Kevin McHale is a HOF player, therefore he will be a great coach

Very little is a more accurate assessment. The one big advantage a HOF player brings to the table is that he starts with a certain level of credibility and respect from the players on the basis of his accomplishments. Beyond that, it has very little bearing.

 

Clyde Drexler.

 

do you work for rick adelman ?? or the unemployment office ???

 

Good luck with that sentiment, JV.

 

Magic Johnson

 

When did you take your logic class? If you can give one single counterexample, you refute a "If x then y" statement. Period.

 

Clyde Drexler refutes that

 

Don't be ridiculous. It's obvious the thread title is not true.

However, the statement McHale was a bad GM, therefore he will be a bad coach is so foolproof it makes 1+1=2 look shaky in terms of foundation.

Never underestimate the power of "We hate him therefore he sucks" logic. It's the most irrefutable logic in the history of mankind.

 

Well, didn't Americans basically voted for George Bush over Al Gore because of "likeability"? People in general care a lot less for logic than feelings.

Note: not meant to be a political discussion and no opinion on "correctness" of decision. Just pointing out that in general everyone is more swayed by emotions rather than hard reasoning.

 

I don't feel like starting an argument with you because you probably won't be here very long.

But Hall of fame in Coaching and HOF in playing have little to nothing to do with eachother.

It's like the same thing as saying, Jerry Sloan has never won coach of the year and never won a title, Paul Pierce was the finals MVP.

REFUTE THOSE FACTS IF YOU CAN.

 

Lenny Wilkens was a 9 time all star in his playing career, and i think Rudy-T made the allstar game almost every year until the punch.

 

why wouldn't i be here for very long ??? because i'm glad the rockets have a new coach ?? because i haven't trashed the rockets or morey/alexander as much as other people would prefer ??

especially because the hall of fame in coaching (in adelman's case) is NONEXISTANT. but yes, you are correct. i was following the OP's theme of using irrelevant facts to make ridiculous arguments. congratulations for figuring it out.

 

it really depends on the type of player, Bird was a great coach for his short stint, yet he sucks as a gm, magic couldn't really do either, and so forth.

For some players, their greatness is more talent than nouse, e.g. Durant will undoubtedly be a HoF player, but I'm not sure I'd trust him to screw in a light bulb.

 

There's more correlation between playing and coaching than between GMing and coaching. I mean, players talk to coaches and see their plays/tactics all the time. Whereas GMs just crunch numbers and have no clue regarding how things really work on the floor.

So if it's factual that being a bad GM implies being a bad coach, wouldn't it also make sense to claim being a great player implies being a great coach?

 

Actually DD I think he's poking fun at RA, and the people who keep saying he's a HOF coach therefore anybody we're replacing with him is trash, Morey is a dumbass for not keeping him etc. Then again, maybe I'm just reaching

 

First of all, you have to prove your title is a "fact". The burden of proof is on you, honey.

 

Why? Just because they are two independent events, doesn't mean they can't independently share the same problems/issues.

How many All Star Games did Red Auerbach and Phil Jackson play in? Zero.

Bill Russell was one of the greatest players of all time. Aside from winning a championship as a player-coach, few remember that Russell was 162-166 coaching the Sonics and 17-41 coaching the SAC Kings.

There is little to no connection to playing at a high-level and coaching at a high-level.