Betting Odds Converter & Calculator + Complete Guide
- Betting Odds Converter & Calculator + Complete Guide
- Sports Betting Odds - Explanation of How They Work
- Betting Odds Converter. Convert Fraction to Decimal
- Odds Converter - Convert Betting Odds
- Odds Converter - My Betting Sites
You're converting your CS:GO sensitivity wrong, here is why.
| || |UPDATED: This new FOV method is the ONLY way to achieve a near-perfect 1:1 conversion between both games, providing you are willing to loose (or gain in some situations) a little bit of screen real-estate. This will match your games' FOVs in terms of screen distances by taking advantage of Valorant's locked FOV. This is now my preferred method, and I'll leave it at the top. I've left the old post below if anyone can't handle loosing some screen real-estate. In the following few paragraphs, most use-cases are covered. submitted by binkaaa to VALORANT [link] [comments]
I will create a set of custom resolutions to run Valorant at below. These should all be scaled 1:1 by your video card on your monitor (No Scaling, aka, no pixel stretching). If you have stretched CSGO, you are screwed, see the next paragraph. 4:3 non-streched users can rejoice, as can 16:9 users. 16:10 users can't use the FOV method, but get a reasonable multiplier, and aren't entirely screwed, but its not as good news as the 16:9 and 4:3 non-stretched users who get heaps of options.
For non-streched users, these will all use the standard 3.18 divider for your CSGO sensitivity, as we have matched FOV, and we can happily match 360 rotations AND achieve perfect on-screen distance for aim. If you don't want to have any black bars on the horizontal, just match the vertical resolution to the same as CSGO. I believe this will give you some vertical sensitivity error though (eg: instead of using 3622x2038 in Valorant in the first example in the resolution list below, I could just use 3622x2160 and accept some vertical error, but only take on side black bars, with no top and bottom black bars. Valorant will look a little more distorted though too). If you can't figure it out with other weirder CSGO configs, feel free to request, and I can give it a go, but I have already spent a lot of time on this and would rather let people start reporting them in. If you really can't figure it out, ask and let me know. STRETCH USER:
Note to users who take a CSGO 4:3 native ratio/resolution and stretch it out to fill a 16:9 or 16:10 monitor: TLDR: Stretched CSGO users are screwed. Nothing can be done, and as I said near the bottom of my original post, this is your punishment for sweating over fat terrorists your whole life.
It is IMPOSSIBLE to salvage the same FOV in valorant. You have an hFOV of 90 in CS, stretched out to take up your whole screen real-estate. You need to somehow get Valorant's hFOV from 103 down to 90. You can't. You would have to somehow superscale the game past the edge of your monitor, and clip its wings, loosing much of your HUD, and I also have no idea how you could even render it like that. For these users, either use the original 3.18 value, or 2.53 if you want your horizontal distance to match.
See my footnote for stretched users way below (2.53 will FUBAR your vertical sens for Valorant, and give you radically wrong 360 motion.). There is no ideal solution for stretch CS users. For most stretch users, I would recommend the 3.18 value as a starting point and learning the new sensitivity. Any data I presented was based on Non stretch conversions. Stretch conversions has the same kind of error gradient that emerges, but radically worse.
CUSTOM RESOLUTIONS FOR VALORANT TO MAINTAIN A 1:1 FOV CONVERSION WITH CSGO: CSGO NOT STRETCHED, 1:1 implies pixel perfect scaling. Pixel doubling would also be ok (using resolutions half the amount of your monitors native). If you are not 1:1, or 2:1 with pixels, it might still work as long as the ratios are the same, depending on how your graphics card behaves. Not listed below? If your CSGO VERTICAL resolution is listed below, then pick any one that has the same vertical res as you, regardless of horizontal, and find the valorant conversion. They all become the same, because csgo just clips your horizontal anyway.
Take your csgo vertical resolution (the 1080
in 1920x1080 for example):
Times by 0.9428793 = new Valorant horizontal res Times by 1.67622932 = new Valorant vertical res
Thank you to x_Delirium in this following post for the math (I adapted his math to figure out the vertical constant without needing to use mouse-sensitivity.com
Common list already done for you, rounded to nearest whole and even numbers:
CSGO: 3840×2160 1:1 16:9 -> Valorant: 3620x2036 1:1
CSGO: 2880x2160 1:1 4:3 -> Valorant: 3620x2036 1:1
CSGO: 2560x1440 1:1 16:9 -> Valorant: 2414x1358 1:1
CSGO: 1920x1440 1:1 4:3 -> Valorant: 2414x1358 1:1
1:1 16:9 -> Valorant: 1810x1018
1:1 4:3 -> Valorant: 1810x1018
1:1 ??? -> Valorant: 1810x1018
* CSGO: 1280x960 1:1 4:3 -> Valorant: 1610x906 1:1
CSGO: 1024x768 1:1 4:3 -> Valorant: 1288x724 1:1
CSGO: 1280x720 1:1 16:9 -> Valorant 1206x678 1:1
CSGO: 960x720 1:1 4:3 -> Valorant 1206x678 1:1
CSGO: 640x480 1:1 4:3 -> Valorant 804x452 1:1
* See how if you use a blackbar res that isn't 4:3, you can get 1:1 with valorant by finding a res above that matches your csgo
VERTICAL res, here, that res is 1080.
A decent guide for custom rez creation: https://appuals.com/how-to-create-custom-resolutions-on-windows-7-8-or-10/
16:10 Native USERS
CSGO: Any 1:1 16:10 NATIVE Resolution -> Valorant IMPOSSIBLE. You only have 100.39 degrees of FOV in CSGO, and you have no more monitor horizontal space to work with to give Valorant room to breathe. It is the same fundamental problem the stretch users are facing. If you use 16:10 on a monitor natively, but somehow have horizontal black bars (this would be weird and unlikely) then it might be possible to do something. For 16:10 users
, your best bet is to just use 3.18 or 3.037
(based on my original post's logic) as your sens divider, and see what you prefer, or use something in between. Fortunately for you, 3.037 is a decent multiplier that won't fuck your vertical sense, or 360 too badly. It is pretty much as good as the 3.370 multiplier that 16:9 users who don't want to match FOV can use.
16:9 USERS NOT WILLING TO CHANGE THEIR SCREEN REAL-ESTATE TO MATCH FOV
The divider value I originally posed as being better than 3.18: 3.370
Not everyone will agree, no problem. Consider 3.18 to 3.37 as the sensitivity region you may like. If you pick one, and something feels wrong, try the other. Yes, my original claim about 3.18 being the downright wrong choice is alarmist. Some people will reasonably prefer one or the other, and there are merits to both choices, as I pointed out all along.
