Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Zelda Zonk, post: 4498414, member: 966"] You just linked your previous comment. That isn’t supporting your argument with reasoning. - Did it stunt his growth? You seem to be of the opinion that ‘this’ (game?) proved your point. It doesn’t. The fact is, you don’t know what growth there would be unless you could play out two timelines. That’s the arrogance of your declaration of a ‘right’/’wrong’ decision. In your mind, the result you see is the best result that there could have been and that’s daft. Secondarily, you actually double down and assert a decision had no effect whatsoever. Which is bizarre, but, okay. To have that make sense and still work out in your favor you then have to also double down on your precognition, where keeping him in the last game would have necessarily resulted in more of the same turnovers and not the ‘good play’ we saw tonight. “It’s as if there’s…” no way for you to imagine anything other than what you are presented with…. Which, I guess, makes it easy to argue for, since it doesn’t tax the mind much. You’ve also erected straw men, but that’s what you get when you need to be belligerent about a concept, without having an understanding of it. No one said QC needed to be cowering in the corner I order for there to have been an effect. Not sure how you even get to that, except if you need to oversimplify psychology. Whatevs. “Trauma” was never part of it. This just reinforces that you didn‘t understand the idea(s). That‘s about all I can say, to someone who believes there can actually be an empirically correct right Or wrong decision in this context. The truth is, there are only opinions, some with more and some with less reasoning, and then there’s the result of one of those decisions. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?