Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
First, comparing how Flames fans treat Treliving vs how they treat Chiarelli in the E=NG thread is ridiculous. I think you missed the part where Chiarelli is the GM of our biggest rivals, who are just generally fun to criticise and laugh at (even if logic doesn’t always apply).
|
I didn't actually. And you really only reinforced my point. You don't rush into that thread with these arguments because you like bashing Chiarelli. But more to the point, you think he's a bad GM. And you're right to think that. Even though you lack all of the data lies behind the decisions he makes.
Quote:
|
Second, I think the disagreement comes in your second point. Not everything that is relevant is laid bare on the ice,
|
I disagree. Results on the ice are the only outcome that matters. Anything that isn't affecting that is not relevant.
Quote:
...and unless you’ve watched every Carolina game you’re not even doing that, you’re looking at a stat sheet.
How someone’s stat sheet looks on one team is not the entirety of what’s relevant when considering how they WILL do on another. Does it provide some incidcation? Yeah. Does it provide enough? No. Is it fair to say that as fans of a team in a different conference, we haven’t a limited scope of information compared to the person whose job it is to have that information and insight? Yes.
|
You mean to say that it takes more than a spreadsheet to judge a player, coach or team? Blasphemy!
Quote:
|
It’s not an appeal to authority, I (maybe some are, but I’m not) am not saying Treliving knows best, but judging his decision before it plays out, or before it is even made given the entirely different levels of information available, is premature. Again, there is a reason why Peters is well regarded by those within the NHL. If you can’t figure out the reason, it’s probably because you don’t have enough relevant information. Seems fair.
|
Yes, it very much is an appeal to authority.
Red's question was "what magic beans is Peters selling?"
Your response was "Treliving knows more than you."
Rather than offer arguments in favour of Peters, you just tried to shut Red down by telling him he doesn't know as much as Treliving, so be quiet.
What he - and others - are looking for are arguments in favour of this potential hire. And at least a few people have tried to provide some of that. In the post that I replied to, you did not.