Now back to the ideal FOV changing method, and how this ideal FOV matching method works:
CSGO maintains a variable horizontal FOV depending on resolution ratio width, and at 16:9, it is 106.260205, and maintains 73.739795 vertical FOV, LOCKED. At more boxed resolutions/ratios, the sides get sliced off, and you loose hFOV. You never lose vFOV
Valorant maintains a tight 103 horizontal FOV, and ~ 70.5328 vertical FOV. BOTH locked. I've tested this in game by wildly changing ratios and custom resolutions. The game image will always distort to maintain the H and V FOV. We can use this to our advantage to distort Valorant into a screen space that matches what those angles and distances would be in CSGO. Valorant is basically just a slightly zoomed in image compared to CSGO, so now we are going to zoom it out on our monitor a bit to match it.
I originally did some incorrect math to convert this (didn't use trig...). There is a simpler way using the mouse-sensitivity website. I'll run through what I did for my screen (2560x1440). This should be correct providing the mouse-sensitivity equations are correct behind the scene, and I do trust that they are. (This is redundant now. I used the trig to get the constants. See near the res list to the easiest method possible).
Select CSGO as your game. Set sens and DPI. Set res to 2560x1440 (or your native res of CSGO). Start to adjust the 2560 number until it closes in on 103 degrees actual hFOV at the data readout. 2414 pixels is the spot... We just found out what our horizontal res needs to be for valorant (with some small black bars) to match perfectly to csgo, seeming valorant will lock at 103 hFOV no matter what.
You could stop there, and it would be pretty good. Horizontal aim and 360 degree matching is now near pixel perfect. I haven't proven this, but I believe your vertical aim will still be off though. So let's do the same for vertical matching:
Now, convert to Valorant as the output. Set the above horizontal res number just found (2416) as your Valorant res. Now adjust the Valorant vertical res number, until Actual vFOV output closes in on 70.5328. This is taking advantage of what I believe is actually a bug on the Valorant data on the website: it thinks valorant's vFOV can change, even though it can't, so we can use it to figure out what pixel count will salvage our smaller vFOV with black bars. I believe for me, 1358 is that number. If they fix this, we will loose the ability to easily match this using the website (redundant now, we can just use the trig derived constants instead of the website. See above the Res list). Redundant: However, it will still be possible to do by matching it until the vertical distance based sensitivities are the same as the 360 degree rotation sensitivities, but it won't be quite as precise or easy, and will require payment on the site. It is plausible that the vertical component of this is slightly off, but I can't see how or why, and if it is, it would be a tiny deviation. If anyone wants to do the math manually to check, please do.
We now have a new resolution 2414x1358. Set this with NVIDIA control panel, (or AMD, not familiar with it though) as a custom res, and use it in valorant.
Divide your csgo sens by 3.18, or use the default (and free) 360 match on the website (it is doing the same division, just more decimals), and use that.
Set scope multiplier to 0.747, or set/leave to preference (see closer to bottom of my original post far below). I still use 0.747.
A near perfect 1:1 experience between both games is now achieved within a tiny and imperceptible margin of error. All we have done is matched Valorant to fill 103 degrees of CSGO's 106.26xxx screen real-estate on the horizontal (talking from a 16:9 perspective), and 70.5328 degrees of CSGOs 73.73xxx on the vertical.
You may have lost about 11% of your screen real-estate. Effectively, it is like playing CSGO with a little bit of the top, bottom and sides of your screen sheered off. The benefit is a near perfect match in horizontal and vertical behaviour at both the aimer, all the way through to 360 degree movement, a 1:1 match. If you just do the black bars at the sides, your vertical sensitivity will be the same as when using the 360 method, so slightly off, but you've salvaged your horizontal sens completely. Add the vertical black bars, and it should be perfect all-round. If you use a 4:3 CSGO native resolution, you will GAIN screen real-estate in order to match FOV.
A few notes. This does NOT significantly distort Valorant from a native 16:9 (providing you are coming from 16:9 CSGO). Things look absolutely fine. You will almost certainly need to run on Fullscreen mode for it to function well. Windowed mode would work too, but leave your desktop in the wings. Fullscreen Windowed doesn't work for me, it just stretches it back out to full screen.
Are there any negatives to the FOV method in terms of perception and aim? Well, your perception may hinge somewhat on the moving region of the screen being identical in both games. However, I think it most likely that matching FOV, and distances on your monitor, sitting roughly equidistant at all times, and having everything else perfect, will be by far the most successful method for the vast majority of users transitioning between games. I personally have also clipped CSGO now to give it 103 FOV on the horizontal instead of 106.26 (giving me the same vertical black bars between both games) for the utmost consistency. So the only difference between the two games is Valorant has some horizontal black bars. Doing this of course didn't impact my sensitivity in CSGO at all, it just clips the image at the sides a little, giving me some black bars. Remember, CSGO's horizontal FOV is variable based on resolution.
My CSGO res: 2416x1440 native black bar ~ 103x73
FOV blackbars on sides
My valorant res: 2416x1358 ~ 103x70 FOV blackbars on sides, top and bottom.
Hopefully that makes sense.
If you refuse to loose a bit of screen real estate, this is my original post below which uses a different divider that prioritises screen distance instead of 360 degree rotation as the method of matching sensitivities between both games. Both my number below, and the original 3.18 number (without doing what I propose above) will have significant errors, in different parts of your aiming. I argue that my number is better if you want to match your aim. It won't feel right for everyone, and some still preferred 3.18, which is perfectly reasonable. I personally now will be using my above method of matching FOV for a 1:1 match, making this entire section obsolete.
THE ORIGINAL POST WITH THE ORIGINAL VALUES THAT CAN RECOVER SOME OF YOUR AIM IF IT WAS FEELING OFF, FOR THOSE NOT WILLING TO LOOSE SOME SCREEN REAL-ESTATE:
IMPORTANT EDIT: This new number can change depending on your game window ratio. If you are not using the simple 16:9 to 16:9 conversion, proceed with caution. This is largely, although not just, due to how valorant distorts to maintain its 103 hFOV. However, it should be ok if neither game is distorted. So black bars 4:3 CS is ok
, as long as valorant is 16:9
. I encourage you to head to mouse-sensitivity.com to get a more reliable value using 0% horizontal distance as your match if there is any deviation from these norms. It will cost $3. To anyone I recommended a value to NOT using 16:9, it may be wrong. Apologies. I have a caveat about stretch to non-stretch conversions in a footnote you need to be aware of if deploying this.
