Mr_Mojo_Risin wrote:fallguy wrote:Mr_Mojo_Risin wrote:Sure single game plus minus isn’t gospel but can give some hints. The thing is though, the available information from the game was that Craig had been worse than Hauser, so is it really a poor decision by Joe not to go back to him? FWIW I wouldn’t have been against using him more but it would have been a risk.
Craig is a risk for sure. And Walsh is a lottery ticket (and not a good one). But anything would have been better than Sam tonight.
I don't really care about this game but JB and JT were working so **** hard tonight it would have been nice if Joe could have shown up for them.
All I’m saying is that there seems to be an assumption that because Joe didn’t make a decision to swap out Hauser for another guy that he isn’t proactive or making a decision. Sometimes a decision to stick with a guy and trust them to turn it around, especially when there isn’t an obvious better one is the best decision. It doesn’t mean Joe didn’t show up. We didn’t win this one but I’m not convinced it’s because Hauser wasn’t replaced more.
If it’s Luka, you just gotta let him get cooked. If Hauser is getting cooked, you can try something different! They went to that switch EVERY TIME DOWN just about, in the 4th! Idc if they were calling the switch and it was JB getting torched, try SOMETHING ELSE!! You think I’m going to go by +\- and say well he had the 2nd best, just keep letting them cook him? Someone else’s plus minus would make us… how could it get worse exactly?

























