PM to recruiting nerds
Comments
-
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.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.
-
So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?
-
Fuck off, Heat was the shitdoogie said:So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?
-
Heat >>> Push?
-
Val Kilmer’s best work.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Fuck off, Heat was the shitdoogie said:So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?
-
Yes, statistics are actually a liberal conspiracy. Great point.doogie said:So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?
-
CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
Val Kilmer’s best work.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Fuck off, Heat was the shitdoogie said:So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?
-
Statistics are not the same as opinions or fraudulent data.FremontTroll said:
Yes, statistics are actually a liberal conspiracy. Great point.doogie said:So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?
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.doogie said:
Statistics are not the same as opinions or fraudulent data.FremontTroll said:
Yes, statistics are actually a liberal conspiracy. Great point.doogie said:So, it’s like Michael Mann’s hockey stick bullshit?
Hth
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? -
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/ -
11 Players are on the field at once. Quality > Quantity, luckily we have both this year
-
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
-
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.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. -
No. We were discussing 247 non -coaches selling subscriptions using opinions with flawed data, they try to fit into a scientific model.
-
TierbsHsotBoobs said:
If you annoy everything, nothing remains.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. -
SarkFan69 gave you an excellent explanation. Facts matter. Facts are real. Facts that go against our intuitions and preconceived beliefs matter even more.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?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.doogie said:No. We were discussing 247 non -coaches selling subscriptions using opinions with flawed data, they try to fit into a scientific model.
If not, then perhaps you should take a long walk for some perspective. Or drink bleach. Your option. -
GrundleStiltzkin said:
If you annoy everything, nothing remains unannoyed.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.
-
Quantity has a quality all of its own. Ask Stalin.2001400ex said:
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.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.
-
When debating anything I like to look at the extremes of both positions and go from there.
Would you rather burn to death or freeze? Freeze.
Would you rather have 1 Shaq Thompson or 5 James Atoes? Shaq. -
Edit: I had to edit this because I'm wasted and I answered the first question as Burn, when clearly that is the worst way to die. This place has affected me.
-
Wow I thought I was editing when I really wrote a new post. Might as well make it a triple shit post, brush my teeth, and move the fuck on.
-
Doogles:
While you are doing the Lord's work here with your recent posting, the trick is that for every player that looks like a James Atoe you sign, you get a chance to have what is behind door number three.
Sometimes that is just another James Atoe. But occasionally it may be...a brand new cara player that isn't shitty.
Unless it your coach is Sarkisian, in which case it is almost certainly another James Atoe (or a Jarrett Finau). -
You seem intelligent.doogie said:No. We were discussing 247 non -coaches selling subscriptions using opinions with flawed data, they try to fit into a scientific model.
