This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How are we scoring this again?In the G.A.D. it was a 1-10 scale, total the score, times 10.Now we are talking about...ranking them? Huh??So we'll have 60 Wild Cards...and I guess 3 will get a 20, 3 get 19, etc.Is that correct?I think he should rate near the top of the WC category.
Basically, yes, although Larry proposed an alternative that Tim said he'd consider after looking at all the Wild Cards. I'm all for Larry's alternative, but I guess that doesn't mean anything. Either we object to Tim's method, and he goes back the GAD method, or he does it his way. No in between as of now.How are we scoring this again?In the G.A.D. it was a 1-10 scale, total the score, times 10.Now we are talking about...ranking them? Huh??So we'll have 60 Wild Cards...and I guess 3 will get a 20, 3 get 19, etc.Is that correct?I think he should rate near the top of the WC category.
Well, every part of the space race was documented. And its alot more recent, of course we know boatloads more about these endevours.Actually, after reading Larry's posts, I'm starting to agree with timschochet.
Basically, yes, although Larry proposed an alternative that Tim said he'd consider after looking at all the Wild Cards. I'm all for Larry's alternative, but I guess that doesn't mean anything. Either we object to Tim's method, and he goes back the GAD method, or he does it his way. No in between as of now.How are we scoring this again?In the G.A.D. it was a 1-10 scale, total the score, times 10.Now we are talking about...ranking them? Huh??So we'll have 60 Wild Cards...and I guess 3 will get a 20, 3 get 19, etc.Is that correct?I think he should rate near the top of the WC category.
I think I am more confused (it's also late so maybe my mind is mushy).Did Larry propose the 1-20 scale, or does he have some other convuluted method?
He proposes a little more lenience with how many picks get a certain score on the 1-20 scale. His suggestion was that we allow up to 5 picks to get a particular ranking with the requirement that every ranking have at least one pick... hope this makes sense.Basically, yes, although Larry proposed an alternative that Tim said he'd consider after looking at all the Wild Cards. I'm all for Larry's alternative, but I guess that doesn't mean anything. Either we object to Tim's method, and he goes back the GAD method, or he does it his way. No in between as of now.How are we scoring this again?In the G.A.D. it was a 1-10 scale, total the score, times 10.Now we are talking about...ranking them? Huh??So we'll have 60 Wild Cards...and I guess 3 will get a 20, 3 get 19, etc.Is that correct?I think he should rate near the top of the WC category.
I think this guy was a charlatan who had no more knowledge of the future that the neighbor's cat. But just like astrology, there are always a bunch of gullible people who are willing to believe any mumbo jumbo that comes couched in mystical terms. Snake oil salesman; it will heal anything; or predict anything.thatguy said:
the chimp didn't even know what he was doing... Gagarin did... so did Armstrong...there's a difference...
but yet you didn't name one person related to those other things...I'm sure we could name dozens of related expeditions that completed parts of what Columbus, Magellan, and others did (Columbus especially)...Actually, after reading Larry's posts, I'm starting to agree with timschochet.We know these expeditions by their leaders, in every case, with the exception of the astronaut and cosmonaut.Right? Columbus discovering the new world, Magellan circumventing the globe (even though he personally didn't make it), Marco Polo in the court of Kublai Khan, Amundsen leading parties to both poles. But when we think of the first man on the moon, I know I think more about what it took to get there - Mercury, Gemini, the launch pad disaster, moon missions that orbited but did not land.I still think the space guys are top ten, but maybe just outside the top five is more appropriate.
My 6 month old has a vocabulary of zero; doesn't even point or grunt yet.I understand her more than what you just said.He proposes a little more lenience with how many picks get a certain score on the 1-20 scale. His suggestion was that we allow up to 5 picks to get a particular ranking with the requirement that every ranking have at least one pick... hope this makes sense.
My 6 month old has a vocabulary of zero; doesn't even point or grunt yet.I understand her more than what you just said.He proposes a little more lenience with how many picks get a certain score on the 1-20 scale. His suggestion was that we allow up to 5 picks to get a particular ranking with the requirement that every ranking have at least one pick... hope this makes sense.
Have Larry explain it.
I was going to ask you to translate Larry's post #5864.Read it five times and I still don't know what his point is.
instead of ranking 3 people 20, 3 at 19, 3 at 18, 3 at 17, etc...tim ranks anywhere between 1 and 5 people at each number, so for instance he ranks 1 person at 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5, 3 people at 6-15, and 5 people at 16-20...My 6 month old has a vocabulary of zero; doesn't even point or grunt yet.I understand her more than what you just said.He proposes a little more lenience with how many picks get a certain score on the 1-20 scale. His suggestion was that we allow up to 5 picks to get a particular ranking with the requirement that every ranking have at least one pick... hope this makes sense.
Yeah, it's all because of you. If you'd been following the draft, you'd have known he was on my list long before you started spotlighting the rest.Um, okay. :I see you went searching for the one who wasn't spotlighted, because I did not give his name, Or, by not mentioning his name, did I spotlight him because he wasn't mentioned, and thus draw attention to him? If I had spotlighted him by name, would that have meant he wasn't spotlighted, because he was really one name amongst many? Did I give the name away by not giving the name?For anyone who's been following this thread the last couple of days, it should come as no surprise who I'm about to pick. Next to Pele this guy is probably the second most renowned soccer player on an international stage. He has scored two of the most famous goals in soccer history - the Hand of God Goal & The Goal of the Century http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goal_of_the_Century - in the same game. Yes, he was a coke head, but this only makes him human and does not take away from what he did on the field, and besides it's likely he was getting his yayo from my Villain, which is pretty cool. On an internet poll, he was voted the FIFA Player of the Century.... yes, ahead of Pele.