The normal method is to divide your CSGO sens by 3.18. This doesn't actually give you correct aim, only a correct abstract sense of movement in the world. Divide by the below instead: 16:9 CSGO to 16:9 Valorant (Native to native): 3.370 4:3 CSGO blackbar non-streched to 16:9 Valorant: 3.370 4:3 CSGO STRETCHED to 16:9 Valorant (Don't fuck with valorant here, it won't behave how you hope): 2.53
PEOPLE USING STRETCHED CONVERSIONS, SEE THE FOOTNOTE BEFORE ASKING QUESTIONS PLEASE :) TLDR IS THAT ALL OPTIONS SUCK AND YOU REALLY MAY WANT TO JUST STICK WITH 3.18.
Ideal, and common scope multipliers are given at the bottom in the scope footnote. For any other weird options, again, pay and go do the work at mouse-sensitivity.com
Yes, using 3.370 will 'feel' a little slower to get around in Valorant now compared to 3.18, at worst about 6% slower in fact, but your aim is more likely to be left in tact. Use whatever you prefer though. Just giving people another option and some stats to what the difference is.
Keep reading if you want to know why these proposed conversions (really just the 3.370 one) are technically "better" than 3.18: This is the bulk of my original post:
ORIGINAL POST AND PROOFING:
People are under the impression that they should be converting their sensitivity from CS:GO by dividing their CS:GO sensitivity by 3.18...
People think this will give them the same sensitivity, thus muscle memory, between the games.
They are (kind of) wrong.
This will only give you the same sense of traversing the game world, as it matches the amount of distance required to move your mouse for a 360 degree rotation. BUT, due to the FOV difference between the two games of 3.26 degrees, you will not have the same feeling of SENSITIVITY.
Here is the result of some math as to why.
How far do I have to move my mouse, in order to get from where my crosshair is, to where that enemies head is on my screen?
You can only achieve a perfect conversion between the two games at ONE point on your monitor. ONE distance. And I can tell you, the 360 degree rotation conversion is wildly off, unless you intend to do a few rotations first in order to hit someone in the head.
I ran the math, and the correct point to calibrate to on your screen is almost certainly 0%, right at the crosshair, making subtle movements at the crosshair (in order to target enemies near your crosshair) perfect between both games. Many may already be aware of this, but it is interesting to understand why.
Ok, if we use the 0% conversion, we end up with a 1:1 SENSITIVITY match between CS:GO and Valorant AT THE CROSSHAIR. Great, but what about points AWAY from the middle of my screen? Well, things gradually get worse the further the distance, and I will provide the percentage of deviation from a perfect match between the special 0% mark, and the very edge of your monitor, if you set at this 0% mark, and I include the error in doing a 360 too.
%distance from edge of screen to crosshair with 0% reference: % error in ideal conversion from CSGO at 0% reference
What do we notice? Perfect conversion (within a few units of error not shown) within a full 15% distance from crosshair to edge of your screen. And very low error, less than 1%, all the way up to 50% distance to edge of screen. This is the hot spot region of aiming. If you are flicking to the VERY edge of your screen, 100% of the way, you have a 2.89% error. Achieving a 360 degree rotation has a 6.02% error, so moving around the game world will feel a bit slower compared to CS:GO, but your aim is comparatively left in tact. A 180 will have about a 5.78% error according to my best calculations.
To compare, lets check the error at each aiming location using the 360 degree as our baseline, the common method where one divides their CS:GO sens by 3.18...
%distance from edge of screen to crosshair at 360 rotation reference: % error in ideal conversion from CSGO 360 rotation reference
We can see, our 0% distance from edge of screen naturally carries the most error with this method. The aiming hotspot is the WORST translated region. Only a 360 spin is well conserved, NOT your aim. Even aiming to the edge of the screen at 100% carries a (slightly) higher error of 2.95 compared to matching your aim to the 0% mark (2.89% error). At 120% distance from your crosshair (heading offscreen by 20%) the methods switch place, and the 360 degree method becomes less error prone compared to 0% matching.
So, unless you intend your muscle memory to be all about matching for flicking to targets OFFSCREEN, you should absolutely NOT be using the default division by 3.181818....
Match instead to 0%, and divide your CS:GO sensitivity by 3.370 (This is accurate to +- 0.001 units of Valorant sensitivity). This will give you a cleaner conversion in the region of your monitor from 0% to about 115% off your screen, with the MOST conserved sensitivity region being closest to your crosshair.
What is better... for your near-crosshair aiming to carry a 5.68% error? Or a 180 spin to carry about the same amount of error while your key crosshair region carries between none to 1% error. You get the latter with the division I provided above. It seems to me a no-brainer as the better option.
As for your scope multiplier? Unfortunately, at this time you can only correct for one zoom level. I use the 2.5x zoom, to correct the scopes to the same 0% level of my valorant sensitivity, and if you correct as I have said, using the superior 0% CSGO conversion, you will also end up with your scopes behaving the same between CS:GO and valorant. Otherwise, they too will carry the error over from the 360 degree conversion. These values are below (assuming you use 3.370 as your division initially, things get wonky if you want to keep to your 360 degree rotation conservation, yet want your scopes to somehow match). These are independent of your sens.
I think the default of 1.0 in Valorant is equivalent to calibrating all of them to the edge of your screen, 100% by distance. This is, at least, a consistent behaviour. I personally still change it to 0.747.
To correct the 2.5x valorant scope: 0.747 This = ~ 0.82 from CSGO. Specifically 0.818933
A note about scope multipliers: The ideal provided above is for matching your scope movement to distance via the exact same logic as presented for matching the two games, at 0% distance.
A few other common scope mulits that people like:
CSGO 1.2 = 1.142 Valorant
CSGO 1.0 = 0.927 Valorant
ALL these values are dependent on using 3.370 as your primary sensitivity divider, and not 3.18. Otherwise, your scopes will carry the error of the primary sens. If using different stretched values, these scoped values should still work ON THE HORIZON. Remember, stretched conversions cook your vertical sensitivity, and you can't do anything about it.
Hopefully Valorant releases the ability to tune every scope/ADS level individually, because right now, every other ADS will be a bit off compared to the ideal 2.5x scope. But still closer than the default 1.0 value. For example, the 1.25x ADS of the vandal etc should be set to 0.870, and will be a bit slow with the 0.747 setting.
Yes, scope values can, although not always, change if you deviate from the default 16:9 to 16:9.
