“Blame is just a lazy person’s way of making sense of chaos” - Doug Copland
(AP Photo/Alonzo Adams)
I recently have been installing shelves in my garage to help better organize the general mess that a self-admitting pack-rat can accumulate. They are fairly easy to install, nail in the support beams that run at a 45 degree angle into a stud, screw in the bracket clips above the support team so that the shelves are held in place by the clip and given structural integrity by the beams. Of course, as I pondered what explicative I should refrain from screaming into the heavens while squeezing my pulsating thumb, I would not have agreed with my own assessment. So as the evil (and yes, I believe inanimate objects sometimes earn these types of adjectives) hammer dropped to the ground and I stood at the shelf, grumbling some amalgamation of agitated words and grunts, I began to ponder who is truly at fault for the Thunder’s offensive woes.
Don’t be surprised, a lot of things in life lead me back to the Thunder…in fact, if you’re here at this site reading this, I really don’t feel a need to explain it to you because, well, you’re here. You understand perfectly.
But as I stared at the shelf, the hammer and my ever swelling thumb, I began to wonder about what is the real reason the Thunder struggle so badly on offense. The shelves that required the use of a hammer…the moron holding his thumb because he couldn’t execute the hammer swing correctly…both of those things led me to ask a question I’m sure we all want an answer for regarding the offensives woes: Who’s more to blame, the offensive scheme OR the players?
True, the hammer was a good tool, but surely the manufacturers of the shelf system could have just allowed the support beams to be screwed in place along with the clips, it would have taken the hammer out of my hands and prevented me from potentially injuring myself. Without the hammer, I would have been in the best possible situation to successfully install my shelves with as little possible risk of injury or mistakes.
And so it is with the Thunder. Brooks’ offensive system is one that is primarily based on high screens, wide spacing, timely cuts and precise passes. Its goal is to open up the floor so that the players can create easy shots for themselves and pull defenders out of the paint to increase the chance for scoring at the rim. This is not an offense based off of a rigid scheme or one that is mandated movement or even a conventional “system” at all. It is free-flowing and gives an exceptional amount of freedom to the players who operate within it.
And that’s the issue.
This scheme of precise passes, timely cuts and free-reign decision making is one that is perfect and tailor made for a team of veteran playmakers. Remind me which team is the second youngest in the league again?
But is the scheme the problem? Is it even a problem? The offensive stats would shout yes, as would the turnover rate. However aren’t the players as equally responsible for the offensive (and I do mean both meanings here) struggles? Durant, Green, Krstic, Thabo, all of these players are not rookies or sophomores anymore. They’ve been around the league enough to understand the finer points of when to cut, when to shoot and when to pass that make this system so tantalizing. Because even though I think that it is a coach’s job to place his players in a situation that allows them to excel and best utilizes their talents, once the ball is tipped and the game is underway, all a coach can really do to affect the outcome of a game is make subs and call timeouts.
The players HAVE to execute whatever system or scheme they find themselves in, especially one that COULD make this team a nightmare offensively if they can only grab a foothold on how best to run it.
The argument could be made that learning an offense takes years and with a second year point guard being the primary facilitator, this team should be given some slack. And I would agree with that whole-heartedly. But if they continue to struggle, if Westbrook continues to make poor decisions of when to shoot and when to pass, if Durant and Co. continue to stand around the perimeter while Westbrook dribbles the shot-clock out and is thus forced to force a shot himself, if the rest of the perimeter and post players continue to take lower percentage shots than higher ones, if there continues to be no movement or imagination with this team’s offense, which ironically is exactly what this type of scheme is supposed to promote, then there has to come a time when Brooks’ must face the reality that this group of players just might not be the right mix to run such a free-flowing, playmaking offense.
It’s no surprise that the individual who has excelled the most in this offense also happens to be the rookie shooting guard that is supposed to be the least familiar with the scheme. Why? Because Harden’s feel for the game, his court vision and his understanding of angles and when to do what is the best on the team. But I’m not exactly sure if that speaks more positively about Harden—-or more negatively about the scheme and the set of players not named, James Harden.
In the end, there is no quick and easy answer. Like most things in life, it is typically not one or the other, the players or the scheme, that is solely at fault but some combination therein. And blame, like so many things for fans, is something that we usually only look to when the team is losing (winning cures all ails, after all). And since they’ve been on a fairly rough stretch recently, all of the warts are coming to light and we always fixate on what’s wrong with a team instead of the positives.
