Football Display Case
national champs baby
Patrick Hruby is doing God's work.
first comment: "EVERY ATHLETE HAS ASPIRATIONS OF WINNING AND WE HAVE OUR FAVORITES BUT IT IS ALWAYS A PLEASURE TO OTHER STUDENTS ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS, TOO!"
stupid Pistons and their refusal to tank properly
rundown of Michigan's riser
needs moar usage
so much for that
This list is completely arbitrary and not a genuine analysis of the relative merits of state fossils.
will be michigan's highest pick in a while
money has to go somewhere
I am only motivated by people who have no opinion about me.
the just released schedules were a flat-out statement that the B10 doesn't believe SOS will matter in playoff selection
but I thought that draft was supposed to be incredibly loaded?
If you're gonna go please be in the first round.
another delightful side effect of a 14 team conference
guess which guy is David Berri.
I just KNEW it would end up in MGo.Lico.us
"All statisticians use prior information in their statistical analysis. Non-Bayesians express their prior information not through a probability distribution on parameters but rather through their choice of methods. I think this non-Bayesian attitude is too restrictive, but in this case a small amount of reflection would reveal the inappropriateness of this procedure for this example."
David Berri is still the dude on the left.
I don't know what historical vindictive I'm wading into here but, honestly, this attack on Prof. Berri has me rather perplexed.
I'm a very proud, bleeding-blue Michigan alumnus, an avowed Bayesian and also a contributor to Dave Berri's Wages of Wins blog. In fact, I'm one of two really strong Bayesians that contribute to the site (the other has his own site titled "Bayesian of Wins").
While I wouldn't classify Dave as a Bayesian himself, he is very far from the religiously-blind Frequentist that Munroe depicts in his cartoon. Dave has welcomed our attempts to add some bayesian priors to his analysis (check out wagesofwins.com for some recent examples) and he never falls back on the absolutes of empirical analysis. His approach is more like "This is what the data seem to tell us. However, we should be careful not to over-extrapolate."
While it is most definitely essential not to look at empirical output without context, as Gelman points out above, you also can't ignore the empirical data. You can't even avoid it. You just have to make sure to put it in context. The Dave Berri that I know never shies away from this.