STRETCHED GO TO VALORANT FOOTNOTE (or vice versa, non-stretched to stretched):
Converting from stretched to any Valorant can COOK your vertical sens. Nothing can be done, this is your punishment for sweating over fat terrorists your whole life. The divider for 4:3 stretched to Valorant is generically 2.53. Any divider that deviates from 3.18 will increasingly add error to your 360 degree movement. This means that the with a stretch value you end up with a much greater error ramp through the distances, even though your 0% and nearby is correct. I don't have the percentages of error, and I can't be bothered running them, but expect it to be awful. Not to mention, you can't salvage horizontal AND vertical sens anyway with thiscombination, so it still won't feel right. My recommendation for these users is to match to the 360 or nearby (divide by 3.18), tune to personal preference, and learn the new sensitivity, sorry.
If you are doing more bizarre conversions, go pay $3 and figure it out at mouse-sensitivity.com using 0% horizontal monitor distance as your hipfire conversion method. Or tune to 3.18 manually, because just like the above, you can't salvage your old sensitivity with varying stretch conversions to any point that won't feel awful on the vertical and 360 movements. BETTER DATA:
For the data folk, this much more complete and accurate set of data will give you the error to each point of the screen given a calibration at a specific point. You'll notice at the bottom, all multipliers to use said distance is provided. You'll notice I've used actually the 15% distance as the default, this is because it is a simpler number (3.37) and it actually will give you, almost 100% of the time, the exact same sensitivity as 0% anyway (3.374). However, if you want to have minimum error across the whole visible space, then you actually want to use 50% as your target point (3.334) BUT the error around the crosshair, at 0-15%, is no longer negligible, even though, in reality, across the whole screen, you could consider this the best choice. Sum of the error is of course absolute values. 360 Rot is provided for comparison of error in these regions against the default 3.18(2) method.
I made extensive use of the mouse-sensitivity.com
website for gathering all data points involved in these calculations. I did not do any of the math to generate those data points myself, just the analysis. Check them out, and consider giving them some cash if any of this ended up making things better for you. It's a great site.
16/07/20 - Premier League - Leicester City vs Sheffield United - Pre-Match Thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: 36 of 38 Referee
: Michael Oliver
- Average Reds: TBD
- Average Yellows: TBD
: Filbert Way/King Power Time
: 1800BST/UTC+1, 16/07/20 Channels (UK)
: Sky Main Event / Sky Sports Premier League (no crowd noises), Pick TV (Freeview)
Accurate as of 0906BST 16/07/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 1.90 Draw
: 3.40 Sheffield Win
- In the league, we've had a good home record as we've only been beaten thrice (P17 W10 D4 L3) by the likes of Liverpool, Man City, and Southampton
- Since 2009, we have meet the Blades seven times and not been defeated. (P7 W5 D2)
- Since the restart, both teams have lost twice having showed mixed form since the restart.
- Sheffield have not performed well on the road only winning four of their 17 away games with the majorities ending in draws (P17 W4 D9 L4). They are yet to win on the road since the restart with only point being taken from relegation facing Villa and Burnley. They last won on the road against Brighton in December 2019.
12/07/20 - Premier League - Bournemouth vs Leicester City - Pre-Match Thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: 35 of 38 Referee
: Stuart Attwell
- Average Reds: TBD
- Average Yellows: TBD
: Vitality Stadium Time
: 1900BST/UTC+1, 12/07/20 Channels (UK)
: Sky Main Event / Sky Sports Premier League (no crowd noises), Pick TV (Freeview)
Accurate as of 1814BST 11/07/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 1.70 Draw
: 3.90 Bournemouth Win
- In our last four league matches against the Cherries, they have failed to keep a clean sheet in the last four matches, in which we've won two matches (P4 W2 D1 L1)
- We have not beaten Bournemouth away in the Premier League having only last done so in the Championship back in 2014 with Kevin Phillips getting the late winner.
- The Cherries have only picked up a point since their 0-0 tie with Spurs this past round. Since the restart, they have lost all matches bar the one by an aggregate of 3-12 with three goals only coming in the last three matches.
- When we met in the reverse fixture at home, we beat Bournemouth 3-1 with Vardy involved in all three goals (2G 1A)
r/NFL Top 100 Players of the 2019 Season - #20-11
submitted by MikeTysonChicken to nfl [link] [comments]
Welcome to the reveal for players ranked 20-11 for this year’s NFL Top 100 Players for the 2019 Season!
Players whose average rank had them land in places 20-11 are on this portion of the list revealed today. Players are associated with the team they finished 2019 with.
Below you will see write-ups from rankers summarizing the players' 2019 season and why they were among the best in 2019. Stats for each player are from this season and are included below. Additionally, their previous ranks in this long running series are also available for all of you. Methodology LINK TO THE HUB POST WITH A MORE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY
- A CALL FOR RANKERS just after the Super Bowl.
- Rankers for each team nominated players to rank. 10 Games Played Minimum Threshold. Players are associated with the team they finished the 2019 Season with.
- The Grind. Utilize ranking threads for individual rankers broken up by positional group. Users were tasked with ranking players within the following tiers based on their evaluation: T-25, T-50, T-100, T-125 based on 2019 regular season only. There were no individual case threads. There were no arbitrary position limit caps. Just questions and rankings.
- Users submitted their individual Top 125 list. Ranking out to 125 is new for this year.
- User lists were reviewed for outliers by me with assistance from two former rankers. Users were permitted to correct any mistakes found. Once complete, lists were locked.
- Reveal the list… right now.
So now, without further ado, here are the players ranked 20-11
in the NFL
Top 100 Players of the 2019 Season!
#20 - Danielle Hunter - EDGE - Minnesota Vikings Previous Ranks
Written By: uggsandstarbux
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/R ||N/R ||N/R ||32 |
Khalil Mack. Von Miller. JJ Watt. Those are the names that come up when you mention edge players in the NFL over the last half a decade. Yet none have as many sacks as Danielle Hunter in the last two years. Hunter is continually passed over in the conversation of edge rushers. Even among young edge rushers like the Bosa brothers, TJ Watt, Myles Garrett, and Bradley Chubb, Hunter is forgotten. He only received 4 All Pro votes from AP (of a possible 50). He failed to make PFF’s All Pro team. Is it because he wasn’t a 1st round pick? Is it because the Vikings defense was already dominant before his arrival?
Hunter has improved every year he’s gotten into the league (88 pressures this year vs 67 last year vs 55 in 2016). His first couple years in the league, he rotated in behind Everson Griffen and Brian Robinson. Yet he holds the record for most sacks before his 25th birthday and was one of only a handful of players in 2019 with double digit sacks and 15+ TFLs last season. He earned an 89.0 overall grade from PFF and forced 3 fumbles this year.
