thebandit27 Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 my giving you a name would be equivalent to the seat of the pants approach that I despise and seems so prevalent, at least among the lesser teams in the league. why would I guess? if I were in the same situation I would use every evidence based objective measure and tool available. i'm pretty confident you wouldn't. you seem pretty confident in your own innate ability to make the best pick. there lies the difference in our arguments. You're pretty confident that I wouldn't? Based on what? The fact that I have a working knowledge of many of the draft prospects? What it sounds like you're saying is that you'd let a computer run your draft, and not bother with the scouting process. What it further sounds like you're saying is that you basically believe that Shaq shouldn't have been selected based upon a set of criteria that you don't know, understand, or care to know or understand. #analytics You don't know what the #analytics would tell you to do, you don't know what they predict for Shaq (or anyone else), and wouldn't bother finding out unless you were the person making the pick. And in light of that, you can confidently say that Shaq shouldn't have been the pick? That is the most fundamentally flawed logic toward arguing...well...anything that I've ever heard. This pick sucks, because someone else should've been picked. I strongly suspect algorithms designed to measure just such likelihoods would have offered several better bets in statistical terms to draft in the same situation, but I can neither prove nor intelligently discuss them because I'm not the guy making the pick. All I know is that this pick sucks because #analytics. Yeah, we're done here.
birdog1960 Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 You're pretty confident that I wouldn't? Based on what? The fact that I have a working knowledge of many of the draft prospects? What it sounds like you're saying is that you'd let a computer run your draft, and not bother with the scouting process. What it further sounds like you're saying is that you basically believe that Shaq shouldn't have been selected based upon a set of criteria that you don't know, understand, or care to know or understand. #analytics You don't know what the #analytics would tell you to do, you don't know what they predict for Shaq (or anyone else), and wouldn't bother finding out unless you were the person making the pick. And in light of that, you can confidently say that Shaq shouldn't have been the pick? That is the most fundamentally flawed logic toward arguing...well...anything that I've ever heard. This pick sucks, because someone else should've been picked. I strongly suspect algorithms designed to measure just such likelihoods would have offered several better bets in statistical terms to draft in the same situation, but I can neither prove nor intelligently discuss them because I'm not the guy making the pick. All I know is that this pick sucks because #analytics. Yeah, we're done here. based on your unabashed and very strongly stated opinion that your pick would have been jack. are you a statistician? did you personally scout jack? do you employ an analyst to help you in these matters? do you have a long proven track record of success in draft picking? it's a fair bet the answers are no. there are certainly humans that possess extraordinary skills at evaluating football talent. bill polian was such a person. he could have been even better with the help of data crunchers and i'll bet he'd have happily used any leg up he could get as long as it was legal. I don't think the bills currently possess anyone with near his skills in this regard. and that's based on...wait for it...outcomes.
Doc Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) my giving you a name would be equivalent to the seat of the pants approach that I despise and seems so prevalent, at least among the lesser teams in the league. why would I guess? if I were in the same situation I would use every evidence based objective measure and tool available. i'm pretty confident you wouldn't. you seem pretty confident in your own innate ability to make the best pick. there lies the difference in our arguments. Way to puss-out, birddog. Not surprising in the least, though. Edited June 15, 2016 by Doc
BarleyNY Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 Whaley is drafting based on the players he determines he wants or needs. If you think Lawson would have lasted into the early 2nd round, Whaley still wouldn't have gotten his guy. Sure he would have X player he drafted in the first, but he obviously placed Lawson at a higher grade than the others. So you have to separate a very short term injury from the long term prospect, Whaley did that, and it was the right thing to do. If he believed Darron Lee or even Myles Jack were rated higher, or would fit better with the team, he obviously would have picked one of them, but he didn't. He picked Shaq. Now again you have to separate long-term impact from draft rankings because as you said GM's make mistakes and the rankings are hardly ever accurate. Time will tell that aspect of the pick, and Whaley will be praised or criticized depending on the outcome. Right now we are trying to criticize with incomplete information and guess work based on usually wrong rankings. Like I said earlier, if you want to rail on Whaley for picking a guy that will miss the first half of his rookie season, go for it. I respectfully disagree, and hope Whaley makes his draft choices with the long term health of the team in mind. I think I've covered my position well in my last and other posts on the topic, so I'm not going to restate it. I started to respond, but I'm just regurgitating what I've already said. It's all there. I will say this, however, and I'm not singling you out as lots of posters have done it: Watching my position mis-characterized and overstated so as to make it appear as though I have an unreasonable or extreme position got old a long time ago. I don't appreciate it. Saying Whaley should have gotten better value from the pick or that I think that Lawson with a torn labrum wasn't worth the 19th pick or that I'd have taken a different player under the same circumstances (Doctson, Jack) isn't the same as railing against Whaley, calling Lawson a bust or saying the season is lost. I've been clear about that, repeatedly.
