×

[Serious] Thanks guys for being a great 49ers community and cool diversion during some hard times by KingofKale in 49ers

[–]captainsadness 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is what sports are for man, its a kids game we get to turn off real life for and enjoy. Best of luck with your life struggles, cancer's a bitch and you're going to kick its ass, we're all praying for you and your family.

The Democrats Are Moving Left Without Self-Destructing by wenchette in politics

[–]captainsadness 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's a very superficial understanding of basic economics.

Free trade is good. Everyone does benefit. Implementing protectionism to cure income inequality is like banning kids from bringing cupcakes to school for their birthday because they aren't all the same size. Now nobody gets cupcakes at all.

Free trade isn't why our wages have stagnated, technological irrelevance and a lack of increase in worker productivity has stagnated blue collar wages. You don't educate the lower class for 30 years, they don't make more money for 30 years - its that simple.

This is why I said it was a class war - protectionism only makes sense if you want to do whats worst for the rich, not do whats best for the poor. Then its stupid.

"Getting the rest of us in on the gains from trade" makes sense when you talk about raising taxes to support education, jobs programs, and infrastructure, not cutting off those trade gains.

Limiting our economic ties with the world and yelling about the grand larceny of rich people was the separation between Bernie and the rest of the democratic party. Obama always wanted free community college, college debt relief, and single payer. Bernie was the only fact denying populist.

The Democrats Are Moving Left Without Self-Destructing by wenchette in politics

[–]captainsadness 3 points4 points  (0 children)

His rejection of TPP was because he viewed it as a corporate money grab that would hurt blue collar union workers and give money to "millionaires and billionaires," claims unsubstantiated by fact. Multiple nonpartisan groups released studies that TPP would improve blue-collar employment. His rejection of trade policy was a result of his left wing positions. He is, definitionally, to the left of the left. TPP was an Obama policy.

I and a lot of people like me will not vote for people who reject fact to formulate everything as a battle between the rich and the poor. Making him a centrist will normalize this behavior - its damaging to all of us and the country.

I'm talking about white Americans, 51% of whom self identify as Conservative, while 43% identify as Liberal. That means that at most, 20% of white Americans are politically in line with Bernie. Thats not going to win you elections.

The Democrats Are Moving Left Without Self-Destructing by wenchette in politics

[–]captainsadness -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Dude I live in Europe. I went to a hospital and paid nothing for it literally three days ago. I grew up in California. Lol "haven't experienced left wing policy."

I voted for Hillary Clinton in California as an absentee and I voted for Obama twice. I'm liberal as shit, I just also happen to think trade deals are a good thing, you know, because every economist thinks so. You want to kick people like me out of the party? I am the majority of the party. You need to get out of my nice centrist liberal party of Obama, you can keep your Hollandian populism. You're not reading the tea leaves here. If there were two to the left of me for every one of me Bernie would have won the primary even with the DNC "coordinating messaging" with the Hillary campaign.

You'd think the far left would get it by now. 70% of this country is white, they aren't going to get any more liberal the more we screech at them for being poor and scared and ruining the country. The numbers you wish were there just aren't.

The Democrats Are Moving Left Without Self-Destructing by wenchette in politics

[–]captainsadness 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You're conveniently forgetting the majority of Democrats like me who listened to the incessant rhetoric about the ills of trade and rich people and thought the guy was trying to start a class war and bring us back to the economic 1930s where protectionism ran rampant. Bernie is absolutely an extremist, just not on healthcare. I must not have been the only person who noticed his TPP rhetoric was the same as Trump's, he lost the primaries and to be honest I don't think he would have won even without the DNC bias. That's just what the Russian trolls wanted everyone to think.

The Democrats Are Moving Left Without Self-Destructing by wenchette in politics

[–]captainsadness 43 points44 points  (0 children)

That's just factually inaccurate, I live in Europe. The Eurozone is basically one big tax free TPP. Bernie is a protectionist populist who happens to be socially liberal, hes more like Hollande than a moderate like Merkel. Hes quite far to the left no matter where you look, yes even in Sweden.

