While I agree that his rotations are ridiculous there is no guarantee that by simply putting the starters back in would have given us 3+ more wins. It's not like our starters are All-Stars. This is the NBA. Other teams starters are generally better than ours anyways and they would have stepped up to the competition. Who really knows what would have happened.
It's kind of like how on this current homestand a lot of posters here have talked about how we should easily win most of the games because we are playing the likes of Minnesota, Indiana, Toronto, Orlando, etc. but the funny thing is all those teams look at us as a win as well. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
this is just repeating things that have been discussed to death on this board, but: the thing is that in-game management on its own has cost the Kings several games, enough for us in all likelihood to be at .500 if it weren't for those. this doesn't even account for the less than adequate system Smart has been running. just imagine where this team might be, had Smart started running that Reke-DMC two-man game last year instead of just lately.
or for the fact that those rotation/lineup disasters have a massive impact on the development of the players. just as much as his "I don't believe in defining roles" approach. there is a reason other teams perceive the Kings as a disfunctional mess, they are, I wouldn't put all the blame for that on the players, who are mostly young and directionless. these kinds of players need a clear cut system, defined roles and so on. no Westphalian read and react offense, no Smartish "they need to figure it out themselves".
all successfull young teams of the last few years had that, be it OKC with Brooks or Chicago with Thibs. more importantly, both of those teams took a massive step forward once the rather incompetent predecessors of those coaches were fired. this could've happened here, too. McMillan, who, iirc, is one of the best coaches there is at managing lineups/rotations and definitely one of the best at getting the most out of young talent, was right there last offseason. but I digress, bad management has of course compounded the mess that is this team, but that is neither here nor there.
But the MKG is not the only difference between Bobcats now and last season. They revamped over 60% of their rotation - Augustin gone, Derrick Brown gone, Tyrus Thomas injured (addition by subtraction); added Ramon Session, Ben Gordon, and Haywood; moved Biyambo to off the bench, moved Walker, Jeff Taylor, Haywood, and MKG into the starting lineup. They have four new starters compared to last season, plus a completely new bench.
Also, MKG is the ultimate glue guy. He does so many things that doesn't show up in the boxscore, any team that has him would immediately improves.
As LWP777 said, the Bobcats also benefited from a friendly schedule.
fair points. maybe the Bobcats aren't the best example for solely a coach turning it around. although I maintain that Dunlap has been a very positive influence and they stick out, because they had already matched last seasons win total 12 games in. anyway, OKC and Chicago then as examples.