Reply With Quote
silver was the only one on that site that wouldn't call it for hillary the day of, listen to his podcast from that day if you don't believe me.
It was no such thing. Clinton's leads in her firewall states were razor thin and their votes were heavily correlated. Trump's win was only a shocking result to the idiots in the media who have never taken a probability course in their lives. It was a mildly surprising result.
silver was the only one on that site that wouldn't call it for hillary the day of, listen to his podcast from that day if you don't believe me.
Not even the biggest pessimist on ST, and Lord knows we have a ton, would expect any less than 50 wins.
And this is a professional polling cite that comes up with this yard waste of analysis.
You guys are rewriting history. I won't do your homework for you. But for MONTHS, Nate Sliver or his neckbearded minions were writing articles about how Trump's chances in the primaries, and then the election, were extremely poor due to low favorability rankings. Then he went through a whopping 5-10 prior presidencies and compared, acting as if that is some kind of mathematically sound probability function.
538 is mostly a joke, and a good expose of the many limitations that affect data analytics when used to predict inherently uncertain events.
As to the Spurs, the 11 game drop off is also a joke. Sure, it could happen if injuries add up. That can happen to any team. Will happen to GSW if say Draymond and Durant went out. But their formula has no way of really knowing just how much KA has improved, how much Rudy will step up and improve his game in the system, how a motivated LMA will improve on defense, how Murray on defense, with Gay/Kawhi/KA gives the Spurs so much length that it will drive teams crazy, etc.
This team could win 50 without Kawhi.
This is a good response. I thought it was interesting their focus on the lack of dribble penetration since Kawhi and Tony are out, both of whom were the most aggressive in that aspect last season.
However, as you say, there is no way they can predict how good Dejounte is going to be this year. Heck I was judging him by his summer league work and the inconsistency of last season, but at the same time, he's 21 with very few NBA minutes. This is not like judging some rookie who played 3000 minutes his first year. He could take a huge leap... And obviously Pop said he's never tried to fit in Kyle per se... No one could say how good he's going to be this season. He wasn't aggressive previously and is shooting much better. He's also coming from a good showing in the playoffs. And Rudy as you say was an unknown quan y in terms of how he would look after that injury. And Kawhi is an MVP candidate, when he's back... this team will be really scary.
Their models would've been more accurate if they accounted for how lazy Hillary was at campaigning tbh
Op-ed seems to doubt his own conclusions, hence the le including the always persuasive argument killer and auxiliary verb "may". Much of what he contends is predicated upon injuries to parker and leonard (but what teams success isn't dependent upon health?) and gambler's logic or the premise that eventually, the Spurs will get it wrong when it comes to what pieces it adds. His part on Patty's and Gasol's limitations was pretty accurate though.
IIRC 538 had Clinton with about a 65% chance of winning the day before the election.
lol ok. I know it's cool in hindsight to say things to make yourself sound intelligent and all knowing. Razor thin margins in which Trump needed to sweep them all and he did. That is a perfect storm and was a statistic improbability.
What a load of crap. Silver was talking for months about how Trump had a real chance and how far off base the media was claiming he didn't because he'd have to nearly run the table in battleground states.
I'm not saying it in hindsight. I knew he had a decent chance on election day and was frightened as he would get elected on that dark November Tuesday while most Democrat sycophants seemed to be thinking the GOP was done in national elections. Our Dear Leader did exactly what Nate Silver warned of: he outperformed the polls by a lousy two points (a pretty standard polling error in presidential elections) and shifted a razor thin Clinton win to a razor thin Trump win. This election result wasn't the shocker the media keeps trying to play it up as to cover their own asses for their stupidity in projections.
Spurs will surprise everyone and win the NBA le!
Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!
538 is a product of idiots using analytics, nothing more. See cleveland browns
I had my high school alma mater (using connections through the faculty and with the greater "learning opportunity" as a driver) poll the country via random telephone dialing (like back in the day), and call a proportional amount of people in each state according to the weight of every state's respective Electoral College. They also attempted to dial proportionally by state districts in order to capture and factor in the urban center effect. Between 6 classes of ~20 high school seniors each they called about 15,000 people total. Their study, conducted 2 weeks prior to the election, ascertained EVERY SINGLE state (except Virginia) correctly. Sometimes simple methods are better predictors of complex events. Which is why I questioned the self inflated promotion of the Democratic Party's hype engine. It seems most media polls believed their own bias, and the bias of their consumer base - which falsely portrayed the cons uency of our nation. The dichotomy of their message and reality was really apparent to me for two reasons: 1) an appreciable voter turnout difference in the primaries between the Democrats and Republicans and 2) event turnouts - Hillary was having problems filling high school gymnasiums across the country and only managed large crowds when Barrack Obama, Mic e Obama or Joe Biden showed up for assistance - Trump on the other hand was drawing massive crowds in large venues everywhere he went.
It’s called Fake News that’s why everyone thought Shillary was going to win.
Incoming 3-4 record with Boston and GSW coming up
Like I said in the offseason... this is a 5-8 seed (at best) and a guaranteed first round exit. I've been spot on all year and Pity Mills and Gasol are delivering the bads (as I and many knowledgeable posters called).
Our season hangs on Parker coming back to playoff form. Kawhi and LMA won't be enough.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