But isn’t that the point? Not sit back on what’s going right but strive to improve, to fix what is going wrong. Isn’t that how championship contenders are born?
So, since this is the Sunday Discussion, there are no quick and easy answers in this article because if Brooks’ and the rest of the team can’t figure out how to fix it, there’s no way I nor anyone here can. But that doesn’t mean the question should just be ignored.
At what point do you stop sacrificing right-now wins for the promise of what the future offense might look like? At what point do you make the decision that this offense just can’t work with this collection of skill-sets versus continuing to be patient and allow this team to grow into the scheme and identity that they could become: an offensive juggernaut?
Or is the question much more simpler…what if the offense wasn’t broken, just missing a vital piece?
I’ve always been much more interested in searching for solutions to questions, than merely assigning blame to a situation that has no right answer. Unless of course your answer is that I alone was the one at fault for bashing my thumb with the hammer and the solution would be for me to stop blaming everyone but myself and be more careful next time.
Because clearly, it was the shelf manufacturing company’s fault. I mean, a hammer. Really?
Cold comfort!
You commit an error. Write to me in PM, we will discuss.
Quite right! Idea excellent, I support.
I consider, that you are mistaken. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
I think, that you are not right. I am assured. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM, we will communicate.
In my opinion you are mistaken. Let's discuss it. Write to me in PM, we will communicate.
Yes, really. All above told the truth. We can communicate on this theme. Here or in PM.
Absolutely with you it agree. Idea excellent, I support.
I apologise that, I can help nothing. But it is assured, that you will find the correct decision.
Completely I share your opinion. In it something is and it is excellent idea. I support you.
Brooks has yet to pick a clear favorite #2 and 3 lineup. I would. And the starters with Harden and with Collison are the simplest choices. Right now those are #4 and 5, not a big deal from that perspective but the minutes are so low- used about 1.5 minutes a game. It probably should 5+ each.
Green in the post can work with just about any other current big. So I agree try to develop that.
J.G. :@Crow
The surprise of the year that has been criminally underused. Green’s post game has improved by leaps and bounds, especially the sweet running hook shot, and yet we still do not utilize it enough.
Ha, I just noticed this post after I posted my last comment.
Great minds think alike.
I love Brooks, so no way am I suggesting he shouldn't be the coach, but ideally we need a coach like Hubie Brown. A straight X's and O's wizard with a supreme grasp on fundamentals.
@justin
I agree with that. Collison started at C for a considerable amount of time in seattle so it's not like he'll be out of his element, though it's not the ideal position for him. I think he definitely needs to get a shot now at starting for us there over Nenad.
Also, I really liked how green looked against the rockets in the post. He really should focus on playing with his back to the basket because he has really good moves down there, especially that little baby hook shot. He could also spin past many of the less mobile PF's that guard him and get to the basket.
justin :Nick Collison and James Harden playing more would help the offense. Nenad Krstic has been inconsistent and inefficient, I think his minutes should be cut and maybe even take his starting spot away and give it to Nick.
excellent suggestion . . .
Nick Collison and James Harden playing more would help the offense. Nenad Krstic has been inconsistent and inefficient, I think his minutes should be cut and maybe even take his starting spot away and give it to Nick.
@Crow
The surprise of the year that has been criminally underused. Green's post game has improved by leaps and bounds, especially the sweet running hook shot, and yet we still do not utilize it enough.
Probably wouldn't want to use it against a good rebounding lineup or a strong inside scoring lineup. Unless you ran. And that lineup probably should run anyways.
Durant- Green- Harden- Sefolosha- Westbrook was dynamite the few minutes it was used, especially on offense. Try it more, against the right opponents; no really good excuse to me not to.
Green jumpers= 63% of shots for 38% eFG%.
Green inside- 37% of shots for 68% eFG%.
Change one out of 4 of his jumpers into an inside shot, or 2 per game, and you've done something. A small team impact really but you have to find and build on small impacts.
A healthy Ollie would appear to help the offense. Same for Weaver. Livingston? Not really in general. If you use him it is almost 4 on 5 and you can't use Thabo or Ibaka too. Collison- Durant- Green - Harden - Livingston seems alright though.
Before the last 10 games it was about Green 35 minutes, Westbrook 35, Harden 23, Thabo 32, Krstic 24, Collison 18.
About 167 minutes.