The Democrats Are Moving Left Without Self-Destructing by wenchette in politics

[–]captainsadness -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I will leave the party if that happens and I'm not alone. There are a lot of people out there who are sick and tired of political extremism as a general concept - not just on the right. Bernie's populist, non-fact based fear mongering over trade deals especially was a good part of why I and the majority of democrats voted for Hillary. Bernie and Trump's retoric on TPP were identical and it spooked a lot of people. Moving the entire party to meet him is a mistake waiting to happen.

Post Game Thread: 1899 Hoffenheim (Buli #34) by BurtaciousD in borussiadortmund

[–]captainsadness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly this whole season just felt like the first half of Kloppos last. I'm glad its over. Out with the old, in with the new. See Y'all in a few months

Anyone else miss this dude? Not as HC but was a great D Line coach. BLUDGEON! by Jordanlf3208 in 49ers

[–]captainsadness 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Been saying it for a while now. Dude was screwed by the media after the press conference fart, totally underrated on the field. Players loved him

Josh Allen to reporters as Jim Kelly walked him off the field after practice: “I’m shaking right now. This is the greatest quarterback in Bills history.” by DreamedJewel58 in nfl

[–]captainsadness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everybody says this. I would guess that being shorter than the line just forces short QBs to rely more heavily on their knowledge of the playbook and the routes run. Steve Young, HOF, 5'11", 3rd highest career QBR of all time, when he talks about this describes a TD play to Jerry Rice against the Ravens where he got a glimpse of Jerry getting a good start to his route, then literally closed his eyes, and threw the ball to where he thought Jerry would be.

It might be harder for short QBs to be mediocre and throw to open guys, but I think it probably forces them to play the game the right way: study defences, know your playbook, throw to the guys that are schemed open.

Seahawks announced they have released Cliff Avril with a failed physical designation. by Jobbe03 in nfl

[–]captainsadness 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree. Hes aged pretty well considering he won more games than kelly with geep chryst as OC and gabbert at QB. No clue how he did that. I bet he gets a DC job in a few years

I took different approach to draft grades and graded teams based on how they selected compared to pre-draft rankings. by skepticismissurvival in nfl

[–]captainsadness 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oof that was stupid of me, especially in such a high effort comment. I didn't see that you did this based on big boards. My first point still stands however - I think the ROI metric especially is irreparably flawed.

If you compare the 2nd and 4th columns in this screenshot you can see that there is a pretty good mix between total pick value and the ROI. It's certainly not perfect and teams with few picks can certainly boost themselves by making a couple of good ones, but the Broncos and Giants are both in the top 10 in terms of ROI and the top 4 in terms of capital.

Thats not what I was arguing, I'll rephrase the argument so that it fits with big boards instead of mocks since it still holds.

My argument is that its very hard to pick highly ranked players too early but comparatively easy to pick them late. This gives an advantage in your scoring to teams that have lower draft picks overall (not in terms of cumulative value, literally more picks, later in the draft). The first overall pick has exactly 0 players with which it can achieve a positive score if I am understanding your selection metrics correctly.

Actually, again if I understand how you did value scaling, I think picking Saquon or Rosen at 1 would still lose value for the Browns, even though they are the top two players even after scaling. Moreover, because neither the logarithmic scaling of the JJ chart nor the positional importance is taken into account on the big board, the holders of top 10 overall picks are incredibly unlikely to pick the top players (you don't take guards at 2), and will be overly punished for it. Meanwhile, any end of the first round pick has a huge opportunity to be a positive pick, and due to the scaling, score highly.

There are exceptions. The Broncos and Cardianls were the only top 10 ROI teams with top 10 picks (for this I used non-adjusted JJ board), but even they were barely top 10, and they used their first picks on big board favorites. Out of the top 7 teams for ROI on the JJ chart, the earliest pick is the Packers at 18. Here is a quick lazy chart I made with Y axis being each team's first overall pick and the X axis being the team's ROI rank on your chart. Two of the top three teams didn't even have first round picks. This is pretty statistically unlikely. Nine teams of the thirty two picked in the top 10, the odds that none of the 7 top teams is a top 10 pick with random sampling and no replacement is 7.3%. Possible, but unlikely.

Now I totally missed that this was big boards. That does invalidate most of what I was saying with regards to the ranking. I don't think the scaling was good though. I'd like to point out that even after scaling Saquon down 8%, he still would have a JJ value of 2760 making him the top player in the draft. If I were to do this I think I would scale your positional scaling based on how the value chart itself scales.

