[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Dude, the your entire post is would've, could've been. All conjecture.

I am so surprised that you have no other response than to keep dodging the tangible evidence for improvement.

The most tangible evidence is how the season went, wins/losses, how deep into the playoffs the team made it.

This is demonstrably false, as has been pointed out to you numerous times now in the last two pages.

Advanced stats are a tool to look for how to improve a team, where a team is excelling and where another maybe lacking - advanced stats don't win games.

But all of this is useful data for ensuring that a team WILL win games, and as has been amply demonstrated to you several times now there are substantive reasons drawn from the underlying numbers to show that the Flames have played better than their record the past several games. They have been used to show you specific places where the team has in fact improved. But of course, because the facts do not promote your anecdotally derived opinion you will continue to plug your ears and ignore them.

The horse is dead, lets both stop beating the #### out of it?

I can't accept GG is a good coach and you can't accept he's a bad coach.

FALSE. I would agree that coaching has been poor if I saw enough evidence to demonstrate the point. There is not enough evidence because a 15% sample size of the season occurring in the most statistically volatile segment of the season is simply too small and far too unreliable. On the contrary, posters continue to point out to you places in which THE TEAM HAS IN FACT IMPROVED, but you are so arrogantly bound to your visceral impression of the coach that you cannot even acknowledge the possibility of the alternative.