HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Crowd in the crease (Leighton)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-18-2011, 02:14 PM
  #101
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
If I'm ranking how good my turds smelled over the last week, does the turds position in the ranking change anything about the fact that it is, still, a turd?

Bill Barber is not a better (or worse) coach based on the job others did. Moreover, if were looking at Hitch as opposed to Barber... The team improved under Hitch. Noticeably.
No you judge him on his own merits and if he falls among the turds also judged on their own merits then he's part of a pyramid of turds..if he falls among the roses he's among a batch of roses. That's all

That's simply the point I'm making and that is what Meltzer was doing with ranking coaches and giving his INDIVIDUAL explanations..

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with exactly nor do I care.

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:17 PM
  #102
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bort Sampson View Post
Your argument was that Barber was an "abject failure of a coach". You concede that argument in this response by calling Barber a "good" AHL coach.

My argument is that his coaching style was incompatible with the team that got him fired. The idea that he didn't practice special teams (already discredited), or that he was a poor X and O coach is purely hearsay. It's basis is on the complaints trumped up by a team lashing out and looking to deflect blame.
He was a good MINOR league coach. Not conceding anything.

And, seriously, what is with the Barber worship. I figured you were old enough to watch the man actually play before. Now I'm just baffled.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:17 PM
  #103
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
If I'm ranking how good my turds smelled over the last week, does the turds position in the ranking change anything about the fact that it is, still, a turd?

Bill Barber is not a better (or worse) coach based on the job others did. Moreover, if were looking at Hitch as opposed to Barber... The team improved under Hitch. Noticeably.
That's not a very good analogy.

Using the coach's immediate predecessor's and successor's, success with that team can give you a gauge of his ability to coach that particular team if the team's core remains largely the same.


For example:

Team X has 70 points 1 year, and 95 points the next year. Team X remained relatively constant but there was a coaching change.

You could draw from that the coach that took over is better suited for coaching that team then his predecessor.

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:19 PM
  #104
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
That's not a very good analogy.

Using the coach's immediate predecessor's and successor's, success with that team can give you a gauge of his ability to coach that particular team if the team's core remains largely the same.


For example:

Team X has 70 points 1 year, and 95 points the next year. Team X remained relatively constant but there was a coaching change.

You could draw from that the coach that took over is better suited for coaching that team then his predecessor.
And then it takes two years for everyone to figure out that John Stevens blows monkey ass.

BTW, you are also missing the central point by focusing on EVIDENCE of better coaching. A better coached team will perform better theoretically. That coach isn't better at coaching because of who proceeded him.


Last edited by Jester: 08-18-2011 at 02:28 PM.
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:21 PM
  #105
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoom View Post
No you judge him on his own merits and if he falls among the turds also judged on their own merits then he's part of a pyramid of turds..if he falls among the roses he's among a batch of roses. That's all

That's simply the point I'm making and that is what Meltzer was doing with ranking coaches and giving his INDIVIDUAL explanations..

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with exactly nor do I care.
Meltzer's ranking is of FLYERS coaches. That tells me nothing about whether or not they are actually good coaches in the wider picture.

As said, if you are lining up a bunch of turds... The order doesn't really matter.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:27 PM
  #106
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Meltzer's ranking is of FLYERS coaches. That tells me nothing about whether or not they are actually good coaches in the wider picture.

As said, if you are lining up a bunch of turds... The order doesn't really matter.

There is where the debate just ends b/c it's black and white as usual...we can expand the parameters of the debate into infinity drawing upon AHL coaches, KHL etc. Pretty futile and not interested..

Just take solace in the fact that I agree with you that Barber was a turd and we'll end it there.

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:31 PM
  #107
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDoom View Post
There is where the debate just ends b/c it's black and white as usual...we can expand the parameters of the debate into infinity drawing upon AHL coaches, KHL etc. Pretty futile and not interested..

Just take solace in the fact that I agree with you that Barber was a turd and we'll end it there.
Im not really interested in expanding an evaluation system, it's just important to understand that Meltzer's analysis is dealing with a specific set of constraints (coaches in Flyers history). He even admits in that analysis that he thinks Hitchcock is a better coach than guys he has him ranked behind.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:31 PM
  #108
Bort Sampson
Registered User
 
Bort Sampson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hammock District
Country: United States
Posts: 1,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Wait, so you were, what, 10 when Barber won the Calder Cup and think you have a sparkling memory of that team?
Sparkling? No, I don't. Who has a sparkling memory of 13 years ago?

