View Single Post
06-25-2013, 10:53 PM
Lorb's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 15,244
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by chosen View Post

I never said Torts was better than Vigneault. I have said that before, here. I have no idea who is better. You have no idea who is better.

My whole point is that no one here has more than a guess as to who is the better coach. Yet, that stops no one from being sure that one is better than the other.

It's the being so sure in either direction that I find funny. Toss in those that throw in made-up specifics , metrics, or percentages, and I find it to be even funnier.

Judging players is one thing. We, as fans can reach conclusions that will be right more often than wrong. We can compare them to other players. There is no way that I know of to conclusively judge a coach against another unless one is horrific. There are very few of those.

There is a reason coaches constantly recycle throughout sports.
I am in favor of AV because of a change, a new direction, new blood and a renewed chance to win a cup with a different system which will replace an old one that I did not believe in. I don't like to bring in specifics on AV because I don't like to take in what he did in Van into what he will do in NY. I base my preference toward AV on my lack of faith in Torts's approach with us (not as a coach entirely, just his approach in the last season).

I don't think I made any strong assertions that AV is much superior to Torts to Torts is a bad coach and instead, I showed preference toward AV, and remarked that Torts's work in NY has come to more or less of an end because his approach to the playoffs and overall philosophy hasn't been dominant and doesn't look like it will become dominant and is therefore bad and undesirable.

Most of the posts I had were about the weird questions such as whether we would have won a cup, win multiple cups in the past years, win cup this year had we had AV because AV would definitively do better than Torts by reaching ECF, SCF, winning the cup (1 step up on Torts) or if Torts held back the team and impeded their natural claim to the cup etc. or how you chose to define "better" and tried to operationalize the term by insisting that a better coach would automatically give better results and have taken us further than we did the last two years (implying cup, SCF or ECF at the least).

For example, something like... because I believe AV is a better coach and because you think that a better coach automatically equates to better results, NYR would have won a cup in the last two years and that would mean we have a championship capable team and then somehow that means I think we have a better roster than BOS or CHI and then you made the point about how if I think we have a better roster than BOS or CHI, you would disagree with me on that. It just didn't make sense.

Lorb is offline   Reply With Quote