sdn40 wrote:Prunty took over and immediately the team started winning games they were supposed to win. Coming out of the All Star break we go on the road and win a street fight against the best team in the East, with guys injured no less. And with a roster full of useless No.1 picks. Are you underwhelmed ? Not entertained ? Should we have won by 30 ? Should the uniforms have glitter and blinking neon lights ? What ?
We can do better ? Blah blah blah. Let's hope your boss doesn't have the same open ended mindset about your job.
How about we could do a hell of a lot worse and be stuck with the guy for 4 years. There's a damn good chance that happens. Just ask 30 other teams. For all we know Prunty is the next Popovich. But don't blame Prunty because we don't have David Robinson and Tim Duncan etc etc etc. IF you know he's not, tell me why. Tell me how. Don't just bang out ridiculous posts saying we can do better. Be better than that.
If your argument is simply that people are jumping the gun deciding too soon we can do better than Prunty, that's fair enough, but I think you way overstate your case. Like to the point that you're wrong. Because it seems like...
...your argument is that Prunty has already earned the job, which means you're jumping the gun just as badly as the people you're attacking.
The fact that Prunty has done a pretty good job replacing Kidd so far is not a good enough reason to commit to him for the next 4 years (or however long).
The fear that "we could do worse" if we go with another coach is hardly a compelling reason to keep him either.
Personally I don't think the case for Prunty is overwhelming so far. He's won 1 game vs good teams, and has a good record over a very small sample size beating a lot of bad teams. You could've used those same criteria last spring to argue Kidd was a good coach.
If I'm the FO, I don't think I use Prunty's record at the end of season as my main criteria to hire him or not- you have to have your own internal criteria and make your decision based on those.
