Everything Nick Nurse

TacoBreath wrote: View Post

Just because you have heard the term, false equivalence, doesn't mean I gave you one, or that you even know what the term actually means. I suspect you meant "false cause." But it doesn't matter, because we are not talking about the correct identification of logical fallacies, we are talking about basketball.

We're not talking about the players' uni shorts falling down around their ankles. We're not talking about them all waking up with a crick in the neck because of their pillows. Nor are we talking about them having indigestion.

We're talking about how they play basketball. Which you are trying to argue has nothing to do with their basketball coach. I decline to believe that the basketball coach is irrelevant to how the players play basketball.

Why have a head coach at all, if he's irrelevant to the players' performance?

And you are absolutely certain the problem lies with each of them individually, and all at the same time. That is truly an amazing coincidence. Not to say that amazing coincidences can't happen, but to interpret everything as coincidence is to lose the ability to distinguish a good basketball coach from a bad one, for example.

Or is it your position that the distinction between a good coach and a bad one is unnecessary, because the coach is irrelevant to the team's performance?

Are you sure there's no common factor that could explain it? It's all mere coincidence you think?

A coach is allowed to speak in his own defense, but why would one take that as being the end of it? Is what he said true, and is he a reliable source to make such a judgment? If he's a bad coach his judgment would not be reliable, and whether he's a bad coach or not is exactly the issue.

And there might even be idiots who are ready to accept that the basketball coach is irrelevant to how the basketball team performs.

False equivalency:
"A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.^[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors."

You understand that at any given point in time, there are 3-4-5 basketball players on ANY team that shoot poorly by FG%, some for extended periods of time. By your reasoning, almost every coach is shite and deserve to be fired since it can't be coincidence and they are the common denominator.

Furthermore when a team has an excellent year like the Celtics last year and underachieve like this year, the Coach actually DID become dumb overnight since he's the common denominator to basically the same roster (one that actually got arguably better in this case).

Coaches are not irrelevant but might have the least amount of game influence of the major sports where your 5 main players often play 3/4 of the game. They are however, low hanging fruit for fans desparate to find fault for a team playing the number one seed overall and for some reason, finding it difficult to sweep them lol

Announcement