Beyond the numbers, Hunter is a unit. He came out of LSU as one of the more raw pass rushers in his draft. However, under the tutelage of the mighty Andre Patterson, Hunter has become one of the most athletic, versatile, technical, dominant edge defenders in the game. He can beat you with a pure bull rush, but he can also beat you with his speed and agility. He’s picked up Everson Griffen’s deadly spin move and has the motor to work through double teams. He can win with an inside move, or he can play pure 3T for an entire game (a la vs NO). He’s got a great understanding of the game and is a force to be reckoned with. If you’re placing bets for DPOY in 2020, don’t waste your money on the big name guys like Aaron Donald (+750) or Khalil Mack (+1100). Don’t spend it on young up and comers, lke Nick Bosa (+1300) or TJ Watt (+1500) either. Place it on Danielle Hunter (+2300). He’s going to continue dominating as he gains more recognition and climbs toward stardom.
#19 - Chris Godwin - Wide Receiver - Tampa Bay Buccaneers Previous Ranks
Written By: MysticTyph00n
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/R ||N/R |
At the beginning of the 2019 NFL season Bruce Arians said:
"I think Chris Godwin is going to be close to a 100-catch guy, especially because I think he can play in the slot,"...."He's never coming off the field."
Bucs fans thought this could be very well true in BA's system, especially with the departure of Desean Jackson which only really left Mike Evans as the only other real target on the team.
The 3rd round pick from Penn State showed up big time this year after having two relatively quiet seasons. Through 13.5 games (missing the final 2.5 due to a hamstring injury) he amassed 86 receptions for 1,333 yards, 9 TDs and only one drop(In fact he's only had 2 drops total in 2018 & 2019)He very well could have gone over 100 receptions , 1,500 yards as well as double digit TDs, but that's just projecting right?
According to PFF he was an absolute monster in the slot with an outstanding 96.5 grade, which shows he can line up anywhere on the field and still produce big time for the Buccaneers.
In 2020, I honestly expect Chris Godwin to have close to the same production, and possibly even better with how much he produces from the slot.
Please don't leave us…
#18 - Quenton Nelson - Offensive Guard - Indianapolis Colts Previous Ranks
Written By: Zzyzx8
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||70 |
Selecting a guard 6th overall was a bold movie for second year GM Chris Ballard, even one as highly touted as Quenton Nelson. Casual fans hated it, while draft junkies loved it. Two years later, it’s become clear that the pick was a home run. Nelson’s selection single handedly turned around a unit that was largely responsible for a slew of injuries to Andrew Luck into one of the best units. Nelson’s second year was only better, cementing himself as one of the best guards in the league, a true road grader. He spent the past year terrorizing nfl defensive lineman en route to his second pro bowl and all pro selections. Plus, he pulled off what was by far the best touchdown celebration of the season
#17 - Jamal Adams - Strong Safety - New York Jets Previous Ranks
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/R ||18 |the_fuzzy_stoner robdog1330
I would just like to start with a moment of silence for the fans of the New York Jets after Jamal Adams recently demanded a trade from that inept organization with a dumpster fire of a coach in Adam Gase.
Anyways, after an incredible sophomore season, Adams has kept up with his awesome play in his third season as one of the NFL's best and most versatile defensive players as well as the clear-cut best player on a football team that somehow won seven games. Adams, also known as President 'Mal, recorded an interception (which was returned 61 yards to the house), 7 passes defended, 11 hurries, and 36 stops, but that's not all! Adams also garnered 6.5 sacks (which is amazing for a DB) and forced two fumbles (like this one he returned to the house on my guy Daniel Jones 😔). With his exceptional play, the star safety was named to the 1st Team All-Pro as well as his second Pro Bowl selection (an honor which none of his other Jets teammates got this year).
What makes Adams so special is that he is exceptional against both the running and passing game. Whether he's with Gang Green or another franchise next year, I'd expect another stellar season out of Jamal Adams in 2020 (assuming there is one) and even as a Giants fan who watched him dominate my team this past season, I really appreciate the guy's play.
#16 - Derrick Henry - Running Back - Tennessee Titans Previous Ranks
Written By: broccolibush42
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/R ||N/R ||N/R |
This part man part tractor was the plow that turned our barren field into a bountiful wheat field full of Nashville Hot Chicken. This beautiful muscly man with a poop rat tail decimated opponents and General Sherman'd the AFC South. Totaling at 1540 yards and 16 Touchdowns in 15 games, with 6 coming from a slow start in a Mariota lead offense, he caught fire and dragged his nuts all over teams like the Chargers, Chiefs, Jags, Colts, Texans, Raiders and was showing just absolute dominance on the field. (Sadly we arent able to take the playoffs into account otherwise i'd gush over how he embarrassed a couple of scrub one and done teams).
Henry has this certain tenacity and a godlike level of endurance that just makes him an absolute beast in the 2nd half. He is just able to keep going, and going, and going, until finally, players get tired of it and turn into lead blockers for him. He is extremely hard to tackle to. Take a look at this play against the Chiefs in week 10, guys just bounce off him like he's running through toddlers. Derrick Henry is so hard to tackle that, according to PFF, Henry had over 1200 of his 1540 total yards after contact. Like this dude was getting hit at the line of scrimmage and he is just like, fuck this shit, i aint no dion lewis, and keeps going. How is this guy even real???
Another thing about Henry is his speed! Henry is a 6'3" 240 pound dude running 20+ MPH down the field when he breaks the open one. Like look at this speed he gets vs the Browns in week 1. Or this one against the Jags where he outruns guys and stiff arms the ones who barely managed to keep pace. Speaking of stiff arms, Derrick Henry has one of, if not, the BEST Stiff Arm in the league. If I had to pick a way to die, I think I would like Henry to stiff arm me in the face running at me at 21 miles per hour with this face, because there would be no greater honor to a titans fan than death by Henry. That concludes my Henry jerk fest. Here are some more highlights. and here are the real link.
#15 - Travis Kelce - Tight End - Kansas City Chiefs Previous Ranks
Written By: DTSportsNow
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/R ||84 ||N/R ||28 ||31 ||13 |
Travis Kelce was drafted in the 3rd round of the 2013 draft. He wound up missing his rookie season due needing to receive microfracture surgery on his knee over the offseason and dealing with a bone bruise during the season. Since then he's received 4 All-Pro designations and was named to the NFL 2010s All-Decade team. He's also become the 1st TE in NFL history to have 4 straight 1,000+ yard seasons. Not bad considering how his career got started.
In 2019 he finished his 2nd straight season of 1,200+ yards and 3rd straight season leading the league in deep receiving yards by a tight end (274). He finished top 4 in overall TE grade for the 4th straight year (85.1), and was named to his second 2nd-team All-Pro designation. In the Sunday Night Football contest against the Chicago Bears he caught his 500th career reception, becoming the fastest TE in NFL history to reach that mark.
