panthera leo fututio
- Member for
- 8 years 12 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|2 weeks 6 days ago||LOSE WITH DIGNITY||
LOSE WITH DIGNITY
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Indeed. Turn those picks,||
Indeed. Turn those picks, this year's lottery pick, and one of Okafor/Noel into a floor spacer, a solid point guard, and some veteran help, and deep playoff runs might not be so far away.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Maybe a bit||
Maybe a bit. But it's hard to argue that guys are peaking before age 25. See, e.g., the development curves here: http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2015/05/player-progression-in-the-nba/
Anecdotally, take a guy like Kevin Durant. One-and-done palyer who started getting heavy minutes immediately, didn't reach his peak performance (looking at any of the total-value advanced metrics: win shares, win shares/48, boxscore plus/minus, value over replacement) until he was 25.
In any case, the point definitely holds that it's silly to look at any college basketball player as a finished product, even at age 21-22.
|3 weeks 1 day ago||Good points||
When looking at a pretty dismal W-L record for the Sixers right now, I think it's also important to keep in mind that they're basically running their offense through a 22-year-old guy who's in his first month of real professional basketball, has a severe minutes restriction, and is currently turning the ball over about a billion times per 36 minutes. If he stays healthy, I really think Embiid becomes the best true center in the game (or at least 1b to KAT's 1a). But gameplay so far has been about his development, not about maximizing wins.
Look a relatively short distance down the road, it's easy to see the Sixers with the best roster in the East. Far too early to say The Process has failed.
|4 weeks 4 days ago||Particularly dumb two-step||
1) [prediction that thread will die because of verboten political claims]
2) [verboten political claim]
|5 weeks 5 days ago||Me counting angels on the head of a pin||
By definition, isn't it impossible for possession to be instantaneous? Think about what constitutes possession for a receiver -- no matter how securely he has his hands on the ball, if he's hit immediately and loses it, possession is deemed to have never been established. So there must be some time between when first touch happens and when possession happens, right?
|8 weeks 2 days ago||The righteousness of only||
The righteousness of only ever being on the side of the good guys, by definition. Worrying about who gets killed at weddings is for pussies.
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Will no one think of the guy||
Will no one think of the guy who needs a safe space for his fantasies of righteous conquest?
|8 weeks 2 days ago||Much more tangential background information||
Maciej Ceglowski (founder of Pinboard, fantastic amateur essayist) wrote a fascinating set of travelogues about some time he spent in Yemen a few years ago. He provides a thoughtful account of a place that exists as something other than Recipient of Missiles. http://idlewords.com/2014/07/sana_a.htm
|9 weeks 5 days ago||Formation name||
I prefer "The Human Centipede".
|13 weeks 3 days ago||> "So only liberals are||
> "So only liberals are interested in sports and pop culture?"
This wasn't remotely implied. Do I think that consumers of long-form essays about Bojack Horseman are evenly distributed across the political spectrum? No. I'd be very surprised if you did, either... (I'll leave my elipses in the standard three-dot form, though I grant that these aren't nearly as effective at expressing petty condescension.)
I'm not fan of the Ringer's explicitly political coverage, as I don't think it's particularly adroit or insightful, but it's silly to think about politically oriented essays on a single, partisan dimension. I don't think that The Ringer and HuffPo are shooting for remotely the same lane (though I admit that I'm not very familiar with the latter), and, whatever their failings, I don't think that The Ringer's political pieces serve primarily as just vacuous expressions of reassurance for people who want to think nice things about themselves.
|13 weeks 3 days ago||The necessity of bents||
I'd counter that a Sports & Culture rag will not be particularly good if it either 1) tap dances around any subjects with political implications, or 2) goes out of its way to be evenly displeasing to people of all political affiliations.
To your direct insinuation: a Sports & Culture rag that exhibits the political bent that The Ringer does is writing off substantially less than half the market for this particular genre of writing. Taking on a mealy-mouthed even-handedness would be writing off much more.
|14 weeks 1 day ago||So if I would have a produced a "Commemoration of||
So if I would have a produced a "Commemoration of the 90th Birthday of Pol Pot", would it have been cool as long as the fawning video montage was relatively brief?
|14 weeks 4 days ago||I'm less sarcastically appreciative||
From my own perspective as fan, I'm less concerned about the extent of some minor (if predictably hyperventilating) media reaction than I am about getting a better feel for the character of people that I root for. As such, I appreciate this thoughtful assessment of where the relevant parties are coming from. And if this piece means that the story stays in some fraction of the public's eye for marginally longer, I guess it's a price that I don't really care about.
|15 weeks 2 days ago||Yeah, you're definitely right||
Yeah, you're definitely right about binary vs continuous scales of goodness. As I mentioned above, I think we're ultimately reasoning about what level of quality a tie at the top is most likely to occur at. I'd say that this is somewhere above Meh and below Throw God. The bit on binary ratios is more in response to Brian's original reasoning -- I just wanted to assert the point that prior probability ratios between tied and non-tied scenarios aren't really germane here. We know that we have a ~tied scenario, so we should be distinguishing among scenarios in which that condition holds.
