Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Some 23-24 Basketball stats
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="lv20gt" data-source="post: 996304" data-attributes="member: 2299"><p>It's also not factually refuted in general. If you are dealing with only absolute facts then you wouldn't be talking about any kind of prognostication in the first place. Teams develop and change over the course of the year. Why wouldn't more recent games be more indicative of the current state of the program than older ones? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, so you could skip the entire looking at previous year's result as a means of direct prediction factor and look at the comparison of the rosters and use it as a relative one. Which is why I said "Even after the roster overhaul the roster seemed to at least be in a similar state if not better.". So if you think the overhauled roster was better then why wouldn't you have higher expectations? So the end of the year play wouldn't be indicative of how the team would play, but could be used as a comparison for setting an expectation in regards to level of play for how an improved roster. Now maybe you think the roster wasn't improved. I thought that was one of the points that was generally held by most here because that seemed to be the case over the summer. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This entire line conversation started with someone saying we were MUCH better than our record so to me that certainly sounds like he isn't responsible for the current record. But beyond that particular post, I'm not talking about token responsibility like just saying a coach owns his record. But after pretty much any loss little to no criticism is ever directed towards CDS. Plenty of it is directed at players either directly, like what happens usually with Kelly, indirectly, like those that point to a lack of interior production, or in more vague terms like talking about competing, hustling, focus, etc etc. But almost none talking about any decision or action made by our HC. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p> That wasn't an argument for a position I actually held. It was playing devil's advocate. The conclusion of that argument was that CDS is likely to have success in year 2 and 3 despite the struggles this year. The argument has lots of issues and it's why I don't actually believe in it or particularly buy the conclusion that it leads to. It was just an example of how you could make an argument that both acknowledges a poor job one year but finding reasons to be optimistic for the near future. . </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The questions weren't a matter of knowledge. It's not possible to know if we'd have a better record if we had a different coach. But if you just want one word answers you could answer yes to all of them except the one about the future which would be just I don't because we can't even know what the future of the program currently is to even have a thing to compare to unlike the other questions. I still don't see how the first three are at all relevant. FWIW if we're talking alternate realities, my pick wouldn't be Pastner. It would be to have gotten Pat Kelsey, not that is any more relevant now. </p><p></p><p>Also, not all his questions were yes or no. In fact the very first question he asked in that post was not a yes or no question.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="lv20gt, post: 996304, member: 2299"] It's also not factually refuted in general. If you are dealing with only absolute facts then you wouldn't be talking about any kind of prognostication in the first place. Teams develop and change over the course of the year. Why wouldn't more recent games be more indicative of the current state of the program than older ones? Yes, so you could skip the entire looking at previous year's result as a means of direct prediction factor and look at the comparison of the rosters and use it as a relative one. Which is why I said "Even after the roster overhaul the roster seemed to at least be in a similar state if not better.". So if you think the overhauled roster was better then why wouldn't you have higher expectations? So the end of the year play wouldn't be indicative of how the team would play, but could be used as a comparison for setting an expectation in regards to level of play for how an improved roster. Now maybe you think the roster wasn't improved. I thought that was one of the points that was generally held by most here because that seemed to be the case over the summer. This entire line conversation started with someone saying we were MUCH better than our record so to me that certainly sounds like he isn't responsible for the current record. But beyond that particular post, I'm not talking about token responsibility like just saying a coach owns his record. But after pretty much any loss little to no criticism is ever directed towards CDS. Plenty of it is directed at players either directly, like what happens usually with Kelly, indirectly, like those that point to a lack of interior production, or in more vague terms like talking about competing, hustling, focus, etc etc. But almost none talking about any decision or action made by our HC. That wasn't an argument for a position I actually held. It was playing devil's advocate. The conclusion of that argument was that CDS is likely to have success in year 2 and 3 despite the struggles this year. The argument has lots of issues and it's why I don't actually believe in it or particularly buy the conclusion that it leads to. It was just an example of how you could make an argument that both acknowledges a poor job one year but finding reasons to be optimistic for the near future. . The questions weren't a matter of knowledge. It's not possible to know if we'd have a better record if we had a different coach. But if you just want one word answers you could answer yes to all of them except the one about the future which would be just I don't because we can't even know what the future of the program currently is to even have a thing to compare to unlike the other questions. I still don't see how the first three are at all relevant. FWIW if we're talking alternate realities, my pick wouldn't be Pastner. It would be to have gotten Pat Kelsey, not that is any more relevant now. Also, not all his questions were yes or no. In fact the very first question he asked in that post was not a yes or no question. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What is the name of Georgia Tech's mascot?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Basketball
Some 23-24 Basketball stats
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top