Nice to know you, Flip Saunders. Adios, Mo Cheeks. Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Paul Silas.
It happens every year -- coaches get the boot because their team is underachieving, because his squad hasn't shown the proper growth, or because the owner or general manager cannot coexist with the coach. Last year there were 17 coaching changes; this season there have been nine, most recently the firing of Silas, whose only crime was leading one of the youngest teams in the league (average age 23.4) to the fifth-best record in the Eastern Conference and an almost certain playoff berth.
But that's not my main problem. My concern lies with potential victim No. 10, Philadelphia 76ers coach Jim O'Brien, who was vilified last week by a Philadelphia Inquirer columnist for reasons not detectable.
Wait, I think I found one. Jim O'Brien isn't personable.
Forget the national championship he won while associate head coach at Kentucky. Forget the fact that when he took over in Boston for Rick Pitino in 2001, the Celtics were 12-22 and facing a schedule that had them on the west coast for virtually all of February. Under O'Brien, Boston finished the season a respectable 24-24. Forget the back-to-back playoff appearances. Forget the appearance in the Eastern Conference finals, the first time for Boston since 1988. Forget all that. Jim O'Brien isn't a good quote, therefore he should be banished 66 games into his first season in Philadelphia.
Why don't the Sixers bring in Maurice Cheeks? He's a personable guy, even though he hasn't won a playoff series. He'll sit down with you before the game and engage in friendly banter. Jim O'Brien won't do that. He's too busy watching film. Or maybe Philadelphia could lure Byron Scott from New Orleans. He's always good for a pithy quote or two. I'm sure he would listen. Not much else to do when your team is 34½ games out of first place.
Now, debunking some of the questions brought up in that Inquirer story. O'Brien's players don't like him? Maybe you should ask Antoine Walker, who under O'Brien developed from an immature street baller into a legitimate All-Star. Or maybe you should check with Mark Blount. When Blount arrived in Boston in 2000 he was nothing more than, a journeyman whose claim to fame was being waived by the Clippers the season before. By the time O'Brien left Boston, Blount had become a bona fide NBA center, worthy of a six-year, $38 million contract.
O'Brien's staff doesn't like him? Maybe you should ask Frank Vogel, who was promoted from video coordinator to assistant coach by O'Brien before the 2001 season and has flourished since. Or maybe you should ask the locker room staff or the ball boys in Boston, people whom O'Brien bought Christmas gifts from his own pocket every year. Can't find anyone "from the marketing department to the locker room and laundry room" in Philadelphia who will speak positively about O'Brien? A nice turn of phrase, but completely untrue.
O'Brien is arrogant? There's a fine line between confidence and arrogance and O'Brien has never crossed it. Is it arrogant to expect his team to pay attention during film sessions? Is it his arrogance that brings him to the arena four to five hours before the start of every game, so he can go over film? Is it arrogant to expect his players to bring the same energy to practice that they do to the games? Funny, I don't hear Allen Iverson complaining.
) on these boards, I feel compelled to post this. Don't worry, this isn't an overreaction to the Detroit game.