Diego Maradona - Athlete
Diego Armando Maradona (born 30 October 1960 in Lanús, Buenos Aires) is a former Argentine football player, and current coach of the Argentine national side. He came top in an internet vote for the FIFA Player of the Century award, and shared the award with Pelé.
Over the course of his professional club career Maradona played for Argentinos Juniors, Boca Juniors, FC Barcelona, and, most distinguishedly, Napoli. In his international career, playing for Argentina, he earned 91 caps and scored 34 goals. He played in four FIFA World Cup tournaments, including the 1986 World Cup where he captained Argentina and led them to their victory over West Germany in the final, winning the Golden Ball award as the tournament's best player. In that same tournament's quarter-final round he scored two remarkable goals in a 2-1 victory over England which instantly cemented his fame. The first goal was an unpenalized handball known as the "Hand of God", while the second goal was a spectacular 60-metre weave through six England players, commonly referred to as "The Goal of the Century".
For various reasons, Maradona is considered one of the sport's most controversial and newsworthy figures. He was suspended from football for 15 months in 1991 after failing a doping test for cocaine in Italy, and he was sent home from the 1994 World Cup in the USA for using ephedrine.
After retiring from playing on his 37th birthday in 1997, he increasingly suffered ill health and weight gain, hardly helped by ongoing cocaine abuse. In 2005 a stomach stapling operation helped control his weight gain. After overcoming his cocaine addiction, he became a popular TV host in Argentina.
Although he had little previous managerial experience, he became head coach of the Argentina national football team in November 2008.
Diego Armando Maradona won the 1986 World Cup almost single-handedly and took Argentina to the final four years later. He also took unfancied Napoli to its only two Italian titles. Maradona was controversially voted best player of all time in an internet poll held by FIFA, much to the chagrin of Pelé and his fans, who contended that an internet poll was bound to attract relatively young voters. People that would have seen Maradona play, but not Pelé.
Truth be told, the title of greatest ever player was probably a bit too much credit. However, no one would surely deny Maradona was the best ever dribbler of the bal. He proved as much, when he scored what was arguably the greatest ever World Cup goal in 1986. Maradona picked up the ball on the halfway line and promptly proceeded to leave half the England team for dead before slotting the ball into the net.
Apparently, you wouldn't recognize a tongue in cheek statement, if you met in on the street. No prob.
Apologies. I thought you were being serious.
Pretty sure you were alone on that one, GB.Apologies. I thought you were being serious.
Pretty sure you were alone on that one, GB.Apologies. I thought you were being serious.
It happens
I prefer Larry's method. I don't like rigidity.I see.I think I prefer rigidity.So how about taking another shot at #5864?
I just hate agreeing with LB about anything.I prefer Larry's method. I don't like rigidity.I see.
I think I prefer rigidity.
So how about taking another shot at #5864?
Sorry, I missed this post earlier. I didn't say garbage, but it's just as well you did. Let me try to clarify my thoughts here. First, in general, regarding wildcards. They can essentially be two types:
Fair enough. Who should be lower?
more than half the wildcards haven't been picked yet, let's see whose picked before we decide that...my guess is just at a glance without really considering who is there and who isn't there... its far from exact...
Again, this is fair. My comments were based on the people already chosen. Still it will be difficult to place Nostradamus above any person who acomplished something of significance.
Great pick. His wildly vague prophecies have been inspiring religious wackos to predict the end of the world for centuries now.IN YOUR FACE NOSTRADAMUS!Really struggling with these last few categories, but as far as I can tell, no one's picked this dude yet, which seems like excellent value. Sorry for the limited write-up. I humbly acknowledge that this really isn't my area of expertise.
17.20 Isaiah Religious figure
I'll be back later (likely tomorrow) for more and my other make-up pick.
I still have to do a write-up on Phelps, whom I personally consider in the top 5-10 based on his time records, medal accomplishments, and pure dominance on the international scene. He's the Babe Ruth or Gretzky of his sport, and he's doing it against the entire globe. Plus he pulls a mean binger.I've been incredibly busy though, and have little time. Maybe tonight I'll get to it. I will say I was shocked to see him slip down this far when Athletes have been drafted steadily for awhile now.
I haven't changed my criteria, but what's important to America is different from what's important to the rest of the world. Look, if I was judging religious figures for this draft, Jesus of Nazareth would be in the top 3 for sure, possibly number one, because of his legend and how profoundly that affected people. I rated Marilyn and Crockett in that draft under the same basic principle; they were huge American legends. Being a "large legend" as you put it, is of some importance.Is Nostradamus a large legend? Not really. His legend, to the world, is nowhere near as impactful as Marilyn's and Crockett's respective legends are to the United States. I really don't see the comparison.
Nostradamus is an interesting figure, but I agree. His impact is pretty negligible. Monroe had a huge impact on pop culture, we can debate all day whether that makes her worthy of the same grade as the true greats. Crockett?
I really don't know how he's in the conversation, what he allegedly did, or his legend anyway, far surpasses Monroe or Nostradamus for impact, but it's doubtful he actually achieved many of the things we learned he did. Either way, unless someone can show what real impact N had, I agree with Tim here.
In 10 years I think Phelps will be thought of as a slam dunk top 10 - if he does what everyone expects and dominates another Olympic cycle. Since he's mid-career people are having a hard time justifying him that high.
Done. Thanks for pointing it out. higgins- I moved Marcus Aurelius to wildcard.