There's no doubt that Kelce is one of the best tight ends in the game, and winding up in the top 20 proves many believe him to be one of the very best players in the league. Since Gronk's decline it's essentially been between him and George Kittle for the top player at the position. He's a key component of what Andy Reid and the Chiefs like to do on offense, even as stacked as the offence is. With a Super Bowl victory and a few records to his name already his legacy will be decided by how long he can keep up his premier play. His partnership with Patrick Mahomes should take him to a locked up Hall of Fame bust.
#14 - Ryan Ramczyk - Offensive Tackle - New Orleans Saints Previous Ranks
Written By: Dahki
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||100 ||74 |
In 2017, sb nation wrote an article claiming that Ryan Ramczyk wasn't a first round talent at LT. The site went so far as to say he would benefit from a switch to RT. In short, they ended up nailing that on the head. The three-year vet has spent almost the entirety of his career anchoring the right side of the Saints O-line after being picked at 32 overall, and boy, has it worked out for both the team and the Wisconsin alum.
Ram makes the /nfl top 100 list for two reasons. First, he was really good. Second, we really wanted to hammer in the idea that the Saints O-line as a whole was really good. Most notably, Ram exits the 2019 season with his first first-team all pro, and he was more than deserving of it. Similar to teammate Terron Armstead, Ram refused to allow Brees or Teddy to be touched, giving up no sacks on the season. Even better, Ram kept his QBs almost squeaky clean in the pocket, allowing just one hit on the entire season, good for 2nd best in the league among nominated tackles. And Ram didn't just do well in pass pro; he was PFFs top graded OT when run-blocking, showcasing his power and quickness from his spot. In total, Ram spent the 2019 season as the biggest challenge for opposing D-lines to overcome when facing the Saints.
#13 - Julio Jones - Wide Receiver - Atlanta Falcons Previous Ranks
Written By: CokeZ3ro
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|32 ||93 ||23 ||8 ||2 ||21 ||17 |
It's a bird, it’s a plane, no it's Jet Jones! In his 9th season Julio continues to be one of the most dominant receivers in the NFL, and the undisputed best player on the team. He’s a force that defenses must give their full attention, and even then he can explode. Even when he doesn’t get the ball, his influence and abilities still shape the play, and better everyone around him. This past offseason Julio agreed to a three-year contract extension worth $66 million, making him the NFL’s highest paid WR, and extending him to 2023. Even though 2019 was a down year statistically, Julio continued to show why the money is worth it. In a “down year” Julio was 2nd in reception yards, 3rd in Yards/Game, and 1st in Scrimmage Yards/Touch, and made his 6th consecutive Pro-Bowl.
But stats can hardly capture the elite combination of athleticism and skill that makes Julio so great. A combination perfectly captured here where Julio is able to jump over the coverage of CB Leodis McKelvin and then tiptoe to complete the coverage on the way down. Later that same game, with the Falcons against the wall, Julio showed that no man can catch him in a 53-yard burst (shoutout to Jake Matthews for the Pancake Block). Julio utilized his route skills to make CB Pierre Desir eat turf before making a 34-yard reception; which likely would have been much more if Ryan didn’t underthrow it. He’s pretty good at catching too, exhibited as reaches over CB Quincy Wilson and manages to hold onto the ball through tackles from Wilson and SS Clayton Geathers to score. Doesn’t matter who you are, Luke Keuchly, Marshon Lattimore, AJ Bouye; doesn’t matter. bUt hE dOEsn’T gET tOUchDoWnS I hear the Fantasy owners say. Watch this and notice how often in the redzone Julio is serving to support his team (blocks, inside presence, taking double defenders), or is just ignored. He’s open more often people realize.
Even in a disappointing season for the Falcons, Julio continues to shine through as one of the NFL’s premiere combos of athleticism and skill. Julio is and will continue to be an absolute force for the offense.
#12 - Chandler Jones - EDGE - Arizona Cardinals Previous Ranks
Written By: Beehay
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/R ||N/R ||N/R ||N/R ||60 ||24 ||100 |
In my write up of ChanJo last year, I mentioned that the return to the 3/4 (even if it's under Vance Joseph) will be huge for his stats. And boy howdy was it! At 30 years old and after double digit sack totals for 5 straight years, Jones set a career high of sacks at 19 this year. He had 8 Forced Fumbles, 53 Tackles, and 26 QB hits. Most of his stats improved from 2018, some more drastically than others. His pass coverage marginally improved but why the hell would you really want him to cover guys? (Don't say it Niners fans, DON'T SAY IT)
Chandler Jones is the prototype for edge defenders. He is what all other Defensive Coordinators wish they had. Strong, fast, smart, consistent. Here's a guys opinion and a breakdown. Here's some highlights because not everybody watched all 16 Cardinals games last year and I don't blame them. I think he will rank even higher next year if he stays healthy because he will finally get to settle into a defense again. Even if it's Vance Joseph's.
#11 - Ronnie Stanley - Offensive Tackle - Baltimore Ravens Previous Ranks
Written By: Letsgomountaineers5
|2012 ||2013 ||2014 ||2015 ||2016 ||2017 ||2018 |
|N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/A ||N/R ||N/R ||97 |
Where to begin with Ronnie Stanley? Oh, how about a nearly minute long clip of him absolutely bullying First Team All Pro and NFC DPOY Chandler Jones. You like that? (Sorry Cards fans, but hey we all know Chandler Jones is a beast). Ronnie Stanley was the best LT in the league. No wait, actually he was the best overall tackle in the league. Actually, Stanley was the best lineman in the league, bar none. I truly believe Stanley was a top 5 player in the NFL last season and even tried (and failed/came to senses) to argue Stanley as a top 2 player. His dominance on the left side of that line was unprecedented.
I know stats don’t paint the entire picture, especially for OL, but I have to start there because his stats were unworldly as a blindside protector facing the best pass rushers the NFL has to offer. Going against the likes of TJ Watt twice a year, Carlos Dunlap twice a year, Myles Garrett, Chandler Jones, Nick Bosa, Shaq Barrett (need I go on), he allowed zero sacks and six pressures on 445 pass blocking snaps. Of tackles with at least 400 pass blocking snaps to allow 6 pressures or less, he was the only one. Wait, the only one? Let’s expand. 10 pressures on 400 snaps? Hmm. Only Ronnie Stanley. 15? Hmm only Ronnie Stanley. 20 and no sacks? Only Ronnie Stanley. Unreal.
