Brian Lewis

XULA 2023 | IO PhD Student at Baruch College

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@_fbrwn @nedeball6 @HonourTheGift I’ll be honest, just ask him to define “first option” and watch everything crumble.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@actuallytweakin @Again1789490 @GGBlixnnn @MarzTalksSports I disagree. Nash and Russ are pretty comparable to build around. They need similar things. I can give you things for Nash that you NEED to hui around him, that you don’t need for Russ. My question for you is what do you need when building around Russ that you don’t need for Nash?

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@jordankobewade7 @kccomadena Tbf anyone can just reject the premise on the fact that you don’t mention the other team as a factor. The truth is with team accolades, more goes into play outside of the superstar and even the team itself.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@nafsuoegliGiahS @Jimmy101jr Dawg…ain’t no way you put quotation marks around an image you put that shows that you left words out of that quotes.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@actuallytweakin @Again1789490 @GGBlixnnn @MarzTalksSports For scoring, again, your point is just wrong. Russ scoring 31 ppg frees up his teammates. That helps the offense. He was their facilitator, that helps the offense. If your primary facilitator is also your primary scorer, defenses literally have to be careful of both.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@actuallytweakin @Again1789490 @GGBlixnnn @MarzTalksSports It is more effective for a pg to get a rebound than a center. They both have the same basic function, getting the ball. For a pg vs a center, a pg getting it allows you to get into the offense faster. Pgs getting rebounds is more effective than centers. You’re wrong.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@actuallytweakin @Again1789490 @GGBlixnnn @MarzTalksSports The rebounding statement is false. Nash having better handles is irrelevant because handles only matter as much as it helps you take someone off the dribble, and Russ is better off the dribble. Nash having the ability to score better is irrelevant because he’s a worse scorer.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@TomTommle8 @jordankobewade7 Not really. The biggest issue with the 4-6 argument is that it makes seem like if Lebron was 4-0 in the finals, his legacy/career would be that much better.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@PrudentChoice @Al_B121391 @SloHoopsFan Your first sentence is a naive take. You can evaluate criticisms and context. Like LeBron has had likely the best post-prime in nba history, but like the OP said, it seems like his case for top 10 gets worse. It just logically doesn’t make sense.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@SlimDawgin @MrMarinKnows @KenHeLive The problem is most arguments, like yours, are just bias. The 2011 finals is a cherry pick and considering his losing finals record bad is dumb, because you’re penalizing him bc it being able to making it to the finals.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@RandomJoe19 @Josh_Merfeld This is how you know rage is manufactured. The parallel is Black vs White and Greek vs African (since Wakanda isn’t real). Instead you use the less paralleled comparison because you can’t make the fair comparison.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@mmatesky @tedfrank The burden shift is necessary because evidence of job-relatedness and business necessity are almost exclusively held but eh org. If they just choose not to keep the info, then the law falls flat. The burden shift makes it to where the org has to actually have the evidence

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@stevebartin @RichardHanania No. Just read it from start to the first comma and you get why. Whether you look at Griggs or the CRA 1991 revisions, none of them actually say that that disparate impact is illegal based on disparate impact alone. This is performative.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@BWConnector @DavidLiptonWI @dilanesper This argument wouldn’t work because disparate impact only exists in the absence of job relevance and business necessity (predicting performance). In the absence of that evidence, that’s when disparate impact exists. So, you’re removing assessments for being ineffective as well.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@mad2live_ @BFromdayto34790 @AlexanderPayton Disparate impact is probably one of the most clear and narrow laws. It really can’t be revisited, which is why Trump deprioritize it.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@AstrosBrain @weswinham @Austen Overturning Griggs wouldn’t matter since disparate impact was codified into law in 1991. You overturn it, and they still have to meet the same criteria of job relevant and business necessity (predicting performance) to justify disparate impact.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@weswinham @AstrosBrain @Austen While your overall idea is correct, disparate impact does not deal with BFOQs.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@al17902 @HeroicViewer It really, she was healing people pretty easily at the end and levitating multiple characters at once.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@al17902 @HeroicViewer The problem is that at the end of season 2, she could already consistently heal and levitate people.

[Brian Lewis @_bjlewis]

@AnswersAsking @drterrysimpson It greatly depends on the weight of everything. If you just consider everything generally, the holistic method will always predict better than the mcat amount because you’re adding variance (unless something negatively correlates with performance).