View Single Post
06-24-2013, 01:42 PM
Registered User
chosen's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,734
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JCresty View Post
In terms of terminology, "holding back" is fairly loaded. When a coach who is suppose to propel a team is said to be holding a team back, it's quite dramatic.

Having that said, Torts did in fact hold the Rangers back this past season. The Eastern conference finish two seasons ago was to Torts's credit. Neither is completely on Torts however.

Asking whether a team would have won a cup with a better coach is unfair because you're just setting me up to counter me in a straw man. If I say, yes we would have, you can easily question my judgement on NYR's capability and my apparently harsh judgement of Torts. If I say no, then you can easily say what is wrong with Torts then, if a different coach cannot win the cup either and Torts's efforts to get to the ECF and ECSF in the past two year is probably as close as one can get to, within reason, without winning the cup.

Am I avoiding the question? The question is loaded and a set up and you know it and that's why you are explicitly stating the "avoiding the question" clause. It's no good.

You're forcing an answer of "Do you think NSA should spy on citizens for reason of national security?"Yes or No?

If you say yes, then you disregard the rights and freedoms and ethics and morals.

If you say no, then you are unpatriotic and place the security of the lives of citizens at stake.

the 80% and 90% statement is conceptual, not empirical or factual.
All I have asked you is if a "better" coach would have gotten better results. That is not a loaded question. It goes to the heart of your argument.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote