Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;911231]I am not very good at math, but 4% of players make it to Canton? I would suggest the equation this way:

The number of players who have played in the NFL (in all it's forms) divided by the number of players enshrined in Canton. I doubt that would be 4% I doubt it would even be 1%.[/quote]

Lol, you can't put it that way. Too many camp bodies, too many players without real careers.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=skinster;911147]The length of the average NFL players career is irrelevant as the HOF only inducts players with HOF careers.
I'm not saying that there are 72 players who are incredible right now, simply that there are 72 players playing right now whose career will end up in the HOF. Some might be rookies, some might be in their 14th year, but the math is pretty undeniable that ALOT of today's players will make the HOF.[/quote]

The length of career of all current players is definitely relevant. If, as just a thought experiment, we consider that every current player will have a career of 4 years or less (except for those who already have surpassed that mark), then the number of players enshrined plummets precipitously.

Your mathematical argument is somewhat circular - it presumes that current players will have longer careers than we have a right to expect them to. You need to reduce your estimate by the percentage of current players who won't have long enough careers.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Mattyk;911225]Guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. If 4% is too high of a figure for you then we're not even in the same ballpark. And again, only 267 players in the Hall out of god only knows how many guys that have come through the league??[/quote]

Agree to disagree.

But on an unrelated note that I probably shouldn't say and I hope doesn't start a heated debate; the number 267 is a little misleading as there are many players who have already played their career who will be in the HOF that have not yet been inducted.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

I've got a headache.

:Smoker:

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Lotus;911236]The length of career of all current players is definitely relevant. If, as just a thought experiment, we consider that every current player will have a career of 4 years or less (except for those who already have surpassed that mark), then the number of players enshrined plummets precipitously.

Your mathematical argument is somewhat circular - it presumes that current players will have longer careers than we have a right to expect them to. You need to reduce your estimate by the percentage of current players who won't have long enough careers.[/quote]

Lol your clearly confused, about what, I'm not entirely sure, so I'm going to try to explain it out.

How long the average player's career length is irrelevant. Think about it; lets say every NON-HOFer had a career length of 1 year, and the average length of a HOFer was 10 years. Lets say that there were 5 HOF inductees per year. How many HOF players (rookie, through 10 year vet) would there be in the NFL right now? 50.

Why 50? Its because every year there are 5 HOF inductees. Fastforward 10 years, we do this 10 times (once for each year), and 50 players get inducted.

Yes I know players don't get inducted immediately when they retire, but I oversimplified for the sake of this example...when they get inducted is irrelivant as long as they EVENTUALLY get inducted.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=skinster;911283]Lol your clearly confused, about what, I'm not entirely sure, so I'm going to try to explain it out.

How long the average player's career length is irrelevant. Think about it; lets say every NON-HOFer had a career length of 1 year, and the average length of a HOFer was 10 years. Lets say that there were 5 HOF inductees per year. How many HOF players (rookie, through 10 year vet) would there be in the NFL right now? 50.

Why 50? Its because every year there are 5 HOF inductees. Fastforward 10 years, we do this 10 times (once for each year), and 50 players get inducted.

Yes I know players don't get inducted immediately when they retire, but I oversimplified for the sake of this example...when they get inducted is irrelivant as long as they EVENTUALLY get inducted.[/quote]

You continue to make the same mathematical mistake. My point is pretty simple.

If every player with less than, say, 10 years experience were to retire right now, none of them likely would make the HoF because they would not have long enough careers. And this would tremendously diminish the numbers of prospective HoFers who are in the NFL right now (which is the heart of your claim), thus tremendously reducing your estimate. Therefore you MUST take into account ALL players in your math.

You keep mathematically presuming what you are trying to prove so your math works out wrong.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=skinster;911235]Lol, you can't put it that way. Too many camp bodies, too many players without real careers.[/quote]

Actually, you can. To look at the pool of who the greats are, you have to look at everyone who actually played the game at that level (camp cuts are not considered to have played in the league).

You look at that large pool and then you figure who the greats are. Yes, many who aren't great play a year or two on special teams all the way up to the Tom Bradys of the league.

267 so far have been enshrined (based on the numbers someone else provided). I am willing to bet in the league's history, more than 250,000 people have played in a game. That makes Hall of Famers better than the top 1%.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;911231]I am not very good at math, but 4% of players make it to Canton? I would suggest the equation this way:

The number of players who have played in the NFL (in all it's forms) divided by the number of players enshrined in Canton. I doubt that would be 4% I doubt it would even be 1%.[/quote]

Not what I said.

I'm sure the % is far less than 4%.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Lotus;911288]You continue to make the same mathematical mistake. My point is pretty simple.

If every player with less than, say, 10 years experience were to retire right now, none of them likely would make the HoF because they would not have long enough careers. And this would tremendously diminish the numbers of prospective HoFers who are in the NFL right now (which is the heart of your claim), thus tremendously reducing your estimate. Therefore you MUST take into account ALL players in your math.

You keep mathematically presuming what you are trying to prove so your math works out wrong.[/quote]

2 things.

1. Every player with less than 10 years of experience aren't going to retire, that's just an absurd statement to make that won't happen. If the world ended that would also lessen the amount of HOFers in the NFL right now.

2. Even if all players with less than 10 years of experience were to retire, there is still no scenario under which all players should be taken into account. The formula stays the same....60 players just get subtracted at the end as the 10 years worth of players magically retire.

I really hate to pull this card, but I'm on a full scholarship right now because of math. Trust me, I'm right.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;911295]Actually, you can. To look at the pool of who the greats are, you have to look at everyone who actually played the game at that level (camp cuts are not considered to have played in the league).

You look at that large pool and then you figure who the greats are. Yes, many who aren't great play a year or two on special teams all the way up to the Tom Bradys of the league.

267 so far have been enshrined (based on the numbers someone else provided). I am willing to bet in the league's history, more than 250,000 people have played in a game. That makes Hall of Famers better than the top 1%.[/quote]

If you count everyone who has ever been paid to play in a game, its far less than 1%. That's a ridiculous concept though because where do you draw the line to make that percentage statement? You could say its anyone that has completed a full contract and gotten a second one. You could say its anyone who has ever started a game. You could say its anyone who has ever played football.

Any agreed upon percentage is also meaningless when determining greatness. What if I say the top 1% are great? What if I say the top 4% are great? how about the top 0.1%? What does that even mean? Numbers don't determine greatness, greatness determines the numbers; and whatever that number is, is what greatness is.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=skinster;911307]If you count everyone who has ever been paid to play in a game, its far less than 1%. That's a ridiculous concept though because where do you draw the line to make that percentage statement? You could say its anyone that has completed a full contract and gotten a second one. You could say its anyone who has ever started a game. You could say its anyone who has ever played football.

Any agreed upon percentage is also meaningless when determining greatness. What if I say the top 1% are great? What if I say the top 4% are great? how about the top 0.1%? What does that even mean? Numbers don't determine greatness, greatness determines the numbers; and whatever that number is, is what greatness is.[/quote]
Your scholarship is great, but you are starting with flawed logic, not flawed math.

It is the professional football hall of fame. In actuality, it is the NFL Hall of Fame. That means you are looking at EVERYONE who played in the NFL and then selecting the greatest from that pool.

While I ain't no math major, I do realize to solve an equation, you must start with the correct formula.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=skinster;911304]2 things.

1. Every player with less than 10 years of experience aren't going to retire, that's just an absurd statement to make that won't happen. [B]If the world ended that would also lessen the amount of HOFers in the NFL right now.[/B]

2. Even if all players with less than 10 years of experience were to retire, there is still no scenario under which all players should be taken into account. The formula stays the same....60 players just get subtracted at the end as the 10 years worth of players magically retire.

I really hate to pull this card, but I'm on a full scholarship right now because of math. Trust me, I'm right.[/quote]

The bolded was my point. Of course such a thing won't happen but it is important as a thought experiment. If you think about that long enough, you will see that logically it means that you have to take ALL players into account in your math. And when you do this, your estimate will shrink significantly.

BTW I was a math major who scored 790/800 on the math section and 800/800 on the logic section of the GRE so I can match your "card."

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Lotus;911349]The bolded was my point. Of course such a thing won't happen but it is important as a thought experiment. If you think about that long enough, you will see that logically it means that you have to take ALL players into account in your math. And when you do this, your estimate will shrink significantly.

