coach d'antoni - not actually the problem?

[Upgrade Dave]

coach brown started off the season 1-4, much of which was played without steve nash. as we all saw, coach brown was fired hastily, in spite of a .621 record last season (taking the PUSSific division).

since steve nash returned, the fakers have gone 3-3.

why didn't coach brown receive the benefit of the doubt? the consideration to assess the team with a healthy roster?

the fakers are STILL a losing team 22 games after a coaching change. why no noise calling for coach d'antoni's immediate ouster?

Being a defensive minded coach, when they brought in Nash, I knew his days were numbered.

 

[cranrab]

interesting footnote.

in games where pau gasol has started, the fakers record is 12-13 (.480)

 

[cranrab]

You can make a case for any coach that has had time to build chemistry with his team and implement his style consistently.

i wanted to revisit this idea surrounding the buzzword topic of "chemistry".

while "chemistry" and the concept of players knowing each other's likes/dislikes and styles is definitely important, it should be noted that true professionals don't need that much time to establish "chemistry".

for example, i submit the 2007 boston celtics. in the very first season the boston celtics gathered the big 3, they won 66 games and the NBA championship. it's worth noting that NONE of the starters played all 82 games either.

i also submit the 2007 fakers. in mid-season, pau gasol rescued the franchise and carried them to the NBA finals. only 2 starters played all 82 games.

and of course, most recently we have the 2010 miami heat. in the very first season the miami heat assembled their big 3, they won 58 games and went to the NBA finals. NONE of the starters played all 82 games.

so any objective individual can see that "chemistry" is a poor excuse for the current fakers to hide behind.