Why not? We have a young team, we want a coach that's going to be in it for the long haul while still being effective at mentoring these kids. McHale was brought in to teach our bigs a thing or two. We aren't big anymore, so let's move forward. Look at OKC and Scott Brooks for reference.
I think winning the first 2 games of the season and Harden dominating was really bad for the expectations of the fans. It appears to have created an unrealistic expectation of the team - 2nd youngest team in the league making it to the playoffs on a very tough Western conference division.
Absolutely not! Leave McHale alone! His staffs need time to set plays and made adjustments for a young Team!
After only 4 games? Lost one close game. And good second half in the last game.. McHale still know more about the game than panicky fans.. He stays!
McHale was always supposed to be an in between coach. He was supposed to be that transitionary coach who would train his eventual replacement. He was also brought in to help our bugs flourish. I think both points of that are now moot. We have the opportunity to think about developing a long term relationship between a coach and our stars if McHale is replaced sooner than later. This isn't a knee jerk reaction to a win loss record, because in all likelihood a new coach means more losses. Maybe fire isn't the right term, I want a transition to occur between McHale and his replacement. We need more time for the rooks and we need to develop a lasting bond between coach and player, McHale is a threat to that the longer he stays. Realistically do you honestly believe when his contract is out he will stay? He was mulling leaving this summer. Why get our guys used to system and develop bonds just to rip them apart for some young gun to come in and take control? I think if we are going to follow the OKC model, we should follow it a bit more tightly.