So if I were to use the ROI analysis you've made, my conclusion would be to spend a low first round pick on a high big board, low positional value player.

I took different approach to draft grades and graded teams based on how they selected compared to pre-draft rankings. by skepticismissurvival in nfl

[–]captainsadness 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its cool what you did here. I'm in grad school to do data science professionally so thinking about this problem is pretty interesting to me and I'm glad you put this together. That said... I really think these charts are worthless, mostly because I think basing draft performance on mocks is like deciding how much fun you had on vacation from comparing what you did on vacation with what a group of 150 vacation planners thought you were going to do on vacation before you went. Don't take that criticism the wrong way, I have the same gripes with PFF and every analyst on air when they talk about draft value, its just a misunderstanding about what a mock draft actually is and what data we can pull out of it.

First, a problem with your charts specifically: the rankings are based off of average draft position. Now I'll admit, I can't really think of a better way to do this other than some distribution based weighting, but its much harder for ADP to be higher than the value of guys selected in the early rounds or much lower than the value of guys selected in lower rounds. For example, no matter who you select at 1, their average is lower than 1. I suspected, and it seems to be true, that a decent amount of the teams who won on your chart had fewer (so higher variance) and/or more later round picks than other teams. Here are a few of the ROI "winners" with their rounds listed: Titans (1,2,5,6), Eagles (2,44,6,7), Jags (1,2,3,4,6,77), Texans (333,4,666,7), Packers (1,2,3,4,555,6,777). I haven't gone through every team, and I'm sure there are outliers, but all these teams are high win, so lower picks within rounds, have more picks later in the draft, or have fewer than 7 picks.

Second, a problem with any analysis of this type: mock draft position is just a really strange thing to base value off of in the first place. It makes sense why people do it, but the math of it makes no sense at all. Mock drafts are guesses of where players will go. They are not rankings of how valuable the players are. Ex. Baker Mayfield might have been taken later in mock drafts than Nelson simply because of what the teams at the top needed (Colts don't need a QB and might be unwilling to trade back). Even if we assume Nelson becomes a HOF guard, he will be less valuable than the 16th best QB in the league, yet for whatever reason I doubt people would take an Andy Dalton or Teddy Bridgewater above him. Mocks are guesses of what will happen in the real draft, so they should be evaluated based on what actually happened, not the other way around. When we criticize a GM for taking a player higher than they were mocked, we are basically getting mad at them because we as a group were wrong about what we thought they would do. That's not just silly, its mathematically wrong to assign value to a function from the error of an approximate fit of that function, it makes no sense.

While I expect that most think this chart is a measure of how effectively teams allocated their draft capital to get the guys they wanted relative to where the guys actually went, I suspect it really just tells us who drafted guys later than we expected them to.

[Maiocco] Why haven’t #49ers selected a pass rusher through first three rounds? Their actions suggest the top edge rusher on their board at any given time did not stack up to the players at other positions and would not have been a significant upgrade over the players they already have. by Zockman175 in 49ers

[–]captainsadness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We were 0-9 before we got our shit turned around. We were 2-14 the year before. This roster has significant holes, I think we've gotta improve pass rush too, but if the right guy for the team isn't there why pick a misfit? We all wanted Harold Landry/Key/Sweat, I get it, but what if they weren't right for the team and there were concerns/scheme fit issues we didn't know about? We won't fill every hole in the roster in two years, the NFL just doesn't work like that.

What is happening? Don’t we need pass rushers, guards and big WRs? by Zoze13 in 49ers

[–]captainsadness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We don't need WRs at all, our WRs are fine, thats just what the media says we need. Also shanahan hates big WRs. WR1 is a stupid concept that doesn't exist, it literally just means WR who gets targeted a lot.

Pass rushers we need, but this draft class kinda sucks. Nobody looked great aside from Landry (who fell, so someone probably knows something we don't), and Chubb who wasn't there when we picked. I suspect they'll see how Pita T does and survive on FAs for another year here. We are still in a rebuild.

Guards yeah. You can get those later or off the street if you need to, but if there isn't anyone they really like its not worth drafting them.

My advice: grab a beer, chill out, and trust the guys who get paid to do this for a living.