So how does he do it? Well for starters, he has an elite pass rusher’s explosion as an offensive lineman. He can pack a pop that will knock the best rushers off line or on their ass without overextending. Just ask Nick Bosa. Refer back to the Chandler Jones lowlight reel for a second and check out how often he simply beats Jones (one of the most explosive and best bending edge rushers in the game) to his spot time and time again. Stanley is out of his stance so fast it looks like he’s false starting and, be it film review/sixth sense/sheer athleticism (my money is on all three), he hits the pass rushers’ marks before they do. Sometimes, he even chips defenders to the ground he doesn’t have a responsibility for. Because of these reasons, he’s basically the only lineman in the game not playing catchup and is tremendously equipped to react to counters. In the run game, he was a driving reason behind that team’s record setting running success. He can be a mauler, but with his speed also can pull like the best guards in the game and lead block for some of the fastest players in the game.
At the end of the day, his dominance in both pass blocking and run blocking makes him a worthy top 15 player, and if not for a tendency to underrate linemen, I believe he should’ve been a shoe-in for the top 10. If you read this far, thank you. Now I need to go puke after that glowing endorsement for a Raven.
Schedule Change Unveiling of ranks 10-6 will take place Monday, July 6 instead of Tuesday. Unveiling of ranks 5-1 will take place on Thursday, July 9. Thank you!
Surge Should Have His Damage Adjusted to 1120
UPDATE: Surge's damage has been adjusted to 1120 in-game! (as of July 6, 2020)
Now, I can completely understand what most of you are thinking:
"Why would you want to buff Surge, he isn't even in the game yet!" _______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The answer to this question is for consistency. Brawl Stars completely ignores decimals or even rounding those decimals up when calculating the damage that a brawler deals. This is important to note because the way Surge's attack works is that when he hits a brawler, his projectile will split into two that will each deal exactly half of the damage of his regular attack.
So when you divide Surge's attack damage (1100) by 2, you get 550 damage for each split. This is fine. But now, what if we found out Surge's level 2 stats? (To do this, multiply the damage by 1.05). We've now run into a problem... his main attack damage (1155) is fine, but his splits each deal 577.5 damage. As I said earlier, Brawl Stars completely ignores decimal damage all the time, so each split will instead deal 577 damage and the extra 0.5 will not be added into that. This creates inconsistencies...
Look at Tick. Surge can 2-shot a Tick at the same level, which means that he can 4-shot Tick with his splits. Or at least he should... let's do the math: Tick's health at level 2 is 2310. 1155 x 2 = 2310, so we're good there. 577 x 4 is 2308 though, meaning that the interaction between Tick and Surge at level 2 is not the same as it is for these brawlers at level 1. If you go through every single equal level interaction, every even level will have this same discrepancy where Tick will survive 4 splits. (Note: This applies to Carl too).
This should not be in the game... I remember in Clash Royale when the Lava Pups from the Lava Hound got a health change because there was an inconsistency for the Level 4 (Now Level 12) Pups and a level 12 Princess Tower. I only bring this up to you because this change proved to me at least that consistency between interactions is (or should be) important to Supercell's balancing philosophy, but yet we still have this problem between Surge and Tick/Carl.
The way to fix this problem is really, really simple - just increase Surge's damage by 20 to 1120 (thereby making each split deal 560 damage). The math checks out here and buffing Surge's damage slightly results in only 3 interaction changes (none of which have to do with the main attack landing a direct hit, this only applies for the splits) - Colt and Dynamike will be killed in 5 splits instead of 6 and Jacky will be killed in 9 splits instead of 10. I think those are worthy sacrifices to make in order to make Surge a brawler with consistent interactions... I hope to see this change.
This situation has come up before when Max was introduced into the game. Her damage was 250 per bullet on release, and at the even levels specifically she would need an extra ammo to take out equal leveled Nitas and Pocos. Her damage was buffed to 300 shortly after that, fixing this problem (and she was pretty bad at the time anyways). My hope for Surge is that Supercell catches this before he gets put into the game.
Thanks for reading! I'm interested to see how you all feel about this.
(Also, a second note: If Surge ends up being too strong in terms of damage, it should be nerfed to 1080 or even 1040 instead of being buffed to 1120. I can't predict the future, but the 1120 change is a safer bet with less interaction changes to account for than the nerfs would)
EDIT: Thank you both so, so much for the Today I Learned Award and the Gold Award! That means a lot to me.
submitted by jonnyfonny to BrawlStarsCompetitive [link] [comments]
07/07/20 - Premier League - Arsenal vs Leicester City - Pre-Match Thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: 34 of 38 Referee
: Chris Kavanagh
- Average Reds: 0.10
- Average Yellows: 3.57
: Emirates Stadium Time
: 2015BST/UTC+1, 07/07/20 Channel (UK)
: Sky Main Event / Sky Sports Premier League (no crowd noises)
Accurate as of 1522BST 07/07/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 3.00 Draw
: 3.50 Arsenal Win
- In our last six league meetings, we have won thrice though all victories have been at home (P6 W3 L3)
- In the Premier League era, we have never beaten Arsenal away. (P14 D1 L13)
- We last beat Arsenal away in 1973, which was the last season we did the double over Arsenal
- In the past five games, we have been the first to score in four of them
- Vardy has scored more against Arsenal (9) than any other club in the Premier League
Becoming pregnant was just ONE THING
PSA: A FEW PEOPLE HAVE STARTED ASKING ME IF THEY CAN USE THIS STORY ON A YOUTUBE VIDEO. THE ANSWER IS I DO NOT CONSENT submitted by Minigiant2709 to rpghorrorstories [link] [comments]
I will begin by prefacing that unlike a majority of posts on here we are still all friends, nobody's feelings got hurt, and we all can talk to each other like properly functioning adults.
The story begins under the shadow cast by COVID19 with our regularly weekly game decimated, and then the repercussions of COVID19 on the work force making it nigh impossible to transfer our game some online platform.
Many months past, and we are all missing our game. I say I have a new campaign that can be played on Roll20 but, won't be able to go until the end of August when I change to a less demanding job. One of our other group members pipes up and says, I can run a game on Fantasy Grounds until then.
We all make up characters, with very little knowledge of the world. I decide to play an Inquisitor (Patherfinder 1E game), and after originally intending on being a Dhampir and discovering that I'm likely to be run out of town I settle on the more subtle, Changeling.
With very little knowledge of the world backstories were vague at best. I settled on a nobles daughter, who was conceived as the only heir to the family fortune after a pact with a Hag. At puberty, rumours got out about my true origin, and by the time I came of age I left for the protection of not only myself but, also my parents. Then there's a small speel about becoming an agent of nature (Mist to be precise).
After I hand in my sheet and brief backstory, the DM informs us that we are all going to receive a homebrew trait during the 1st session, that's in someway related to the backstory. First thought: Awesome idea.
