View Single Post
11-19-2012, 04:51 AM
Registered User
lazerbullet's Avatar
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 684
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I think it's fair to say that, whatever degree the talent pool has increased by, the number of players of qualities x, y, and z have increased proportionally. But that can't be applied to the geniuses and outlier players. There is no guarantee that if one generation produces one, that a generation three times the size will produce three.
True, but odds are a bit bigger that it will happen. But the problem is not even with outliers.

Odds are a lot bigger that your average elite player is better. Same player against whom that genius (outlier) competes game in and game out.

You keep bringing up the poor competition in the 70s, but you ignore that Orr dominated the other elite players in the league to a greater degree than anyone else did.
This is exactly what I'm saying. Degree of Orr domination and his competition are connected. Put a similar genius like Orr into 80s-90s and degree of his domination is smaller, because competition is stronger. Is that new genius somehow worse than Orr?

IMHO nobody can't ignore the odds that your average top5/top10/top20 player will be better with increased talent pool. So that means outlier will dominate to a lesser degree.

It's simply logic and math. And totally throwing it out of the window is simply ignorant.

lazerbullet is offline   Reply With Quote