Have you looked at the record for the past four years at this time of the year right before the west coast trip?
Go take a look before you start calling people stupid.
I'm sorry; I went overboard in calling it a stupid comment (note that I did NOT call you stupid, however). I apologize. But my opinion holds: You are putting way too much blame on the coach for the failures of the roster--and the players themselves (cough-cough Jason Kidd). Did Doc Rivers suddenly go from an idiot to a genius? The Coach can only do so much; the players have to execute. My opinion is that, over the past few years, the Nets have signed veterans on the downside of their career for pennies on the dollar to fill out their roster, and they were incapable of producing what Coach Frank wanted from them. It was as if there was a disconnect between the players Frank wanted and the players Rod Thorn gave him. Part of that was due to the salary structure on the team, of course. How can you blame Frank for having a hard time making a team out of a pile of crap?
I feel that, for the first time, they have a team that is filled with players that Frank wants. This will be a big test. he does have the advantage that no one is expecting much this year, but his vision has thus far panned out: They are 6-6, which is better than anyone would have expected.
Of their losses, no one is to blame for the Phoenix and Cleveland games. Those were doomed to be losses.
Golden State . . . they could have won, but i don't blame Frank for that. The players were clearly still trying to figure out how to play together; it wasn't until game four vs Detroit that they (read: Devin) started to "get it." They weren't sure how to interact together, the rookies were still kind of skittish, Najera was hurt, and Simmons was horrible. The first few games should be looked at as just more competitive training camp, as far as I am concerned.
The other three losses . . . well, look. Devin was hurt, which had a reverberating effect throughout the roster (it meant that Hassell had to play; notice he has been buried since Devin's return, and Dooling could come off the bench again). If Devin was healthy, obviously they were all winnable. Without Devin, how many coaches in the league could have made a difference? They fell apart in the fourth quarter against Miami, but had played well until that point, and just had no energy in one of the two Indiana games (the one that Granger didn't play). The other Indiana game, they were just outplayed, but played hard, despite Devin's absence (and the absence of some other players, if I remember correctly).
So the way I see it, your complaints about Frank have to focus on five quarters: The fourth against Miami, and the entire game against Indiana. Maybe they could have won one or both of those, even without Devin. But give Miami credit: They have a .500 record themselves, and have beaten San Antonio and Philadelphia. They're not Oklahoma City. Maybe the Miami game was winnable, though. Indiana . . . sometimes if a team has no energy, there's nothing a coach can do to change that. it just is what it is.
I really think that is nitpicking over the course of 12 games. Remember, over the past 20 quarters, the nets have been outscored in just five of them. That's pretty consistent. You have to give the players a chance to "get it." They're clearly buying into what Frank is selling; they're playing hard. What more do you want?