The last 10 games it was Green 39 minutes, Westbrook 35, Harden 25, Thabo 27, Krstic 22, Collison 21.
About 169 minutes.
If you went Green 33 minutes, Westbrook 32, Harden 32, Thabo 24, Krstic 20, Collison 25, White 8.
That's 171 minutes. Would you get better offense? I'd guess yes but have to try it to know.
Of course the starting lienup doesn't have to be your best lineup and if you are winning with your bench that is an ok way to go, a way some coaches prefer. But Collison and Harden have the potential to play more. If they in fact make things work better then you could get better overall results by using them more, whether they start or not, and use others less- probably Thabo and Green, though I guess it could be Westbrook and Krstic or some minutes from most or all of them.
You could say stay with the current starting lineup for the defense it provides but the average defense of the rest of the lineups is only about 1.5 pts worse while the average offense of the rest of the lineups is about 7.5 pts better.
Of course there is the against starters vs subs issue but by Adjusted +/- the starting lineup is not showing as facing a tougher than average set of opponents.
Improve the offense?
This is scatter shot but here are a few thoughts:
By the stats Westbrook should not shoot the ball late in the shot clock. To avoid him shooting the ball, maybe his teammates should avoid giving it back to him halfway or more thru the shot clock. To avoid that they need to either give it to KD or Harden and I'd prefer Harden. If he is in. Late in the clock I'd want Westbrook looking to make a quick cut to the basket, off the ball. If open, feed; if not, at least try to use that as a distraction to get something else.
Might want to try to fastbreak a bit more. Not sure who is the best fastbreak finisher but whoever it is should try to leak out more and can't be relied on to a rebounder. But if you fastbreak for an open 3 then this guy could trail and do that. 3s off fastbreaks seem pretty easy to get. Is this guy Green? Looks like he is killer, by far team best, early in the shot clock.
If you are willing to take any clues from the lineup stats the starting lineup is even worse than average for the team on offense. Does it make sense to make this lineup the 4th most used in the league and used as much as the next 15 Thunder lineups? Not to me.
What to use more? The starters plus Collison over Grenn or Harden over Thabo each do 20 pts better on offense per 100 possessions. Small sample... because they've declined to give it more a try. You can either cut back the starting lineup or small stray lineups. Either way you should be able to test / use these lineups more. It almost seems as if they don't want to try or know.
I keep having this thought, so I'll put it out there: I'd love to see Russ post up like GP used to. Payton would iso and back down and just kill pgs on the post at times. I think Russ could actually do this--with work! I keep thinking about Payton also because he took a few years to get it together and really learned to shoot in the league. But he was always a pg, and a pg first. That's what I miss out of Russel. Oh man, DJ, Payton, that's the kind of legacy I want out of Russ. Great Sonic guards of the past. It's way too early to give up on Russ.
@The DON wants to have Harden’s & Ibaka’s offspring
yeah nate rob would fit on a team with a strong controlling coach, like the lakers or celtics where they wouldnt put up with his crap
The DON wants to have Harden’s & Ibaka’s offspring :
Durantula :Hollis Price?
LMAO, is he even still alive?
ROFL..hahahaha!!
Durantula :
Hollis Price?
LMAO, is he even still alive?
@GAP
Yeah, and it's a shame because he has all the ability in the world. Pound for pound one of the best athletes in league history. The man is 5'7 at best. His jumper is silky and wet. He has range. He can pass.
But all the extracurricular stuff with him is just too much. It's not like he's a thug that gets in trouble off the court really, it's just that he's absolutely immature and out of control.
@Durantula
I would agree, but I haven't seen him play since OU but he could be a good player if he still got his game on.
Hollis Price?
as a knicks fan, i agree, nate robinson is a bad idea, id rather have marbury.
The DON wants to have Harden’s & Ibaka’s offspring :
Durantula :Nate Robinson?
I’ve said this before and i will say it again, i have personally played with and against nate on countless occasions in pickup games and in organized games. He is the most immature knucklehead in the entire league. There is a reason he is in the dog house of D’Antoni, and that reason is that his act eventually just gets intolerable .
If it were based on talent alone, he’d be the perfect sparkplug pg for us off the bench. But there is more to the game than just talent.
Keep him the hell away from this team.
I'm going to have to agree with this assesment DON, Nate is just too flamboyant for this team.
Durantula :
Nate Robinson?
