What Changed for Mike Brown?

On Friday, the Los Angeles Lakers fired head coach Mike Brown after the team's 1-4 start to the 2012-13 season.  The Lakers were all over the NBA headlines this offseason, from the acquisitions of high-profile superstars Dwight Howard and Steve Nash to the instillation of a new Princeton offense.  Of course, its nothing new for head coaches to be fired in the midst of a disappointing season - the Knicks 2011-12 season, for example, was partially marked by the firing of Mike D'Antoni (currently a candidate for the Lakers vacancy) and the promotion of assistant coach Mike Woodson.  From that perspective, I have no problems with the Lakers dumping Brown.  My question, however, is: Why now?

I'm confused too, Mike Brown.

Mike Brown has been an NBA coach since 2005-06, when he took the Cleveland Cavaliers to the Eastern Conference semifinals.  Since then, his career has been marked by a series of "almosts" and "could have beens."  His Cavs teams finished either first or second in the Central Division in each of his five years with the team, but only once reached the NBA Finals and never won the title despite having a roster that included arguably the best player in the NBA.  Last year with the Lakers, Brown took Kobe and Co. to the Western Conference semis, but couldn't get past the Oklahoma City Thunder.  Basically, after getting half a dozen seasons to prove himself, Mike Brown is who we thought he was (as Dennis Green might say) - a coach good enough to get you to the playoffs, but no further.  I'm pretty sure that Mike Brown is the same coach today as he was this past summer, when the Lakers decided to bring him back for this season to lead the newly revamped Lake Show.

If Brown was good enough for the Lakers a month ago, what's changed in the last few weeks that lead the Buss family to change their minds about Brown?  I find it almost impossible to believe that it was the team's 1-4 start - firing a head coach based on a five game sample size would be an extremely shortsighted panic move that I refuse the believe a franchise like the Lakers are capable of committing.  Yes, the Lakers are 1-4, but so what?  The Denver Nuggets - a team many expect to contend in the Western Conference this year - started the year with three consecutive disappointing losses.  Since then, they've won four straight and have people talking about them as a force to be reckoned with.  The NBA season is long, and the Buss family has been around long enough to know that a rough five game stretch - especially for a team bringing in a bunch of new players and instilling a new offense - means very little.  So no, I don't buy the team's slow start as a rationale for Brown's firing.

So assuming Los Angeles knew what Brown was about way before this season started, and assuming that they're not overreacting to a slow first two weeks, why did the team make this move on Friday?  Some are arguing that its so they could pursue either Phil Jackson or Jerry Sloan, but those two legendary coaches are no more available now than they were over the summer.  I don't think Mike Brown is a particularly good coach and don't think he was ever a great fit for the Lakers, but I'm having a hard time figuring out how that's more true now than it was just a few weeks ago.  I think the Lakers will be competitive with whomever they bring in to run the ship (yes, even with D'Antoni), but it's a shame to think about what they could have been if they used the offseason to integrate a new coach instead of making a strange move in mid-November.