[washingtonismoney]

I think it is sensible to ask "Why did you make the change?". You may not get an answer that satisfies your desire to know, but it is for sure fine to raise the question. I don't think it is sensible to ask "Why didn't you do this earlier?", because the only possible answer is "I previously thought differently, but now I think  this is what should be done."

Right. But what I'm saying is that in a brobdingnagian percentage of scenarios, the level of evidence is insufficient to convince you of the switch. If the level of evidence was sufficient, chances are more likely that you screwed up the initial decision rather than becoming better informed. Now, better to correct an error than persist in it -- but it's still an error. If Little was the right guy for game 3 he was, in all probability, the right guy in game 1.

[washingtonismoney]

I think it is sensible to ask "Why did you make the change?". You may not get an answer that satisfies your desire to know, but it is for sure fine to raise the question. I don't think it is sensible to ask "Why didn't you do this earlier?", because the only possible answer is "I previously thought differently, but now I think  this is what should be done."

Right. But what I'm saying is that in a brobdingnagian percentage of scenarios, the level of evidence is insufficient to convince you of the switch. If the level of evidence was sufficient, chances are more likely that you screwed up the initial decision rather than becoming better informed. Now, better to correct an error than persist in it -- but it's still an error. If Little was the right guy for game 3 he was, in all probability, the right guy in game 1.