• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Doral Moore

I love that RChil and RJ are on the same team here. This happens maybe 40% of the time, at most.
 
RChildress107 said:
1.
giphy.gif



2. Yeah you were actually doing alright til the bold. Is that really your argument for assuming Manning is not a good big man coach with such certainty that the overwhelming amount of data pointing in the opposite direction hasn’t yet changed that assption.
Click to expand...

Holy shit dude! Where have I said that he is not a good big man coach with any level of certainty? My whole fucking point is that there is uncertainty.
 
birdman said:
You obviously struggle with the concepts of inference and proof and data.
Click to expand...

You’ve actually managed to misunderstand all three.

Inference is a philosophical concept. It is the process of reaching a conclusion that is not logically required by the assumed premises but is probable based on those premises. This process need not, and usually does not, involve statistical analysis.

Proof is a mathematical concept.

Data is simply information. “Danny Manning is 6’10” is a piece of data. “Jeff Goodman thinks Danny Manning is a great big man coach” is a piece of data. “Danny Manning has recruited two big men ranked outside of the top 100 that are no longer playing at Wake; they both signed multi-million dollar contracts” is a piece of data.
 
RChildress107 said:
You’ve actually managed to misunderstand all three.

Inference is a philosophical concept. It is the process of reaching a conclusion that is not logically required by the assumed premises but is probable based on those premises. This process need not, and usually does not, involve statistical analysis.

Proof is a mathematical concept.

Data is simply information. “Danny Manning is 6’10” is a piece of data. “Jeff Goodman thinks Danny Manning is a great big man coach” is a piece of data. “Danny Manning has recruited two big men ranked outside of the top 100 that are no longer playing at Wake; they both signed multi-million dollar contracts” is a piece of data.
Click to expand...

OK, NM, Danny is the best. You win. Drop your mic now please.
 
Danny was in charge of coaching the bigs at Kansas. This is what the HC said Danny's duties were.

He's an excellent position coach not a miracle worker which seems to be your criteria. Blaming Danny for Dre or Devin is ludicrous.

JC went from nowhere to a Top 20 pick. Whether you approvet or not, Dinos signed a big contract with the best team in Greece. He hadn't been offered anything like that before. For 25% of this season, Doral is LEADING the nation in FG%. It is unfathomable that you don't think he has made great progress, I'm not sure what will.

Each time I give you data, you try to find an excuse not to believe anything other than your preconceived notion.


You have a position that is
 
RJKarl said:
Danny was in charge of coaching the bigs at Kansas. This is what the HC said Danny's duties were.

He's an excellent position coach not a miracle worker which seems to be your criteria. Blaming Danny for Dre or Devin is ludicrous.

JC went from nowhere to a Top 20 pick. Whether you approvet or not, Dinos signed a big contract with the best team in Greece. He hadn't been offered anything like that before. For 25% of this season, Doral is LEADING the nation in FG%. It is unfathomable that you don't think he has made great progress, I'm not sure what will.

Each time I give you data, you try to find an excuse not to believe anything other than your preconceived notion.


You have a position that is
Click to expand...

Link?
 
RJKarl said:
Danny was in charge of coaching the bigs at Kansas. This is what the HC said Danny's duties were.

He's an excellent position coach not a miracle worker which seems to be your criteria. Blaming Danny for Dre or Devin is ludicrous.

JC went from nowhere to a Top 20 pick. Whether you approvet or not, Dinos signed a big contract with the best team in Greece. He hadn't been offered anything like that before. For 25% of this season, Doral is LEADING the nation in FG%. It is unfathomable that you don't think he has made great progress, I'm not sure what will.

Each time I give you data, you try to find an excuse not to believe anything other than your preconceived notion.


You have a position that is
Click to expand...

Pretty sure this is the opposite of what I did when you provided quantifiable metrics of his success rate.
 
birdman said:
Holy shit dude! Where have I said that he is not a good big man coach with any level of certainty? My whole fucking point is that there is uncertainty.
Click to expand...

You haven’t. You’ve stated that you are currently operating under the assumption that he is not a good big man coach. I’m inferring from that statement that you hold that assumption to a degree of certainty that has not yet been overcome by the available evidence.

Here is an example of the point I’m trying to make.

Let’s say you are given a coin and are accurately told that it is more likely to land on Heads than Tails but aren’t told how much more likely. You flip it 5 times and it lands on Heads each time. At that point, the only logical assumption you can make is that the coin will always land on Heads, but your degree of certainty in that hypothesis will understandably be quite low and easily (in fact necessarily) disproved by evidence to the contrary.

Not all null hypotheses are created equal.
 
