Washington Wizards Q and A: Thunder Writers Discuss Scott Brooks
By Ben Mehic
4) What are some common misconceptions about Brooks?
J.A. Sherman (@WTLC):
I think the most common one is that he is not an “X’s and O’s coach.”
I am reminded of something Popovich said recently – every coach at the professional level knows the schematics of designing plays, setting up a defense, etc.
The difference between a good coach and a great coach is in their ability to a) communicate the concept to their players and, with the proper education and nurturing, get them to execute it with the understanding of the big picture; and b) surround themselves with the right kinds of assistant coaches to help reinforce the process.
In both of these areas, Brooks thrived.
He is first and foremost a relationship coach, and I would argue is simply a more subdued version of Steve Kerr, where both have that calm, West Coast personality that goes with the flow.
In the latter regard, Brooks has always had great assistant coaches around him, starting with defensive guru Ron Adams. When Adams left, the Thunder defense learned and adapted, not only to his lessons, but also to their new coaching staff, who helped propel them consistently to top five finishes in defensive efficiency.
Shawn Woods (@Shawn_Woods15):
This might contradict what I said about Brooks’ offense earlier, but there is a misconception that Brooks is a “bad” offensive coach.
Kevin Durant is one of the best isolation scorers in the league, and Brooks got him the ball as often as possible. Russell Westbrook isn’t a good isolation scorer, but he became a really good passer under Brooks and he has to have the ball in his hands to do that.
The good coaches adjust to the players in the system, not the other way around. Brooks might not be a good offensive coach, but it’s possible he’ll adjust to the players he has with the Wizards to improve their offense.
Next: Reacting to Brooks in Washington