Deranged Rhino Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 it's not surprising you all are apologists for one of the worst run professional sports organizations in recent history. And yet, here you are on a forum dedicated to fans of that team. Who's really the fool in that equation? Right, it's the guy who said spleen surgeries are comparable to labrum surgeries. That's right, when your assertion falls flat on its face, resort to criticizing the person as opposed to trying to back up your statement. He's embarrassed, Bandit. That's where all this is really coming from. Bird made perhaps the most asinine comparison in TSW history with his Shah of Iran comment and has been trying to dig himself out of that hole this entire thread. Of course, because he's not intellectually honest, he has chosen to dig himself out by doubling down on his own idiocy and then lashing out at everyone else for supporting their team. It's classic overcompensation. And it's hilarious.
thebandit27 Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 based on your unabashed and very strongly stated opinion that your pick would have been jack. are you a statistician? did you personally scout jack? do you employ an analyst to help you in these matters? do you have a long proven track record of success in draft picking? it's a fair bet the answers are no. there are certainly humans that possess extraordinary skills at evaluating football talent. bill polian was such a person. he could have been even better with the help of data crunchers and i'll bet he'd have happily used any leg up he could get as long as it was legal. I don't think the bills currently possess anyone with near his skills in this regard. and that's based on...wait for it...outcomes. I have a dual degree in engineering and math, so yeah, statistics are like a second language to me. And yes, I watched every play of Jack's final two seasons at UCLA--more than once. As to my batting average when it comes to draft prospects, I'd say I'm coin-flip accurate. You can decide for yourself if that's good or not. In the meantime, I'll end my discourse with you until the time that you formulate an argument that is grounded in more than mere speculation about theories that you haven't vetted.
BADOLBILZ Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 Bird made perhaps the most asinine comparison in TSW history with his Shah of Iran comment and has been trying to dig himself out of that hole this entire thread. There was a more asinine comparison than a certain poster who insisted that Dick Jauron was the head coaching equal to Bill Belichick? And maintained that stance religiously until Dick finally peed his last drop? Is that possible?
Augie Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 This has been quite amusing! I hope we can hash this out in another 100 pages or so and come to a consensus. But I won't hold my breath as it's hard to argue with someone who's entire position consists of: It was bad. I have no idea how Shaq will turn out. Pro Bowler? HOF? Out of the league quicker than Maybin? I don't know. I do know the Bills did their homework and decided it was worth the gamble. There is nothing more "seat of the pants" than just declaring it to be wrong without greater knowledge. That will never come (though some day a little insight may leak out), so I'll be open and see what happens. After all, there's nothing else we can do. (Excluding obstinant arguing with no apparent alternative plan.)
GG Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 I have a dual degree in engineering and math, so yeah, statistics are like a second language to me. And yes, I watched every play of Jack's final two seasons at UCLA--more than once. As to my batting average when it comes to draft prospects, I'd say I'm coin-flip accurate. You can decide for yourself if that's good or not. In the meantime, I'll end my discourse with you until the time that you formulate an argument that is grounded in more than mere speculation about theories that you haven't vetted. Welcome to our PPP purgatory.