My fellow faithful, do you think we will move down again tonight? by dbrigzshow in 49ers

[–]captainsadness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eh, Carl Lawson had a decent year but they're different players and he was used differently. Carl played 50% of snaps, mostly in pass rush situations. Solly played 75% and kicked inside for money downs so Doom could go eat. The difference between the two? Carl had 5 more sacks, Solly had 4 more tackles for loss. Do I think thats miles better when this was Solly's first year playing the position? Nah. Solly is a dominant run defender who needs to develop his pass rush, he always was and thats why we drafted him. Solomon still has time to be a pass rush stud he doesn't have to do it in a rebuild year when he's 21 years old.

I want to be clear, I don't think Solly played like a #3 pick, I think he played like a guy who was played out of position and its way too early to say hes a bust. I disagree that you have to hit on your first rounders immediately, the partiots have had two first round picks in the last 5 years (both so late they were effectively second rouders) and they somehow made it to three superbowls. The guys they won with were old cheap mid range vets and guys that developed over time.

If you think Reuben Foster was a bad pick then you picked the wrong sport to be a fan of. Ray Lewis might have literally killed someone, but hes still going to Canton first ballot and was a locker room leader just like Foster is. Yeah, if he never plays on the team again I'll concede he was a bust, but in light of todays news that isn't looking likely.

Wanna talk recent first round 49er busts? AJ Jenkins, Jimmy Ward, Aldon Smith, Arik Armstead (I doubt they pick up his option), Joshua Garnett. I would grade all of those picks as the same or worse than the Solomon Thomas pick if he plays even a little bit better than he played last year for for the next three years

I'd add Witherspoon to your list, dudes legit. The only guys who haven't outplayed their pick yet are Solly, Pita, and Joe Williams.

My fellow faithful, do you think we will move down again tonight? by dbrigzshow in 49ers

[–]captainsadness 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We took fine advantage of the top 3 pick dude lol what are you talking about. Out of our #2 we got Solomon Thomas (who I know you don't like but still has time to improve), pick 67, and pick 111. We traded away 67 for 229 and 2018 saints 2nd round which we still haven't used (we gave away our 2nd for Jimmy G). 229 we used to pick Adrian Colbert, who was good enough to replace Jimmy Ward, former first round pick people somehow complain less about than Solly. 111 we traded away to Seattle to go get Reuben Foster.

So with the number 2 overall pick, we got: Solomon, who everyone has decided after one year to give up on, Adrian Colbert, our starting safety who kicks ass, we moved up to get Reuben who was an ankle injury away from being DPOY, and another second round pick WE HAVEN'T EVEN USED YET (59 overall). Better advantage my ass, hindsight is 2020 and we absolutely killed it with our #2 overall last year. If we got Colbert, a second, Reuben and Solly magically disappeared I would still call that pick a success.

The Bengals took John Ross at 9. Based on our fan-bases premature Solly hate I can only assume the suicide rate in the bay area would have risen if we had done that.

My fellow faithful, do you think we will move down again tonight? by dbrigzshow in 49ers

[–]captainsadness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It depends. I think there are a few QBs that people would want to trade up for - Lamar Jackson, Mayfield, Rosen, and Darnold. Frankly, I doubt anyone will trade up for Allen, I'm honestly stunned he's been mocked in the first round and I doubt any GM would bet their career to trade up for a guy with his metrics. If one of those guys is on the board at 9, and the raiders aren't fielding offers, then I'd say the candidates for trade-ups are the bills, chargers, patriots, and cards. Maybe ravens too?

Lamar Jackson especially I could see going much earlier than expected.

White people in America are sharply divided by education and income: Donald Trump is the result by dont_tread_on_dc in politics

[–]captainsadness 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You said across every income and education level. He showed that wasn't true for a specific education level.

Nobody here is denying whites mostly voted for Trump, but not every group of whites did. I'm a Jew, and I'm classified as white in this country. We went 70% for Clinton. This isnt pedantic, its data

Failed exam by Sangeorge in kendo

[–]captainsadness 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think we all need to fail sometimes to stay humble. The first time I took my 3-dan I failed because my Hakama was old and crappy looking without much pleat definition. Needless to say I felt like crap, and I didn’t have the opportunity to re-examine for a full year.

Your rank is a reflection of how good your kendo is, not the other way around. Keep improving your kendo and your rank will improve itself. Good luck!