I've said this before and i will say it again, i have personally played with and against nate on countless occasions in pickup games and in organized games. He is the most immature knucklehead in the entire league. There is a reason he is in the dog house of D'Antoni, and that reason is that his act eventually just gets intolerable .
If it were based on talent alone, he'd be the perfect sparkplug pg for us off the bench. But there is more to the game than just talent.
Keep him the hell away from this team.
@Keith
Sir, i don't know who you are, but your comments are turning me on in the most severe of fashions
Nate Robinson?
J.G. did a great job conveying my sentiments exactly, I think it's a mixture of both coaching and players. On one hand in the Houston game, I thought Serge was having a nice game in the first half and it took brooks a 17pt lead (for Houston) to finally take out Krstic and put Ibaka back in.
Brooks seemed to let Livingston play a lot longer in the Pistons and Rockets games because of Russ's play, but needs to coach by feel and not always rotation. On the other hand, and it's been said time and time again that Westbrook is trying to shoulder the load and his jump shooting is killing us down the stretch. I can't remember who posted it, but I do remember KD looking a lil pissed off by Russ's play down the stretch in Houston and it's never good to have your best player bummed by his supposed PG because he knows why we went from rallying back to just down by 1pt to a few quick jumpers later from Russ (and no offensive rebounds to speak of) to gift wrapping the game for the Rockets.
I think the system has great potential but the lineups needs to be utilized so that the system can realize that potential. And a lot of it has to do with knocking down open shots. But rhythm is extremely important for this type of system, which is why we can go on big runs. One of the problems is Kristic, one of, if not the most, inconsistent starter. You never know if he is going to come out and shoot well or start 0 for 6, and his shooting plays a big part in hitting our rhythm. I'm not sure why Thomas isn't playing, but Ibaka probably isn't ready to start and Collison is better coming off the bench, like Harden. The one game Thomas started, was against Houston on Nov 29th. We started off doing well, out rebounding the rockets, outscored them 29-25, setting a decent pace. Against the lakers he played 35 minutes and yet was +4, while all the starters were big -'s, and he played the entire 4th quarter and helped to keep it close.
These are only two instances but I think thomas helps this team a lot more than the boxscore shows. He doesn't play well against fast small teams but he hasn't played since the 2nd, none in any of our losses. Is this because Kristic is the future? i hope not, but Ibaka isn't ready either. I think we should be starting Thomas when the matchups are right, Kristic was good against shaq, but thomas needed to be in there when shaq wasn't there. thomas' does a better job boxing out than Kristic, which makes it easier to get rebounds, even if he isn't the one getting them. Also, thomas shoots close to the basket, so there is at least a chance that he or another thunder gets the rebound, when Kristic shoots, there is almost no chance at an offensive rebound. I think this dynamic affects the rhythm of the offense, or at least can affect it. When Kristic is making those open shots that westbrook loves to get him, it works, but that isn't often enough to warrant starting him. If he comes off the bench, then if he is hot he can stay in, if he is cold then he doesn't play much. does anyone know why thomas isn't playing?
Relativism tells us that all things are relative, and that there are no absolutes. Which makes relativism an absolute.
That's why you smashed your thumb.
I'm also absolutely sure that the Thunder will eventually grow into this offense. They're still young and getting it figured out. They've shown flashes and it will take some time before the flashes show up on a regular basis, but they'll get there. Relatively speaking.
GAP :
f5alcon :also when we came into the season i dont think anybody really expected us to be .500 at this point. Maybe the goals of mid 30s for wins are still realistic.
To be perfectly honest, I thought we could win about 40 games this season and still do.
yeah i probably shouldnt have used an absolute, because yeah a few people did say that at the start of the season. I know I said 35 wins.
f5alcon :also when we came into the season i dont think anybody really expected us to be .500 at this point. Maybe the goals of mid 30s for wins are still realistic.
To be perfectly honest, I thought we could win about 40 games this season and still do.
Keith :I feel I need to temper my growing frustrating with an explanation. I was not a fan of Westbrook last year. I knew Harden looked like a better/easier fit, and I still wanted Rubio. When that didn’t happen, I hoped for the best. With the site growing a bit this year and the team doing well, I felt it only right to let people grow their own opinions and not force mine. As things have changed and certain person became more critical, I felt it more reasonable to voice my concerns. Now, I still think Westbrook has all the talent in the world, but I’m quite unsure that it will develop perfectly, or if his final form is even what we want for the team.
