After we graduated from college, my friends and I joined a softball team. We had been on pretty successful intramural teams, and wanted to continue playing. Even though we grew up in Miami, we really didn’t know enough people to field a competitive team. After some phone calls from our captain, we were able to scrap together some experienced players.

At first glance, we were a pretty solid team. Once you glanced at an actual game, we just kept on losing. We really couldn’t figure out why. Our defense was probably one of the better ones in the league. Our hitting, though far from spectacular, should have been enough to win us some ball games. But for some reason, nothing we did could translate into wins.

Fast-forward to this season. Our team is made up of almost the exact players, playing against almost the exact (maybe better) competition. But now, rather than having a losing record, we are 5-2-1. I could even make the argument that we should be undefeated, owing to maybe a grand total of four different plays. Why the sudden turnaround?

Like the Dolphins this year, the Celtics last year, and countless other teams, how do terrible teams one year, become good teams the next?

Continuity is one reason. People become more comfortable with one another. Teams start to form an identity. Almost every Saturday during college football season, you can hear about a certain quarterback who has had three different offensive coordinators during his college career. This is the reason this specific quarterback has been less than successful, argue the announcers (Chris Leak, anyone?). Even though I’ve never played organized football, I can’t imagine it being easy to learn a different offense every year. I’ve been playing Madden for about ten years now and still use the Ask Madden option for every defensive play.

Chemistry also lends to success. It was very obvious during the Celtics run last year, that every single player, from top dog Kevin Garnett to token Celtic Brian Scalabrine (if there was ever a player that was born to play for the Celtics, it was Scal), liked playing with one another. I know it’s been written before, but every time a player hit the deck, two players would rush to help him up. Though it pains me to say this, you simply don’t see that with the Heat this year any time Wade falls to the floor. The most obvious example of lack of chemistry translating into failure is the 2004 Lakers team. They were talented enough to make it through the Finals before getting spanked by the Pistons. (I love how everyone likes to call the Pistons dominant. I would say that the Lakers “lost” that championship more than the Pistons “won” it. Take away that season, and really you have just another Mavericks team, or Atlanta Braves team. Not quite good enough to take it all the way. That’s a different article for a different time though.) Even though chemistry doesn’t directly translate into wins, it doesn’t hurt to enjoy playing with your teammates.

I think sometimes professional teams over-think certain aspects of the game. Why not give a team two or three years to mesh, and then declare it a success or a failure? Too often I think teams, and even coaches are given up on too quickly. They only need to look as far as Monday night at Chapman Field to see the Long Balls formula for success. We don’t have any high-priced free agents. We have the same team as we did last season. The difference? We know each other now. We like each other now. We play well with each other now. Chemistry and Continuity.