BTW I was a math major who scored 790/800 on the math section and 800/800 on the logic section of the GRE so I can match your "card."[/quote]

You don't include something that almost positively will not happen in a prediction. I said the end of the world part sarcastically. If you want conservancy, I already shrunk my estimate as the average HOF career of players drafted since 1980 is 14 years and my formula shrunk it to 12.

Still, even if there's a doomsday scenario, or any other scenario possible, I don't see any scenario under which all players are taken into account. Please write me up a formula to educate me.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Leader In Sports;911325]Your scholarship is great, but you are starting with flawed logic, not flawed math.

It is the professional football hall of fame. In actuality, it is the NFL Hall of Fame. That means you are looking at EVERYONE who played in the NFL and then selecting the greatest from that pool.

While I ain't no math major, I do realize to solve an equation, you must start with the correct formula.[/quote]

Lol, the obnoxious scholarship comment wasn't directed at you. My discussion with you is not about math (and I'm not a math major either, just had perfect math scores on sat, satII, and act, finished every high school math class by my sophomore year, and made alot of money very successfully tutoring math).

There's no equation when it comes to evaluating greatness. However many great players there are, is how many great players there are. The "percentage" is dictated by however many great players there are...the greatness of a player is not dictated by what "percentage" they fall in.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=skinster;911433]You don't include something that almost positively will not happen in a prediction. I said the end of the world part sarcastically. If you want conservancy, I already shrunk my estimate as the average HOF career of players drafted since 1980 is 14 years and my formula shrunk it to 12.

Still, even if there's a doomsday scenario, or any other scenario possible, I don't see any scenario under which all players are taken into account. Please write me up a formula to educate me.[/quote]

But in your formula you are still presuming a 12 year career which is an unsupportable presumption.

I'm done with this issue. I can lead a horse to water and that's all.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=Lotus;911440]But in your formula you are still presuming a 12 year career which is an unsupportable presumption.

I'm done with this issue. I can lead a horse to water and that's all.[/quote]

Lol. How is it unsupportable? That's the average based on a very long history. We make predictions based on averages. Its a prediction. Is it certain? No. Is it probably accurate? Absolutely.

I'm still waiting on that formula that includes all players.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

what percentage of nfl players have 12 year careers?

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

Make your case for why this thread should still be open

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=SmootSmack;911475]Make your case for why this thread should still be open[/quote]

Because I enjoy feeling like I'm sitting in probabilities 101 instead of discussing my favorite team in a sport I enjoy watching?

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=los panda;911473]what percentage of nfl players have 12 year careers?[/quote]
HOF players? most. Of the players drafted since 1980 that made the hall. The average career length is 14 years.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=skinster;911626]HOF players? most. Of the players drafted since 1980 that made the hall. The average career length is 14 years.[/quote]

I don't think that's what he asked

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

Gary Clark deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame. I used to think that his number of receptions(699) is what is keeping him from out of the HOF. But Redskin great Charley Taylor has 649 career receptions. Taylor had less receiving yards but more TD catches(79).
Still, Michael Irvin has 750 receptions but has around 1100 more yards than Clark but he and Clark are tied for career TD receptions(65).

Gary Clark belongs in the Pro Football Hall Of Fame.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;911635]Gary Clark deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame. I used to think that his number of receptions(699) is what is keeping him from out of the HOF. But Redskin great Charley Taylor has 649 career receptions. Taylor had less receiving yards but more TD catches(79).
Still, Michael Irvin has 750 receptions but has around 1100 more yards than Clark but he and Clark are tied for career TD receptions(65).

Gary Clark belongs in the Pro Football Hall Of Fame.[/quote]
I agree if you look at Clark alone, but it is flawed logic to compare someone from the 60's & 70's to someone in the "modern era".

Of course, there is such a back log of receivers with stats that Gary Clark might end up being in that Phil Simms, Stabler & Roman Gabriel category we talked about earlier. They all should be hall of famers, but there ends up being a cut somewhere.

Re: Make your Case for non-HOFer
 

[quote=SmootSmack;911629]I don't think that's what he asked[/quote]

lol, I'm well aware. I just don't feel like re-typing the relevance of the HOF players career vs the regular players career again.