Anyway, I think Brooks needs to man up as well. D’Antoni made a system that almost any group of scrubs can implement to run a decent offense. Brooks made a system that got young, shoot first guys to play good defense. Both have done wonderful things. But, both will never make it to the top without getting more out of the other end of the floor. Brooks needs a little more D’Antoni, D’Antoni needs a little more Brooks. You could put Nash in our system and he wouldn’t look like a superstar. But, you could put Westbrook in Phoenix and he would still be out of control and a poor shooter. I’m hard on Westbrook because Presti has made it clear that he is a long-term guy. I don’t think Westbrook has earned that title, to this point, and thus I want to see more.
I agree...
shiki=4 seasons :I find someone mentions Billups,if anyoone here has memory of the five years of the begining of his career,or checks the number of that time,he can find how bad Billups is.So pay attention for Russ,maybe someday he could be a smart PG just as Billups.
and if trade,why not Ramon Sessions?
As bad as Russ's has played, I would never trade him for sessions, but I would aquire sessions for a backup role and use him as leverage to make Russ look over his shoulder at the bench.
also when we came into the season i dont think anybody really expected us to be .500 at this point. Maybe the goals of mid 30s for wins are still realistic.
It really doesnt matter, presti wont trade westbrook until his rookie deal is up, so in 2 and a half years when that happens if he still is the same as now, then he gets replaced, but if he continues to improve then we have our PG. We are not gonna win a championship this year, even if we had chris paul we wouldnt. Putting the blame on westbrook isnt fair, its not like the rest of the team has been amazing. Last night if durant scored his usual we win. Plenty of other games green played badly. If its anybody's fault blame prest and brooks for the team they put on the floor.
I feel I need to temper my growing frustrating with an explanation. I was not a fan of Westbrook last year. I knew Harden looked like a better/easier fit, and I still wanted Rubio. When that didn't happen, I hoped for the best. With the site growing a bit this year and the team doing well, I felt it only right to let people grow their own opinions and not force mine. As things have changed and certain person became more critical, I felt it more reasonable to voice my concerns. Now, I still think Westbrook has all the talent in the world, but I'm quite unsure that it will develop perfectly, or if his final form is even what we want for the team.
Anyway, I think Brooks needs to man up as well. D'Antoni made a system that almost any group of scrubs can implement to run a decent offense. Brooks made a system that got young, shoot first guys to play good defense. Both have done wonderful things. But, both will never make it to the top without getting more out of the other end of the floor. Brooks needs a little more D'Antoni, D'Antoni needs a little more Brooks. You could put Nash in our system and he wouldn't look like a superstar. But, you could put Westbrook in Phoenix and he would still be out of control and a poor shooter. I'm hard on Westbrook because Presti has made it clear that he is a long-term guy. I don't think Westbrook has earned that title, to this point, and thus I want to see more.
I find someone mentions Billups,if anyoone here has memory of the five years of the begining of his career,or checks the number of that time,he can find how bad Billups is.So pay attention for Russ,maybe someday he could be a smart PG just as Billups.
and if trade,why not Ramon Sessions?
Keith :@thunder10The system itself is broken. That said, Westbrook doesn’t help things. It’s not his fault that Durant doesn’t play well without the ball. It’s not his fault that Thabo is timid (at best) on offense. It’s not his fault their neither of his big men get into the post and get easy shots. It IS his fault, however, that he dribbles into traffic, makes inaccurate passes, and shoots when he should pass.
Something that I’ve been thinking about lately is the more popular comparisons for Westbrook: Parker and Rondo. Neither can shoot, neither started out as much of a playmaker, and both were more chaotic athlete than significant NBA player. Something very interesting to note about both players is circumstances around their progression. Parker was drafted onto a great team and given every opportunity to succeed. Further, he had a team of great veterans around teaching him and making up for his weaknesses. Rondo was all but hated by Boston fans for the early part of his career. Suddenly, the entire Boston culture and locker room changed with Garnett and Allen. Rondo turned from a nobody to a great PG in 2 years because of the team around him. Westbrook doesn’t have that. Durant is a great player, but it takes time to become what Duncan and Garnett were for their PGs.
Amen...
@thunder10
I'd say off-the-ball movement in general is a serious problem...across the board, not just for Durant. Now Westbrook does compound the issue by sometimes making poor decisions, but for a system depending upon timely cuts and precise passes, there is hardly ANY movement off of the ball to make it easier on the offense and on Westbrook as a point guard.