Last edited:
RChildress107 said:
You haven’t. You’ve stated that you are currently operating under the assumption that he is not a good big man coach. I’m inferring from that statement that you hold that assumption to a degree of certainty that has not yet been overcome by the available evidence.

Here is an example of the point I’m trying to make.

Let’s say you are given a coin and are accurately told that it is more likely to land on Heads than Tails but aren’t told how much more likely. You flip it 5 times and it lands on Heads each time. At that point, the only logical assumption you can make is that the coin will always land on Heads, but your degree of certainty in that hypothesis will understandably be quite low and easily (in fact necessarily) disproved by evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

I never stated that "he is not a good big man coach." That is not my position. Stop inventing positions that I have taken and then arguing against your imaginary position for me.
 
RChildress107 said:
You haven’t. You’ve stated that you are currently operating under the assumption that he is not a good big man coach. I’m inferring from that statement that you hold that assumption to a degree of certainty that has not yet been overcome by the available evidence.

Here is an example of the point I’m trying to make.

Let’s say you are given a coin and are accurately told that it is more likely to land on Heads than Tails but aren’t told how much more likely. You flip it 5 times and it lands on Heads each time. At that point, the only logical assumption you can make is that the coin will always land on Heads, but your degree of certainty in that hypothesis will understandably be quite low and easily (in fact necessarily) disproved by evidence to the contrary.

Not all null hypotheses are created equal.
Click to expand...

Also, the math to figure out which side of the coin is probably favored is pretty easy to do. There is no logical assumption necessary other than assuming equal probability that either side is favored before your first flip. From there you just calculate the probabilities of each flip outcome and update your prior probabilities with Bayes theorem. Five flips is probably not enough to be strongly conclusive but you don’t have to assume anything, you can remain in a state of uncertainty, kind of like I am with respect to Manning as a coach.
 
birdman said:
Also, the math to figure out which side of the coin is probably favored is pretty easy to do. There is no logical assumption necessary other than assuming equal probability that either side is favored before your first flip. From there you just calculate the probabilities of each flip outcome and update your prior probabilities with Bayes theorem. Five flips is probably not enough to be strongly conclusive but you don’t have to assume anything, you can remain in a state of uncertainty, kind of like I am with respect to Manning as a coach.
Click to expand...
I believe the point is, the coin is not a normal coin and will land on heads more often but you don't know how much. But it is kind of analogous in that..you know Manning is a good coach but you don't know how much. LOL.

Good science starts with skepticism so I don't even understand the logic of arguing you shouldn't be skeptical. There's nothing really wrong with that and like you say, trying to prove something is an outlier is much easier, which is why skepticism works in science. What a lot of people miss about science is that it's not the most likely hypothesis that is the best one, it's the hypothesis that gets you the answer by running the best experiment..........with the least amount of work. Could be the the same thing but often not true.
 
birdman said:
Link?
Click to expand...

NCAA stats- dloral leads the nation in FG% by 5.5%. that's a lot. http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/statistics

Last year, doral shot 52.5%; as a forsh 64.9%. This year 84.4%. I'm not sure in what world you live, As a frosh he averaged 2.6 rpg; as a soph, 2.2rpg. so far this year 7.6 rpg.

Before you say, "he's playing more mpg", there were plenty of minutes the past two years if he was good enough.

Don't make excuses to justify a bizarre position, that Doarl hasn't improved that much.

Beforn
 
Ok, most of this is crazy town but I do enjoy the idea that Collins didn't play because of Devin and Moore didn't play because of Collins. Good stuff.
 
DCDeac said:
Ok, most of this is crazy town but I do enjoy the idea that Collins didn't play because of Devin and Moore didn't play because of Collins. Good stuff.
Click to expand...

Huh? Each of them played C. Manning has said as much.
 
birdman said:
Also, the math to figure out which side of the coin is probably favored is pretty easy to do. There is no logical assumption necessary other than assuming equal probability that either side is favored before your first flip. From there you just calculate the probabilities of each flip outcome and update your prior probabilities with Bayes theorem. Five flips is probably not enough to be strongly conclusive but you don’t have to assume anything, you can remain in a state of uncertainty, kind of like I am with respect to Manning as a coach.
Click to expand...

Re-read that hypothetical. I’ll explain it if I have to.

You are not remaining in a state of uncertainty. You picked a hypothesis because you felt it was more reasonable and haven’t been convinced otherwise. All while refusing to actually argue for your position with data. That’s not an argument and it’s not scientific.
 
birdman said:
I never stated that "he is not a good big man coach." That is not my position. Stop inventing positions that I have taken and then arguing against your imaginary position for me.
Click to expand...
Nicely done.

Also, someone misrepresenting your position (i.e. how you feel about Manning's coaching ability) would indeed be an example of strawman argumentation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top