View Single Post
01-29-2013, 08:17 AM
Join Date: Aug 2005
Originally Posted by
I left the gate open
According to the trivial reading, the mere fact that the Jets had the lead and then lost it is enough to ground the claim that they couldn't hold the lead. They couldn't hold the lead, on this reading, just in the sense that they weren't able to to do it.
According to the substantial reading, there was something
about the Jets
why they had the lead and then lost it. It's not just that they didn't hold the lead; on this reading, they didn't have the ability to hold it. In roughly the same circumstances, they likely wouldn't have held it.
OMG, are you in the philosophy department or something? This reads like something out of PPR.
Is there reason to think that the Isles' problem is substantial in this sense?
Yes, they're small and if not small then slow. And tired, at the end of games from being small and/or slow and playing too many minutes.
That is, is there something about them that this causing them to give up leads?
Yes, and intrinsically. Also, their best defensive center (Nielsen) isn't good on the draw.
If so, what's the evidence for this?
Flubbed clearing attempts, blind defensive zone passes, and lost battles increase as the game wears on according to my observations. I'm afraid if you want something incontrovertible, you'll have to look somewhere else.
Is it the fact that they lost the lead against Winnipeg? In isolation, this is only evidence for the trivial sense of not being able to hold a lead, not the substantial sense which is at issue. Is it the fact that they repeatedly give up leads? Well, this was a problem last season. But they've only lost two games this season. Perhaps it's too early to call it a problem. The defense is a problem, but we knew that. It's not obvious to me that there's a specific lead-holding problem.
Is this Professor Conee? I'd say it was just a problem on Sundays, except that it also seems to affect the team on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and also (at least) Fridays and Saturdays. But perhaps they're not small, they're
things will be big.
Again, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate. I am worried about this, largely because it was an issue last year. But this team is maturing, and perhaps Capuano is as well.
Maturing will allow this team to play smarter, I suppose. But there's still the fundamental problem that our defense is undersized and/or slow, and this results in us getting penned in deep in or zones. The fact that we gave up the lead in that particular game may have been a fluke. But it also more plausible that the fact we had a lead to begin with was a fluke. We should have been blown out in the first period.
I have no idea what the coach is doing or saying. But I will say this: Why not wait till the Isles think they can contend before bringing in an established coach? If Wang isn't going to spend the money to improve the team besides through the draft, what's the point of hiring and eventually firing (due to predictable failure) an established coach?
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Dan-o16