I didn't say you said finagle. I said you "suggested that....". "Suggesting" and "saying" is the difference between implicit and explicit use of a word.
Now with the semantics out of the way and just to be clear, I don't think Joerger should be replaced or fired. I am okay with him. I just don't hold him in quite as high regard as you do or think his coaching is beyond reproach. He's competent maybe above average, but not exemplary. He's middle of the pack of NBA coaches as far as I can discern. His teams play hard. He has poise and engagement about him. But his real time decision making is tenuous. I don't trust him to make the right substitution or lineup in response to the flow of the game. He's not intuitive. He's dogmatic.
There is something to be said for patience but a coach also has to be flexible and strategically experimental not married to a line-up that is not working. There's a stubbornness to his coaching style that I think works against him. If you look at this new group, the number of new teammates, the number of rookies and second year guys and the shortened pre-season, our 1-4 record and frequent lethargic starts to the 1st and 3rd, there should be more change than stability at this point. Change with regards to lineups and starters should be part of the process in realizing who this team is going to be and forging a formidable identity. And it is HIS job as the coach and position of authority to clearly articulate this to those affected by the change.
So if there is pretense over which will preclude a line-up change, which you suggested not me, though I think it is a reasonable and viable suggestion, then I am only saying this pretense is NOT necessary given the aforementioned variables.