention Liggins is an upgrade over Cook. All and all, this year's team is a better squad. Nothing to commend Brooks for.

Brooks is not above criticism. He doesn't run a great offense, often times counting on Russell/Durant to bail them out with isos. This is even more evident with Russell going down as the Rockets know to focus on Durant once an offensive set gets broken down.

He also makes horrible roster decisions. He insists on starting Kendrick on the first and second half, despite this creating horrible matchup problems as Ibaka cannot guard Parsons on the wing. The Rockets can also get away with this as Ibaka/Perkins have no low post game and thus can't exploit Parsons playing the 4 on defense.

In addition, Fisher should never be playing the 2 over Liggins. Backup PG is fine, but Fisher does everything Liggins does at the 2 only far, far worse.

 

[sperry]

It shouldn't be. He got the number 1 seed this year after losing Hardin. It is not his fault that Westbrook got hurt. This is fan logic, not ownership logic. The front office and owners understand that the Westbrook injury is a very big deal. They undersand losing Hardin was a very big deal. I susupect the owners are quite happy with Presti and Brooks at this point. Those guys had a tough situation with Hardin. The team couldn't afford to keep Durant, Westrbrook, Hardin and Ibaka. They made a solid deal and still had the best record in the West. Some of you just aren't logical. It will suck if OKC loses this series but to suggest a coaching change is needed is crazy in my opinion. The players like each other, they like Brooks and they are winning when healthy. Don't change something that is working.

I'm not convinced he's anything better than a mediocre NBA coach. He has two of the 10 best players in the league on his roster, including a guy who is going to end up as a top 10 player in the history of the NBA. Just like Spoelstra in the East, we got a 1 seed because of the talent we have, not because of brilliant coaching. In fact I think a lot of Brooks moves are puzzling, and for the people who ranted and raved about Jeff Capel's lack of a system, what exactly is the system that Scott Brooks runs?


As for Presti, he needs to bring some talent in to OKC. Past Westbrook and Durant, our roster is just awful. Our 3-15 men have to be in the bottom third of the league. I pray that Harden wasn't a money issue, and just a Harden wasn't willing to be a 6th man and 3rd option any more. Otherwise keeping Serge Ibaka over him is going to go down as one of the all time worst moves.

 

[campbest]

It shouldn't be. He got the number 1 seed this year after losing Hardin. It is not his fault that Westbrook got hurt. This is fan logic, not ownership logic. The front office and owners understand that the Westbrook injury is a very big deal. They undersand losing Hardin was a very big deal. I susupect the owners are quite happy with Presti and Brooks at this point. Those guys had a tough situation with Hardin. The team couldn't afford to keep Durant, Westrbrook, Hardin and Ibaka. They made a solid deal and still had the best record in the West. Some of you just aren't logical. It will suck if OKC loses this series but to suggest a coaching change is needed is crazy in my opinion. The players like each other, they like Brooks and they are winning when healthy. Don't change something that is working.

Who celebrates #1 seeds? You really think if SA doesn't sit players for rest they don't get the #1 seed? Listen, I love the Thunder but it took SA's injuries and strategy of sitting their older guys for OKC to get the #1 seed. Brooks has ran his course, he is great for young, rebuilding teams because he fits the "culture" the front office wants. But at some point you better have some offensive strategy to hang your hat on or your going to get beat...see Miami last year. His rotations have been VERY questionable and he widely known as one of the worst end-game strategists in the league. I appreciate what he has done thus far, but he doesn't have what it takes to get them over the edge. You can't have a system that runs isolation sets for guys who don't have the skills do occupy the roles. The writing was on the wall last year when it took some incredible jump shooting to beat SA in those four games...but when you face a solid defense that makes you move the ball from side to side (which OKC can't) they will continue to struggle.

Brooks is one of OKC's "guys" so fans are quick to protect him, but his inefficiencies as a coach have not improved since his first season.

This team was down LATE in Game 2 with Westbrook, series could be easily 3-2 headed to Toyota for a close out game.

 

[snydrosooner]

Maynor needed the change in scenery. Every game he played for the Thunder he was not the same as before. He was asked to go to the D league to get more playing time and turned it down. You cannot blame Presti, knowing what we saw of Maynor and his choices for trading him. IN hindsite, I would like to have him for right now though.

 

[DenverSooner]

I am simply saying the results of this post season should not be a reason to fire the coach. Those that don't think it is a big deal to get the number 1 seed in the west are crazy. Even if they got it based on San Antonio resting people that still means the Thunder earned the number 2 seed with some major changes in the roster. To me that indicates the coach is doing something right. OKC was looking like they would sweep Houston before Westbrooks injury.

Do you want the Thunder to be run like the Oakland Raiders?

 

[TheGimper]

I am simply saying the results of this post season should not be a reason to fire the coach. Those that don't think it is a big deal to get the number 1 seed in the west are crazy. Even if they got it based on San Antonio resting people that still means the Thunder earned the number 2 seed with some major changes in the roster. To me that indicates the coach is doing something right. OKC was looking like they would sweep Houston before Westbrooks injury.

Do you want the Thunder to be run like the Oakland Raiders?

If that means being one of the most successful franchises in history only to have a few down years and then be taken over by one of the sharpest GMs in the league then yes, I would like the league to be run like the Raiders.

 

[DenverSooner]

The Raiders have been a joke for a long time. Since 1985 they have been above .500 just 7 times. They have been below .500 14 times. The Raiders had a 20 year run that was impressive, even more than impressive but the Raiders are a great example of how not to run a franchise.

 

[DenverSooner]

Seriously, your response about the raiders is based on what they did from 65 to 85? How about modern history? How many seasons above .500 since 1985?

 

[TheGimper]

Seriously, your response about the raiders is based on what they did from 65 to 85? How about modern history? How many seasons above .500 since 1985?

The majority of them they were not below .500, plus they dominated between 2000-2002. There have been numerous sports franchises who have been far less successful in that time span (many in the NFL). The Raiders are just the go to for people who aren't trying to be honest or creative.

 

[DenverSooner]

13 of them were. When I was a kid Oakland was great. They have been a joke for a long time. Denver, KC and San Diego have all made the play offs more often than Oakland in the last 25 years.