John from Riverside Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 This has been quite amusing! I hope we can hash this out in another 100 pages or so and come to a consensus. But I won't hold my breath as it's hard to argue with someone who's entire position consists of: It was bad. I have no idea how Shaq will turn out. Pro Bowler? HOF? Out of the league quicker than Maybin? I don't know. I do know the Bills did their homework and decided it was worth the gamble. There is nothing more "seat of the pants" than just declaring it to be wrong without greater knowledge. That will never come (though some day a little insight may leak out), so I'll be open and see what happens. After all, there's nothing else we can do. (Excluding obstinant arguing with no apparent alternative plan.) I refuse to have a legit conversation with any birdog who goes through all this trouble to bash......but wont say who THEY would have picked Every court needs a court jester
thebandit27 Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 Welcome to our PPP purgatory. Well, you did warn me. There was a more asinine comparison than a certain poster who insisted that Dick Jauron was the head coaching equal to Bill Belichick? And maintained that stance religiously until Dick finally peed his last drop? Is that possible? I don't know man--that Shah-spleen-removal take was pretty incredible
Maury Ballstein Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 (edited) That's right, when your assertion falls flat on its face, resort to criticizing the person as opposed to trying to back up your statement. Edited June 15, 2016 by Ryan L Billz
26CornerBlitz Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 I have a dual degree in engineering and math, so yeah, statistics are like a second language to me. And yes, I watched every play of Jack's final two seasons at UCLA--more than once. As to my batting average when it comes to draft prospects, I'd say I'm coin-flip accurate. You can decide for yourself if that's good or not. In the meantime, I'll end my discourse with you until the time that you formulate an argument that is grounded in more than mere speculation about theories that you haven't vetted. So do you solve integration by special parts problems just for fun?
thebandit27 Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 So do you solve integration by special parts problems just for fun? Oh heck no I'm only part-time consulting anymore I still do it because it's profitable, but I pay a lot more attention to my wellness consulting business--it's a heckuva lot more fun and far easier
Augie Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 Oh heck no I'm only part-time consulting anymore I still do it because it's profitable, but I pay a lot more attention to my wellness consulting business--it's a heckuva lot more fun and far easier A nice blend of profitable, fun and easy should be in every Bills fan's life. We deserve it!
3rdand12 Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 statistics don't hold for every example. they hold for the majority of examples. they represent what is most likely to happen not always what does happen. it's really a pretty simple concept. not rocket surgery. This need to be clear. Anomalies appear and can skew the mean. but just a little with enough data points. with small sample size the variant can ruin a predictability equation A nice blend of profitable, fun and easy should be in every Bills fan's life. We deserve it! sound like a nice pair of socks to me !
birdog1960 Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) I have a dual degree in engineering and math, so yeah, statistics are like a second language to me. And yes, I watched every play of Jack's final two seasons at UCLA--more than once. As to my batting average when it comes to draft prospects, I'd say I'm coin-flip accurate. You can decide for yourself if that's good or not. In the meantime, I'll end my discourse with you until the time that you formulate an argument that is grounded in more than mere speculation about theories that you haven't vetted. i'd say with that kind of accuracy one would want the most possible draft picks. every year. and the actual placing would be less important than than quantity. so trading away draft picks for a "sure thing"or using a high draft pick that supposedly no one else will trade up for on an injured player would be a generally silly approach. Edited June 16, 2016 by birdog1960
John from Riverside Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 I have a dual degree in engineering and math, so yeah, statistics are like a second language to me. And yes, I watched every play of Jack's final two seasons at UCLA--more than once. As to my batting average when it comes to draft prospects, I'd say I'm coin-flip accurate. You can decide for yourself if that's good or not. In the meantime, I'll end my discourse with you until the time that you formulate an argument that is grounded in more than mere speculation about theories that you haven't vetted. His coin flip accurate is probably better then your "anytime" accurate
Augie Posted June 16, 2016 Posted June 16, 2016 sound like a nice pair of socks to me ! The farther north you go, the more this counts. The wimp that is me is old and prefers thin socks, if at all. The best gift I get every Christmas is heavy wool socks from my sister-in-law in "cold country". The move from Florida was the first time I ever moved NORTH.
Recommended Posts