Against teams .500 and over: 1-7
Against teams less than .500: 7-2
This is the classic definition of mediocre - a .500 team that can beat sub-.500 teams and can't beat those over it.
How can a team with so much talent be so mediocre?
Most of the time there is a complex of reasons, but in this case the data is so stark it's amazing to me that no one else is concentrating on it: Lawrence Frank cannot in-game coach.
The Nets are one of the few teams in the NBA yet to have won by 10 or more points. (The Knicks, Seattle and Minnesota are the others. Combined they have barely more wins than the Nets.) They have lost 6 by 10 or more, 5 by 20 or more.
During the Lawrence Frank era, as they say, the Nets are 166-138, a difference of +28. But 14 of them were the initial streak, so it's really +14. Over 5 seasons.
Bruce Ratner is not going to make a coaching change. What will happen?
JKidd wants to stay. VC is staying. RJ is the focal point now of the O.
The cases are:
- Frank suddenly and unaccountably "gets it"
- The Nets remain mired in mediocrity.
A shame, really. A decent coach would easily get 50 wins out of this talent. Might not get out of the 2nd round, but then again, the 2nd round might be a lot easier with 50 wins...
I wonder if Brian Hill would do better...
We'll never know.
It's time, for my own sanity, to mourn 2002, 2003, 2004 and embrace mediocrity, sadly...