Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
You make some valid supporting arguments. So why is it so hard for you to accept that others can make valid arguments to the contrary?
|
I'm sorry, I don't mean this to be snarky, but what points have you made?
I initially provided some advanced stats to show that the team is performing well except in terms of shooting percentage. This would indicate that the system the coach has implemented is working and they just aren't getting the puck to go in. The low shooting percentage hardly seems like a coaching issue since they are continuing to get scoring chances as well as high danger scoring chances.
You responded by saying that you disregard advanced stats and then later suggested that no one has been able to provide you with a legitimate argument that Gulutzan is a good coach.
You then suggested that "Special teams, breakouts, response to adversity, etc" are appropriate metrics to judge a coach by. However, even if we want to accept that those are the ways to measure a coach's success, how do you do that?
Special teams can be somewhat cut and dry if you simply want to look at their success rate. However, breakouts and response to adversity are way more subjective.
I'm completely willing to listen to an argument for why Gulutzan is not a good head coach, but if the argument essentially comes down to "I just don't feel like he's that good" I don't see that as a valid argument. It's an opinion you're entitled to have but it's not a valid argument.