So reading over the first two parts of the analysis posters did on mid-season coaching changes (here and here), I thought it would be interesting to look at the long term health of the franchises.  After all, what good are an extra 3-5 wins if players, don't develop, draft position is sabotaged and the team goes downhill the following few seasons.  So below is another graph and some statistics for people to ponder.

In case they are not obvious, the headers are:

YO: the year of the midseason change

Y1, Y2, Y3: The following 3 seasons

# of C: # of coaches during those 3 years (10 games coached minimum)

I or E: For teams that improved, small evaluation on whether the improvements were mostly based on internal changes from coaching/player development or external changes like getting LeBron James in the draft or signing Steve Nash.

Some statistics from the table:

Overall, what does this mean for us.  Regardless of who we bring in, I think we are likely to improve long term based on natural player development and another lottery pick. 

It also makes little sense to let go of Westphal unless you think Elie can be one of the 15% of coaches who worked long term.  Personally, I feel like the players are developing and unless he completley loses them, I would rather have him finish the year for the sake of consistency.  If the team continues to dissapoint, then I would like to see Westphal remain with the team in an executive capacity, while bringing in another coach after the season.  I think Westphal knows NBA basketball and seems to have helped Dallas when he was there.  Petrie and him seem to get along and Westphal's is tenured enough in the NBA and a strong enough personality to help be an effective sounding board and counter-balance to Petrie in a positive way.  It would also prevent the Maloofs from having to pay Westphal for nothing.  That can be done graciously at seasons end, but would be much harder mid-season.