Was I obsessed with that team, and am still almost embarrassed to see Phantoms stickers on random stuff from when I was a kid? Absolutely. The Phantoms' inaugural season was special for me. I think I was too young to realize that it was just an AHL team.

I had never experienced a championship as a Philly sports fan. I remember the first game of that season, all the rest I went to, and that Calder Cup run pretty damn clearly.

I didn't grow up watching football, played baseball but the Phillies weren't great, and never cared for NBA basketball. It was nothing but Flyers and Phantoms for me growing up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
He was a good MINOR league coach. Not conceding anything.

And, seriously, what is with the Barber worship. I figured you were old enough to watch the man actually play before. Now I'm just baffled.
So he was a good coach in the AHL, stepped in and won the Jack Adams, and then became a bad coach? Sure.

As far as Barber worship, this is how we ended up here:
-You said Boucher has always been a good teammate.
-I reminded you he helped publicly execute Bill Barber
-You concede that it could have been handled better, but Barber was a crappy coach

My only point, which isn't even close to "worship", is that Barber wasn't a crappy coach. He stepped in and won the Calder Cup on a good team. He earned a shot in the NHL, took it, and won the Jack Adams. The next season his team started well. Then, his wife died. That's pretty big. But he continued on, his team staggered down the stretch, but they still finished first in their division and second in the conference. Then, they got upset in a series where a lot went wrong. Then, he got fired.

Those are the unbiased facts that I hope we can both agree on.

You're judging a guy's career based on one playoff exit.

And you're defending Boucher for helping someone get fired.

It's not worship, it's defense, and while you've got a great mind for the game, you're defending a chicken **** move.


Last edited by Bort Sampson: 08-18-2011 at 02:59 PM.
Bort Sampson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:36 PM
  #109
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bort Sampson View Post
Sparkling? No, I don't. Who has a sparkling memory of 13 years ago?

Was I obsessed with that team, and am still almost embarrassed to see Phantoms stickers on random stuff from when I was a kid? Absolutely. The Phantoms' inaugural season was special for me. I think I was too young to realize that it was just an AHL team.

I had never experienced a championship as a Philly sports fan. I remember the first game of that season, all the rest I went to, and that Calder Cup run pretty damn clearly.

I didn't grow up watching football, played baseball but the Phillies weren't great, and never cared for NBA basketball. It was nothing but Flyers and Phantoms for me growing up.
Well, I remember that Phantoms team pretty well and the teams around em pretty well, and they were a lot better than you are giving em credit for. No, not stacked with future NHLers, but you don't need to be to be very good. Peter White had far better AHL seasons than many a future NHL player.

I mean, would you request serious analysis today from a 10 year old on much of anything?

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:50 PM
  #110
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
And then it takes two years for everyone to figure out that John Stevens blows monkey ass.

BTW, you are also missing the central point by focusing on EVIDENCE of better coaching. A better coached team will perform better theoretically. That coach isn't better at coaching because of who proceeded him.
I'm actually focusing on the point that looking at a coach's predecessor or successor, and the success they have, can show you something about their ability to coach that team. You said there was nothing you could get out of that, but I'm pretty sure I just gave a valid reason that there actually can be.

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 02:50 PM
  #111
Bort Sampson
Registered User
 
Bort Sampson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hammock District
Country: United States
Posts: 1,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Well, I remember that Phantoms team pretty well and the teams around em pretty well, and they were a lot better than you are giving em credit for. No, not stacked with future NHLers, but you don't need to be to be very good. Peter White had far better AHL seasons than many a future NHL player.

I mean, would you request serious analysis today from a 10 year old on much of anything?
I'd probably wait about 13 years and then have him get back to me. By that point he'd have been playing hockey for about 20 years and would have been watching from the womb.

You're not debating a 10-year-old, guy. When you want to respond to what I've said regarding Barber, do it. If you want to know a little more about me (awkwardly seems that way), PM me.

Bort Sampson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 03:04 PM
  #112
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bort Sampson View Post
I'd probably wait about 13 years and then have him get back to me. By that point he'd have been playing hockey for about 20 years and would have been watching from the womb.