And yes, I'm just glad that Rashan Gary is around to make sure that I don't get wedgied and stuffed in a locker by SEC message boarders.
|15 weeks 2 days ago||Relevant probability ratio for QB||
In using a Fall camp dead heat to update QB quality priors, the relevant ratio isn't p(2 good)/p(1 good), but p(2 good)/p(O good) -- we know that the QBs are about the same right now, so we should be reasoning among scenarios in which that condition holds.
This distinction is both relevant and reassuring, I think. While it might be unlikely that we have two all Big Ten throw gods ready to go, I think it's even less likely that an extended Harbaugh residence has produced 0 plausible starters.
Reasoning in a more continuous way, we'd want to think about what level of quality is most likely to produce a tie between the top two. I think that level is Pretty Good Quality.
|15 weeks 5 days ago||"The human body traditionally||
"The human body traditionally isn't built for swimming."
This is exactly the reason why I'd define world-class sprinters as better "athletes" than world-class swimmers -- sprinting is fundamental to human movement in a way that swimming isn't. Obviously, Bolt couldn't just jump into whatever sport and excel, but the physical tools he possesses would be *enormously* useful on the football field, basketball court, baseball diamond, etc. That's not nearly as true for Phelps.
In terms of accomplishments, though, they're both once-in-a-lifetime competitors, and I doubt any of us ever see their equals in their respective sports.
|17 weeks 19 hours ago||NBA defense||
Right, defense in the NBA is the worst...except for every other basketball association in the history of the sport.
I mean, you can always point to some guys getting lazy on the weak side on a non-playoff squad in March, but the defense played in the modern NBA is way better than what you see in college, way better than in previous eras of the NBA (go back and watch old Golden Era '80s games if you don't believe this), and way better than any other modern pro league.
|18 weeks 1 day ago||I don't think we're disagreeing, except to the||
I don't think we're disagreeing, except to the extent that I'd emphasize that maybe we should let people decide for themselves what tiny risks they are and are not willing to accept.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||But more to the point, would you "let" your wife||
But more to the point, would you "let" your wife ride in cars? If so, where do you see the difference?
|18 weeks 2 days ago||I think we have different sorts of||
I think we have different sorts of relationships.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||Depending on one's specific attachment to the||
Depending on one's specific attachment to the Games, I'm not sure that skipping them would be a smaller sacrifice than eliminating all non-essential vehicle travel. And as far as I know, doctors don't generally recommend that pregnant women do the latter.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||Vain phone-based edit||
|18 weeks 2 days ago||Fair point||
And a more constructive approach to the problem of ubiquitous, small risks is probably to try to minimize them wherever one can, rather than to shrug one's shoulders and say "I could have just as easily been hit by a car." Still, given the risks that you list, I think it's important to hold out the possibility that a pregnant women *could* reasonably and ethically decide to be in Rio.
|18 weeks 2 days ago||Relative risk assessment||
Thanks for a very informative post!
A small quibble with this, though: "essentially, any non-zero risk for a developing fetus is too high."
This doesn't seem to square with the countless other small but non-zero risks that pregnant women (and all of us) take during routine activity. Obvious example: the risks of virus contraction that you list aren't that much greater than the risks of catastrophic injury from car crashes.
Less abstractly: if some form of Olympic participation is hugely important to women who are or could become pregnant, the threshold for risk has to be something greater than 0 (though of course there are non-thriving arguments over exactly what non-zero risk is ethically acceptable).
|19 weeks 4 days ago||Utility function||
You'd probably want some sort of negative exponential function for player utility, since differences in position at the bottom of the list mean less (guys are just guys).
Ultimately, of course, you'd want to tweak the parameters of such a function so that Michigan has the best roster.
|20 weeks 1 day ago||Entrance rights|
|20 weeks 3 days ago||Is this a parody account?||
Penn State fan: "Whatever you do, don't acknowledge institutional failures in addressing sexual assault."
|21 weeks 4 days ago||Depends on what you mean by||
Depends on what you mean by "supplemental". If you're talking about isolation work for triceps and delts, nobody in the history of humanity has ever gotten strong doing this. You get strong at pushing things by pushing heavy weight. You might see some strong dudes doing isolation stuff, but they're either shoring up weak points or trying to get sexier. They got strong in the first place by pushing heavy weight.
|32 weeks 2 days ago||Hey, man||
Them days we weren't able, there was always Cain.