Bradley and Mularkey got similar results with similar talent.


If Bradley were a better coach then better results would emerge, especially after several years.


If the talent level has to be above average to produce average results the the coach has a negative impact on overall performance.


The case against Bradley is that his efforts didn't appear to have any more impact on the results than Mularkey's did given more time to implement his system or to modify his system to the talent he had. Everyone keeps saying "roster, players, roster, players", but there's no more reason to believe that Gus will achieve greater results relative to the talent than MM would have with the same benefit.

---