You're not debating a 10-year-old, guy. When you want to respond to what I've said regarding Barber, do it. If you want to know a little more about me (awkwardly seems that way), PM me.
No, I'm debating a 10 y/o's memory.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 03:08 PM
  #113
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
I'm actually focusing on the point that looking at a coach's predecessor or successor, and the success they have, can show you something about their ability to coach that team. You said there was nothing you could get out of that, but I'm pretty sure I just gave a valid reason that there actually can be.
No, it shows you results (i.e. evidence that coach B is better than coach A). Coach B isn't better than Coach A because he got better results after him, he's better than him because he's better than him. You're establishing a methodology for comparing coaches, which is fine, but what you glean from that isn't why the coach is as good as he is.

As said, whomever Barber was replaced by or preceded by is irrelevant to how good a coach he was.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 03:10 PM
  #114
Bort Sampson
Registered User
 
Bort Sampson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hammock District
Country: United States
Posts: 1,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No, I'm debating a 10 y/o's memory.
That's not really how the brain works (crystalization of memories would not have occurred by age 10), and the actual debate is based around what Barber did four years later.

You've already agreed with me that Barber was a good AHL coach. So you're not debating a 10-year-old, because there's no actual debate.

So basically you're floundering. You can't respond to what I say, so you question my credibility on an unrelated manner.

Have a good day.

Bort Sampson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 03:15 PM
  #115
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bort Sampson View Post
That's not really how the brain works, and the actual debate is based around what Barber did four years later.

You've already agreed with me that Barber was a good AHL coach. So you're not debating a 10-year-old, because there's no actual debate.

So basically you're floundering. You can't respond to what I say, so you question my credibility on an unrelated manner.

Have a good day.
Dude, your entire position has been a Barber beej... all of your "points" have been addressed, and the primacy of your position is based on the assertion that Barber did a FANTASTIC job with an undermanned AHL team, won a Calder Cup and Jack Adams... and, was, therefore, a fan-*ing-tastic coach and everyone is wrong about his tenure in Philadelphia.

This, of course, ignores my rebuttal that I don't view a good "AHL coach" as a good "coach," because I don't really give a flying **** about how good you are in a developmental league. So, the reality is, the debate is kind of over because you've retreated from arguing that he was a "good coach" to simply attempting a rear defense of the oh-so-awesome job he did in your 10 y/o fantasy land that was the Phantoms 1997-98.

Oh yeah, and Boucher (and the rest of the veterans on the team), were ****** for picking on Barber.

In the end, he was a failure at the NHL level and never coached again after that season.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 03:30 PM
  #116
Bort Sampson
Registered User
 
Bort Sampson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hammock District
Country: United States
Posts: 1,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Dude, your entire position has been a Barber beej... all of your "points" have been addressed, and the primacy of your position is based on the assertion that Barber did a FANTASTIC job with an undermanned AHL team, won a Calder Cup and Jack Adams... and, was, therefore, a fan-*ing-tastic coach and everyone is wrong about his tenure in Philadelphia.

This, of course, ignores my rebuttal that I don't view a good "AHL coach" as a good "coach," because I don't really give a flying **** about how good you are in a developmental league. So, the reality is, the debate is kind of over because you've retreated from arguing that he was a "good coach" to simply attempting a rear defense of the oh-so-awesome job he did in your 10 y/o fantasy land that was the Phantoms 1997-98.

Oh yeah, and Boucher (and the rest of the veterans on the team), were ****** for picking on Barber.

In the end, he was a failure at the NHL level and never coached again after that season.
First off, 800 posts. Big accomplishment for me, I'm definitely going to celebrate today.

I'll say this, because somehow you're clearly too worked up to respond clearly:

I've said multiple times throughout the thread that Barber failed. Go back and re-read it. Seriously, humble yourself and realize how many times you missed me saying that.

You got yourself worked up over nothing. I don't think Barber was a crappy coach, that's my opinion. Crappy coach or not, Boucher was a ****** teammate for doing what he did. That's exactly where this debate began (LOOK AT THE FIRST POST OF YOUR'S I RESPONDED TO), and for some reason, you decided to defend Boucher and start up on Barber. To me, I think it's irrelevant whom the player or coach is in the scenario.

Once again, have a good one.


Last edited by Bort Sampson: 08-18-2011 at 03:34 PM. Reason: dear god I just realized you have 33,000+ posts
Bort Sampson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:44 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.