PM to recruiting nerds

doogie

How the fuck can you have the #1 recruiting class in the conference when you only recruit 14 players?

SarkFanSixtyNine

Each recruit is weighted in the rankings according to a Gaussian distribution formula (a bell curve), where a team's best recruit is worth the most points. You can think of a team's point score as being the sum of ratings of all the team's commits where the best recruit is worth 100% of his rating value, the second best recruit is worth nearly 100% of his rating value, down to the last recruit who is worth a small fraction of his rating value. This formula ensures that all commits contribute at least some value to the team's score without heavily rewarding teams that have several more commitments than others.

2001400ex

SarkFanSixtyNine said:

Each recruit is weighted in the rankings according to a Gaussian distribution formula (a bell curve), where a team's best recruit is worth the most points. You can think of a team's point score as being the sum of ratings of all the team's commits where the best recruit is worth 100% of his rating value, the second best recruit is worth nearly 100% of his rating value, down to the last recruit who is worth a small fraction of his rating value. This formula ensures that all commits contribute at least some value to the team's score without heavily rewarding teams that have several more commitments than others.

Or you could say it's the Sark rule. Where you take 26 players every year and less than 10 Actually ever stay past the first 2 years. So you perpetually have big classes full of shit players.

doogie

So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?

GrundleStiltzkin

doogie said:

So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?

Fuck off, Heat was the shit

doogie

Heat >>> Push?

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

GrundleStiltzkin said:

doogie said:

So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?

Fuck off, Heat was the shit

Val Kilmer’s best work.

FremontTroll

doogie said:

So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?

Yes, statistics are actually a liberal conspiracy. Great point.

Captain_Insano

CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:

GrundleStiltzkin said:

doogie said:

So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?

Fuck off, Heat was the shit

Val Kilmer’s best work.

doogie

FremontTroll said:

doogie said:

So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?

Yes, statistics are actually a liberal conspiracy. Great point.

Statistics are not the same as opinions or fraudulent data.

Hth

FremontTroll

doogie said:

FremontTroll said:

doogie said:

So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?

Yes, statistics are actually a liberal conspiracy. Great point.

Statistics are not the same as opinions or fraudulent data.

Hth

So because you didn't understand the explanation of the Gaussian distribution your mind defaulted to another subject you don't understand as an analogy. Nice.

Where is the opinion in the class rankings formula? Where is the fraudulent data?

Where is the opinion in the assertion that global temperatures were the highest in 1,000 plus years in the 20th century and have continued to rise? Where is the fraudulent data?

doogie

Not at all.

Non-coaches put their opinions into a model. Great. Doesn’t explain how leaving 8 positions empty makes for the best recruiting class.

Mann, well, snicker

https://principia-scientific.org/breaking-key-un-climate-fraudster-makes-concessions-tim-ball-lawsuit/

Neighbor2972

11 Players are on the field at once. Quality > Quantity, luckily we have both this year

doogie

Yeah, “quality” as defined by non-coaches trying to sell subscriptions to fans like us. Kinda the point.


Edit, they’re now #3 Makes more sense

FremontTroll

Not sure how you think a pending lawsuit for libel filed by Mann proves Mann is a fraud? Even if he doesn't win the libel case that doesn't mean his research was fraudulent, do you see why?

Every climate reconstruction study since '98 has essentially confirmed Mann's study but that is neither here nor there.

Are we really re-litigating ClimateGate in 2018? I thought you guys had moved on to attacking other institutional pillars of society from the NYT to the FBI.

TierbsHsotBoobs

FremontTroll said:

Not sure how you think a pending lawsuit for libel filed by Mann proves Mann is a fraud? Even if he doesn't win the libel case that doesn't mean his research was fraudulent, do you see why?

Every climate reconstruction study since '98 has essentially confirmed Mann's study but that is neither here nor there.

Are we really re-litigating ClimateGate in 2018? I thought you guys had moved on to attacking other institutional pillars of society from the NYT to the FBI.

If you attack everything, nothing remains.

doogie

No. We were discussing 247 non -coaches selling subscriptions using opinions with flawed data, they try to fit into a scientific model.

GrundleStiltzkin

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

FremontTroll said:

Not sure how you think a pending lawsuit for libel filed by Mann proves Mann is a fraud? Even if he doesn't win the libel case that doesn't mean his research was fraudulent, do you see why?

Every climate reconstruction study since '98 has essentially confirmed Mann's study but that is neither here nor there.

Are we really re-litigating ClimateGate in 2018? I thought you guys had moved on to attacking other institutional pillars of society from the NYT to the FBI.

If you annoy everything, nothing remains.

FremontTroll

doogie said:

No. We were discussing 247 non -coaches selling subscriptions using opinions with flawed data, they try to fit into a scientific model.

SarkFan69 gave you an excellent explanation. Facts matter. Facts are real. Facts that go against our intuitions and preconceived beliefs matter even more.

Neighbor2972

doogie said:

No. We were discussing 247 non -coaches selling subscriptions using opinions with flawed data, they try to fit into a scientific model.

There is no way not to have opinions in recruiting rankings. I don't understand what you want them to do? Opinions + Scientific Model > Opinions. If you think their opinions are wrong then fine, but why do you care about recruiting rankings at all?

AIRWOLF

doogie said:

No. We were discussing 247 non -coaches selling subscriptions using opinions with flawed data, they try to fit into a scientific model.

Is this shtick? If so, it is high quality satire.

If not, then perhaps you should take a long walk for some perspective. Or drink bleach. Your option.