ascension

19

[ascension @xfrixo]

@sren1ty_ @adey_sama he has a consistent reason for 80% of what he argued, fauwkz was just saying shit that was blatantly not true to ragebait Lyte

[ascension @xfrixo]

@mikelikesgivea1 @LytePk straight slobbering on it

[ascension @xfrixo]

@MillsTwitch I'll give you a stat they actually need to add to the game: deaths per 10. No idea why they decided to hide how much you die per 10 minutes

Also your "attention" stat is shown by win rate

[bogur 🇧🇬 @b0gur]

stay the fuck away

[ascension @xfrixo]

@MaddenAcademy_ Great for the game Its just that defense needs to be improved

[Jay3 @Jay3OW]

Please give us more avoid slots @MarvelRivals

[adam @adamxpb]

rivals needs a reputation system

players who consistently throw, grief or are repeatedly reported for toxicity should be matched together, while those who play properly get better-quality matches. reward and incentivize good behavior

[Sam Monson @SamMonsonNFL]

Pressures vs sacks, let's talk about it.

I was dismissive yesterday, let's actually break it down as a valid discussion.

A sack is almost always a better play than a pressure in terms of results. A pressure CAN lead directly to a turnover, forcing an errant throw for an INT etc, so it's not always, but generally, a sack on the play is a far better result for the pass rusher than a pressure would have been.

BUT, that doesn't mean it was qualitatively a better rep from the pass rusher.

There's a wide range of quality in the pass-rush reps that can end in a sack (same thing is true for pressures). You can whoop the LT in 1.5 seconds and smoke the QB in a way that the play never stood a chance, or you could have been dominated by your blocker, but the QB tripped over as he went by you and you touch the guy down for the stat. Box score shows those two plays as the same, but obviously, they're not.

This is where the subjectivity that people hate has some power. It's subjective, placing a distinction between those 2 plays, but clearly it's directionally more correct than acting like they were the same quality of play from the rusher. That's why PFF grades have some predictive power that other stats don't have. They can capture some of that lost info.

That range in quality of rep, added to the small sample size, is largely why sacks aren't a great measure of actual pass-rushing performance.

A rusher can play 1,000 snaps over a season. The difference between a solid season and an All-Pro season is 10 sacks to 20 sacks. 10 snaps. 1% of his season. Intuitively, we know that's just a bad sample size to be leaning on.

This is why people lean on pressures so much. The guy with 10 sacks may have 80 pressures. We're upping the sample size almost by an order of magnitude, which is in turn reducing the impact of outside variables. This is why the better indicator of FUTURE sacks is pressures, not current sack totals.

But pressures are just 'almost' plays.

Sure. But those almost plays aren't necessarily an indication of any failing by the pass-rusher. I can find you dozens of pressures over a season that are qualitatively better reps from a pass rusher than some sacks.

If you whoop the LT instantly, but the QB gets the ball out quickly against a CB who got roasted off the line, you may only end up with a pressure. Hell, if you even bury the QB with a hit but he manages to blindly fling the ball out of his grasp forwards, it's an incomplete pass and your sack becomes a pressure, even if the play was wildly risky by the QB.

The point is that you don't always control the outcome of the play as a pass-rusher, certainly less than people want to ascribe when they're dismissing players with high pressure totals and lower sack numbers.

People like to think of elite pass-rushers as 'finishers', but in reality I think that's pretty rare, and a much lower factor in finishing than the other influences outside of the rusher's control.

There ARE some players who 'finish' pressures into sacks at an unusually high or low rate over a few seasons, but they're rare. Most players regress back to the mean in either direction after an outlier season.

None of the top 10 edge rushers over the last two seasons in terms of pressure to sack rate had an overall pass-rush win rate over 20%. And basically the only guy to rank very highly in both is Myles Garrett, arguably the best single football player in the game.

The bottom line? You want as much data as possible when you're evaluating edge rushers. As big a sample size as you can find.

High pressure totals are a pretty good indicator of pass rushing ability. High pressure rate has signal. PFF pass-rushing grade has power.

Combine as much as you can to build the best picture of a rusher you can get, but sacks would be a few steps down on the list of data points i'd focus on if i was trying to evaluate how good a pass-rusher was.

Sacks are the goal, not the best measure of performance.

[Mimi ⊹ ࣪ ˖ ݁ 𓉸ྀི @lvockhart]

how it feels to solo queue comp as a support main

[ascension @xfrixo]

@shionsuperfan cause sinatraa is their overlord and daddy

[NAVI TrqstMe @TrqstO]

Settling the debate: If the tank plays poorly, everyone has bad stats. If the tank plays well DPS have best stats.

🛡️ Tank plays bad = everyone has bad stats.
⚔️ Tank plays good = DPS have the best stats.

If you have the first thing happening mainly step up your game.

[ascension @xfrixo]

@NealBruceBC My dad taught me this line when I was 7 years old and I still have every move memorized, such a beautiful mate

[ascension @xfrixo]

@Vohes13 Lock this guy up minimum 20 years

[Tappedfreak @TappedfreakR]

fine girl let me ramble about chess openings for 30 minutes because she said “yeah i dabble from time to time” and then showed me she’s rated 1648 on rapid while grinning #mogged

[Julesgambit @julesgambit]

No matter how confident you are just know you’ll never be as confident as this dude

[Stathole @Statholesports]

Bam Adebeyo's 83-points was 8.5 standard deviations above his average. This is so large it breaks data floating point precision limits in returning an exact statistical probability of occurring.

I'm led to believe this is a 1 in 166 quadrillion chance

[ascension @xfrixo]

@MirzaErdurak @Healthwolf2 @reverienoo Some of the most successful people I know who scored 1500+ on the SAT use ChatGPT literally every single day for research, work, etc.

[kuno @kunostia]

the art of trying anyway

[ascension @xfrixo]

define Goal:
    description
    distance

goal = Goal("Impossible", far_away)

loop forever:
    if AI.reaches(goal):
        goal.description = "Not that."
        goal.distance += 10
        goal.justification = "We meant the *hard* version."
    assert goal.distance > 0