Discussion in 'Parramatta Eels' started by Avenger, Sep 11, 2013.
Just because Poupou can't figure it out doesn't mean some of us can't, right?
So is Tim Sheens any good at coaching? How about Jason Taylor?
Yep. They both go alright.
I don't think you read my post.
How about Sticky, can he coach?
Based on your observations of his ability, how will the Raiders go next year?
Can we judge a coach in their first year? I'm not sure if we can.
makes it hard as they only ever last a year at the Eels
You said - a few months back - that you 'don't think Steven Kearney was a very good coach'. You have no right to make that comment. How can you form that opinion?
OK. The impact of the coach is what statisticians would describe as a latent variable. You view its effect indirectly (and with a lot of noise) through the actions of the players. But let's not go there.....
I said I don't think he's a good one, in response to some idiot who claimed I said Kearney was the greatest.
I didn't say I "don't think he's very good" because that implies I think he's poor. But his credibility is shot as a head coach, at least in Australia, so he's not worth employing anywhere other than the Warriors.
So I formed my opinion that Kearney is not a good coach because he showed nothing to convince me he is good. He also has done nothing to convince me he is poor so I don't think that either.
You seem to have latched onto my comment about Kearney not being a good coach, because you have asked me about it several times. For the record I also don't think Ricky Stuart, Michael Hagan or Brian Smith are good coaches. I also don't think they are poor coaches - they have strengths and weaknesses, like most coaches.
We've already gone there Barry. It's been my point all along.
That's why it can only be properly judged across a large sample. Because if you look at a small enough sample you're just as likely to see Ricky Stuart, premiership winner as Ricky Stuart, wooden spooner.
If Sticky had just finished his rookie season with those results do you think he would have a coaching career to carry on with? Yet a coaching career he will continue to have, for another two years at least.
Sticky isn't great because he often lets his ego and pride get in the way of making the right decision for his team. However, I think he will do OK with the Raiders. They will be competitive but ultimately won't compete with the better teams.
Yeh, I know....I sort of started it (if you look back far enough in the thread). I was just adding some technical non-clarity to the debate.
Stats are only one measure. You can form an opinion of a coach through a variety of other measures, including the actions of the coach itself. Clearly, the longer someone coaches the more you can get a better sense of these other unquantifiable measures.
Absolutely....and this also holds from a statistical perspective. The noise tends to zero as sample increases....particularly when their coaching output is observed across numerous teams / player cohorts. But with most coaches, people form opinions pretty early...then stick to them out of some desire to rationalise what they thought last year.
I used to think Matt Elliot was a good coach
Did anyone here Sterlo discussing the coaching and GM appointments on Triple M tonight? He was happy about both Arthur and Anderson and actually gave Ando a fair wrap.
He was asked about Price's comments about Ando being a proven failure. Sterlo went on to say that Price isn't a mate of his and if you were to ask Pricey at the end of every year there would be 15 dud coaches. I didn't realise they disliked each other so much.
No he didn't. They are great mates. He just doesn't agree with him.
Thanks mate, I came in half way through the interview. I must have misheard.
Separate names with a comma.