Derek Fisher was a punching bag this past season as the New York Knicks lost a franchise worst 65 games. Still, Fisher manned the sideline with passion each game without conceding the fact that the Knicks’ front office wanted him to lose. He was showered with boos from fans and took jabs from media members, but the constant losing really was not his fault even though he did appear incompetent in certain situations.

Team President Phil Jackson received harsh criticism from many angles as well for turning the original roster into the hollow skeleton that finished with the second-worst record in the league. In spite of Jackson’s fame, Fisher was arguably the face of the failure. No matter how depleted the team’s roster became or how lopsided a particular game’s score was, Fisher screamed from the bench throughout each game and then faced the media’s harsh questioning afterward with composure.

In postgame press conferences, Fisher often sounded corny. He praised his players for exerting effort and not giving up when he thought it true, which made him sound like the head coach of a middle school team who was just happy that everyone showed up.

Fisher harped on effort because it was the only plausible goal to strive for. After the Knicks’ 124-86 massacre at the hands of the Sacramento Kings on March 3, Fisher said, “The most disappointing part is not necessarily losing the game, but just the way collectively as a group we couldn’t find a way to compete against this team tonight.”

Fisher was and continues to be an easy target for disgruntled fans and writers looking for a scapegoat. Fisher as the patsy becomes an even easier premise when you remember that Steve Kerr, Jackson’s first choice to coach the Knicks, won a title in his first year as a head coach with the Golden State Warriors. By the end of the regular season, New York was a crumbling mosaic of castoffs, not a competitive NBA roster. In cases like this, the head coach cannot receive too much blame.

The triangle offense, which Fisher implemented at the behest of Jackson, became more of a punchline than an effective offensive system as time went on. The offensive scheme was not unsuccessful because of Fisher’s inadequacies, and its perceived ineffectiveness was not the reason for the Knicks’ struggles. A verdict cannot be reached on if the offense is useful in today’s NBA until it is run by a roster capable of competing.

Also, public perception of the triangle is mostly void because many of the people chiding it likely could not begin to describe how it works.

With the exception of those from the first few weeks of the season, there were not many games in which Fisher’s coaching abilities could be accurately judged.

The Knicks started 3-10 and it immediately became abundantly clear that the team’s roster, as it was assembled at the time, was not going to contend for a title. That realization led to Carmelo Anthony nursing his injured knee, the team trading J.R. Smith, Iman Shumpert and Pablo Prigioni as well as buying out Amar’e Stoudemire. From that point on, all eyes looked toward the draft lottery and whether the organization admitted it or not, Fisher’s main goal was not to win games.

The Knicks will look vastly different come October, hopefully restocked with smart free agent signings to compliment the addition of rookies Kristaps Porzingis and Jerian Grant.

Fisher was far from perfect in his first season as a head coach. I’m not even sure he was average. It also didn’t help fans’ views of Fisher that he received $25 million over five years to do a job he had never done before.

Still, it’s not crazy to say that we have not seen Fisher coach an NBA team yet – a real, competent NBA team.