Jump to content

K-9

Members
  • Posts

    9,644
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by K-9

  1. 6 minutes ago, ... said:

    You're being very childish.

    The subject of the sentence you are quoting is Meatballs. You're taking a specific reference and arbitrarily broadening it to create a strawman.

    You should really just let this go. If I'm in the wrong it will reflect on me. However, whatever little victory you're trying to gain is making you look like a 12-year-old school hooligan. 

    Wrong thread you are in.

    You just can’t do it, can you? Instead you’re the victim of “bullying” and “hooliganism” and have to resort to insults as a defense mechanism. 

    You are in the wrong and it does reflect on you. A little humility might help in the future. 

    I will now “just let this go.” 

  2. 23 minutes ago, ... said:

    Why would I do that? I never made that claim. You're just following a rabid few here who put their knee-jerk reaction ahead of reason and are now trying to bully me into justifying incompetent reading and thinking.

    A cop once pulled me over and tried to get me to admit I wasn't wearing my seat belt when in fact I was. I just unbuckled it to reach into the glove box and retrieve my registration in an effort to be a nice, compliant citizen.  What he really pulled me over for, which he'd never admit, was prior to that I didn't let him go through a four way stop first even though he clearly stopped after I did.


    Sure sounds like you made that claim:

    Quote

    Meatballs will never understand what it takes to compete at the NHL or even AHL level because he's never experienced it.

    But yeah, let’s qualify that stand alone sentence with another stand alone sentence, from a different paragraph entirely, just to avoid having to admit that you didn’t say something in the first place. It would have been easier just to apologize for not making yourself clear in the first place. 

    Is there a Latin phrase for “intellectual dishonesty?” 

    • Thanks (+1) 1
  3. 12 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

    You're speaking about Granato and stressing that he's patently unqualified because he's never played in the NHL.  The greatest coach in history never played in the NHL.  Just admit that not playing in the NHL is not a disqualification as a coach.

    Something… something…MILQUETOAST!

  4. 13 minutes ago, ... said:

    I said:

    "This is what happens when you hire milquetoast people who have never played in the NHL.

    Meatballs will never understand what it takes to compete at the NHL or even AHL level because he's never experienced it."

    Are those other coaches "milquetoast people"?

    No. I singled out Meatballs.

    You're bent out of shape over your strawman. Ira faxit stultitiam.

    LMAO! Bent out of shape? Hardly. 

    But I understand your need to now make your preceding “milquetoast” sentence the qualifier for your completely separate next sentence, which is the gist of everyone’s argument with you on the subject of playing experience being a requirement for success as a coach. 

    So only milquetoast coaches need that NHL or AHL experience. Got it. But perhaps you can be clearer from the start next time instead of taking umbrage. 

    And we can’t get enough of that pretentious use of Latin phraseology. We are so fortunate to be in your esteemed company. 

    • Agree 1
  5. 14 minutes ago, ska-T Chitown said:

    I don't necessarily disagree that DM might not have what it takes to be a successful NHL coach - but the "he didn't play high level hockey" argument is a strange hill to die on when other posters have provided contradicting examples at a 2 or 3 to 1 rate.

    As an aside:

    Not to detract from "Bowman's acumen" - but other than his early success with the expansion Blues; he took over the defending SC champion Montreal team. With only slight hyperbole, I feel like I could lead a team with Henri Richard, Guy Lafleur, Steve Shutt, Larry Robinson, and Ken Dryden to many victories. No cups were won in Buffalo while he was there. Again, in Pittsburgh took over a defending SC champion team. And coaching the early 1990's Pens to any kind of success probably required 5 active brain cells. 

    Then he went to mid 1990's - early 2000's Detroit - lol. Osgood and eventually Hasek in net. Fedorov, Konstantinov, Kozlov, Lidstrom, Fetisov, (a few other "ovs"), Shanahan, Holmstrom, Cheap-shot-Chelie, Luc Robitaille, Datsyuk ... yes, I can see how great of a hockey mind you must need to win with that group, lol.

