is here. (well, not all fans, but a few good ones anyway)
One of the main complaints is over a lack of adjusting both in season and between seasons.
So
while we've been discussing whether he's a good fit as Bulls coach, it's
been seeming like the first route is to then think how the Bulls roster can be
like that of Phoenix. But they're not like Phoenix, and even if that was a goal
it'd be too hard to accomplish in any reasonable timeframe.
It seems ridiculous to me to just assume D'Antoni only knows how to coach Steve
Nash. However, he’s also never had another (NBA and long-tenured, for those
nitpickers) head coaching gig, so it’s tough to say conclusively that he can
coach without Steve Nash, either.
But I don’t think it makes sense to simultaneously want him as a coach, yet also
think he can only coach if he has a ‘Nash’, or ‘Nash-type’point guard. You
either trust him to be a coach who can adjust to his personnel, or you don’t.
And it it's the latter, I don't see why one would want him here. And to make a
more pertinent point, Paxson has indicated that adjusting to the roster (as
opposed to allowing a coach like Skiles to have heavy input) is a good selling
point for potential suitors in his quest-for-the-basketball-soulmate.
So while there's no Steve Nash in Chicago for D'Antoni, there is a nucleus of players who defensively are above average individually, and possibly great together (at least be a top-10 defense simply by not playing for a coach they openly despise), something he didn't have in Phoenix. If he can embrace that, while also bringing some of his offensive philosophies (and his apparent emphasis on player development) to transform a completely inept offense, that's enough for me, even if the Bulls can never become as proficient as the team he left behind.
As you can tell, this isn't exactly an endorsement, as I wouldn't know what to expect from him on another roster either. As for better or for worse, most of the players will still be back no matter who's the coach.