KEY POINTS:
One man's barrel of vintage can be another man's large case of sour grapes. Looking at the test record of John Bracewell as he enters his third season in charge of the Black Caps you could dress it up to look like a full-flavoured pinot noir, but you
might find it tastes like a cask of Velutto Rosso.
Martin Snedden was prepared to toast his coach last week and, when you look at Bracewell's bald stats, he has a reasonable argument.
Since Bracewell took over before the home series against Pakistan in 2004 New Zealand have won nine of the 26 tests under his charge, losing 11 and drawing six - a winning percentage of 34.6.
That compares relatively favourably with his three immediate predecessors. Denis Aberhart won six of 17 tests (35.3 per cent), though he lost just two tests while in charge.
David Trist's sides won just five of 17 tests (29.4 per cent); and even the teams of the highly regarded Steve Rixon won only nine of 27 tests (33.3 per cent).
But you do not have to knock those stats too hard to find a hollow sound.
Four of Bracewell's nine victories have come against Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. Four of the remaining five were produced at home against poor travellers Sri Lanka and the West Indies - although Stephen Fleming will rightly argue that you can only beat the side you're up against.
In truth, the one beacon shining in Bracewell's five-day record was the Eden Park victory against South Africa, where New Zealand played close to the perfect test (though they promptly went out and lost the next one).
The five test sides New Zealand have beaten under Bracewell are placed on the ICC test rankings as follows: Bangladesh, 10th; Zimbabwe, 9th; West Indies, 8th; South Africa, 6th; Sri Lanka, 5th.
New Zealand have not beaten any of the top four sides - Australia, England, Pakistan or India - in 10 attempts since Bracewell took over.
They were mown down home and away against Australia in four of five tests, only drawing the middle test of the home series when Wellington became fog bound.
They lost three tests in England, although they were competitive in all three before succumbing to fourth-day collapses. They lost a two-test series 0-1 against Pakistan at home, and have yet to meet India.
The first test lost under Bracewell was probably the most galling, when New Zealand lost their last seven wickets against Pakistan for 14 runs in less than nine overs, but there have been plenty of other candidates.
Apart from the Zimbabwe and Bangladesh excursions, New Zealand have lost every away test they have played under Bracewell bar one, when Stephen Fleming scored a double century at Newlands.
Why have New Zealand failed to progress in the five-day arena when they've become a consistent force in one-day cricket under Bracewell?
There is an insistence from on high that test cricket has not been devalued and that it is still seen as the ultimate form of the game, so why then has there been no improvement?
That's tougher to answer.
You can point to injuries to key players - particularly to Shane Bond and Daryl Tuffey - but there is an uneasy feeling that none of the top-order batsmen Bracewell has turned to during his tenure have grown in the test arena.
Perhaps only Stephen Fleming can point to a discernible improvement at the crease under Bracewell's reign. That would tend to lend weight to the argument the Black Caps are long overdue a specialist batting coach.
New Zealand has a much busier test schedule over the next two years than it has had this summer. Perhaps Bracewell's legacy can only be measured then.
So for now you can point to the stats, but do so in context. It'll soften the bitter after-taste.