    You raise a good point that is true in all team sports leagues: they are all players’ leagues. I’m not discounting the importance of great coaching, especially at key moments in the contest,  but it’s always been the players who make great coaches and not the other way around. I’ve had the good fortune to talk to several pro coaches in a few different sports over the decades and they’ve all said the same thing.

    The greatest strategists and tacticians just can’t get it done without the talent to execute the plan. As the old saying goes, it’s about the Jimmies and Joes and not the Xs and Os.

  6. 3 hours ago, Night Train said:

    Edwards was a great insurance policy. He's not someones backup. He played a lot. They can get more and probably will. Free safety starter as of today. Rapp at Strong Safety. 

    Still have a lot more positions to work on. Looking at the current depth chart but Beane is doing OK. Draft coming and I'm betting some post June 1st FA signing when more cap space opens up ( T.White ).  They'll be Vets still hanging out there. That's how they got DE Floyd last year. Signed him on June 6th. 

    Agree entirely. Although I’d prefer Rapp as a third safety instead. 

  7. 15 minutes ago, ... said:

    I've answered these attempts to level the field several times already. I am speaking about Granato.

    These other people figured it out by having the personal attributes that allowed them to figure it out. Granato is no match for Bowman's acumen. Not smart enough, not creative enough. Granato has shown absolutely no progress or aptitude as a NHL coach beyond what we have already seen.

    That Granato is not Bowman or any other championship coach is obvious. But that doesn’t make you correct about the argument you put forth that a coach needs to experience the grind of AHL or NHL playoff success as a player as a prerequisite for the job.

    • Agree 1
  8. 10 minutes ago, ... said:

    This analogy is so Incongruous that it's reductio ad absurdume.

    Now if you were to use reaching the top of Mount Everest as your analogy then it wouldn't be as ridiculous.

    Glad the absurdity wasn’t lost on you as your own ridiculous comparison to raising children wasn’t lost on me earlier. 

    If the going to the moon comparison was too much for you, let’s dumb it down a bit. Please explain Scotty Bowman, Bill Belichick, Gregg Popovich, Vince Lombardi, etc.. I could go on ad nauseam (look ma, more pretentious use of Latin). 

    Bottom line is you are simply wrong when saying one has to have experienced the lessen before he can teach it. 

    Discipulus dimisit.
     

     

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Eyeroll 1
  9. 3 hours ago, ... said:

    If you're a parent, have you ever had people who have never had kids try and explain to you how to raise kids? People who have never had children will never understand what it's like to have children.

    How is basically any other task different?

    I’ve been a parent for years and you’re right; there’s no manual for the task. And as a parent, I will say that it is different from every other task in the world.

    Does one have to have visited the moon to be able to teach others how to get there?

  10. 1 hour ago, ... said:

    This is what happens when you hire milquetoast people who have never played in the NHL.

    Meatballs will never understand what it takes to compete at the NHL or even AHL level because he's never experienced it.

    I don’t know that one has to have played in order to be a good coach. The world of sports is full of great coaches who never  excelled as players at the professional level. 

    • Like (+1) 1
    • Agree 1
  11. 1 hour ago, Porous Five Hole said:

    They were good with Levi and his above average goaltending.  Systems aside, Cooley & Tokarski have been objectively bad and the run and gun offense hasn’t helped the team. They will be dangerous once Levi comes to ROC for the playoff run. 

    Levi made them look good as he was constantly peppered with a ton of shot; many of which were great scoring chances time after time. If Levi doesn’t stand on his head, the Amerks lose most of those games.

  12. 2 hours ago, pastajoe said:

    I don’t get why they’re not better defensively. They have a solid group of AHL quality defensemen.

    It’s their team defense as a whole, but I’m not convinced they have that solid of a group of Dmen overall.

  13. 2 minutes ago, OverPowerYou said:

    I feel like every time I open this thread the Amerks are winning. I feel like they’re on a 15-0-3 point streak right about now. Maybe it’s just lucky timing on my part 

    Trust me, it is lucky timing. The Amerks are a flawed team defensively; from the goalie, out to the D, and then to the forwards. 

    Imo, their only hope is to have Levi between the pipes. And even he will needs a miracle here and there with the group in front of him.

×
×
  • Create New...