At this point it is good for you to know that the other player in this game, is going to be playing a Yokel Fighter.
Cut to the first session, and we both start with this vivid nightmarish vision/dream. Then the first "thing" happened, my character was flung through time and space from an old churches library to falling through the roof of the second players characters bedroom.
There is a lot to unravel here. The first is I started in a dusty library when my character is a nature Inquisitor so that was a little off putting. Then I got thrown through time and space; this was a major red flag for me because I am now immediately thinking that my character has become the "special snowflake/Mary Sue" in this world from simply not being from it.
A little time passes before I come too, and then I'm interrogated by my fellow player about breaking his roof. Trying to play my character as a stereotypical "British Aristocrat" who always tries and does things the "Proper way" tried to excuse herself in embarrassment (My intention was never to properly leave but, to find a place to compose myself so that my character can make amends as well as figure out what really did happen).
Then comes the "second" thing, I attempt to stand up, and am informed that the fall has, and I paraphrase "taken it out of me" so I'm unable to move. Great. I then decide to try and heal myself, and having cast my cure spell, it achieves nothing.
Now at this point I'm a little agitated my character in her eyes is going through a humiliating social encounter, and I'm running out of things I can do because, I refuse to play that "Damsel in Distress" act.
We then learn that the nearest town is a days walk away, and that is the closest place for any healing. Being unable to move however was an issue but, of course there's no wagon for us to get there, Mr Yokels only way of transporting me is...... a Wheelbarrow (More humiliation for my character).
The "third thing" happens now (The one you have been waiting for), as I'm loaded into the wheelbarrow the DM informs me of my custom "trait", my character is to be the first of a separate race of Changelings, ones free of Hags, and that I was with child through a a miraculously conception. The Wheelbarrow apparently was a little uncomfortable for bump, and I.
At this point I refuse to continue, I don't feel comfortable playing a pregnant character. If the DM's character arc idea is as good as they think, then it can run by me before next session, and if I agree to give up that agency, it can easily be retconned.
The trek to the next town begins, and having stopped to camp the previous night, we awake and I'm still unable to walk. Sometime during the walk on day 2 a large shadow starts coming towards us from the sky. I respond by casting a mist spell; to give us cover is all directions.
Some of you are thinking, how could this possibly go wrong, a mist spell (That I can see perfectly through) is great cover, allowing us to avoid any encounter easily.
It wasn't an encounter, nor was it a combat. A GIANT ASS WHALE FELL OUT OF THE SKY. I'm 100% telling the truth, far away from the coast, a Whale had somehow managed to fall from the sky onto Mr Yokel, and myself in a Wheelbarrow.
We manage to avoid a direct impact but, I am yet again unconscious. Mr.Yokel wakes me up, and at this point I become an annoying player. Instead of heading towards the next town, I suggest we start smoking off the whale meat to sell it, with a portion of my share going towards repairing the thatched roof I fell through the previous day. Hilarity ensues as Mr Yokel and I prat around planning our Cooked Whale Restaurant.
I have looked back on this, and I have no regrets, it was the first thing that I was able to actually do, and not get DM blocked.
After preparing a smoking pit and preparing the meat to be cooked, an encounter occurs that evening. A Shambing plant (It was not a shambling mound, the creatures name escapes me) stumbles through our camp (The CR was well above our level I was well aware). I roll well in Initiative, and decide the best bet is to cast the Mist again, and for us to hide, and to avoid the encounter entirely.
The creature suddenly become sentient and understands this as a trick (With a 0 Intelligence), and starts to track us through the Mist. I eventually shoot a few arrows (Miss them all annoyingly), the Fighter tries to hit it with their shovel and does so little damage, for the DM to hit the Fighter once and immediately realize, they are about to do a TPK. The next round, with a lot of unsubtle fudging, it "miraculously" died.
This is a personal pet peeve of mine with all DM's, if a player comes up with a genuine way of avoiding an entire encounter, without having to roll a single attack, it should be rewarded as if they had completed the encounter. It should not be forced upon you, undoing everything you did to avoid it in the first place.
TLDR; Was thrown out of the backstory I wrote, into a world I'm not sure I belong/fit into, am unable to cast spells, nor move, learn that I am with child, have a Whale land on top of me, and am chased by the most intelligent 0 INT creature of all time which almost results in a TPK if it wasn't for a lot of immersion breaking Fudging.
04/07/20 - Premier League - Leicester City vs Crystal Palace - Pre-Match Thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: 33 of 38 Referee
: Jonathan Moss
- Average Reds: 0.15
- Average Yellows: 3.68
: Filbert Way, King Power Stadium Time
: 1500BST/UTC+1, 04/07/20 Channel (UK)
: Sky Main Event / Sky Sports Premier League (no crowd noises)
Accurate as of 0845BST 03/07/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 1.66 Draw
: 3.60 Crystal Palace Win
- Brendan Rodgers has never lost nor drawn to Roy Hodgson (P3 W3)
- We as a club have been less fortunate having loss 4 our last 6 matches (P6 W1 D1 L4) with the only win being earlier this season. Prior to this, we had not won since October 2016
- It was this exact fixture that was Puel's last game after a 1-4 pummelling at home saw most of Blue Army leave before the end of the match
- We at home have had a good run with only 3 losses at home to the likes of Liverpool, Man City, and a (understably) vengeful Southampton. (P16 W9 D4 L3)
- In the reverse fixture, Soyuncu scored his first goal for the club and Vardy came up with the legendary shit bird celebration
- At 55pts, this is our second highest haul in the Premier League only behind the championship winning season of 2015/16 (81pts)
How to DD Biopharma and Not Fuck Up
submitted by Hired-Sellout to wallstreetbets [link] [comments]
Earnings only come 4 times per year, and most little biotechs don't have any anyway. Problem is, guys like us, we need to lose money to big news at least twice as often. The solution: pharma stocks, where you also get clinical trial read outs, patent litigation, and PDUFA dates on the ol' catalyst calendar. Ready to learn how? For the purpose of annoying all you options traders, I'm going to write this from the perspective of someone going long the equity of a small to mid-cap. Plenty of DD already out there on Abbott and J&J. Step 1.
Cash matters. Stay the fuck
away from anything development stage with a market cap under $150 million. Unless you are YOLO-ing a hundred bucks or whatever, the only thing these plays will do is disappoint you worse than you disappoint your dad. Pharmaceutical research takes hundreds of millions of dollars to bring one small molecule from pre-clinical to market under ideal circumstances. A fucking rat carcinogenicity study can run $8 mil and 3 years. Under-capitalized companies with anything besides stud assets don't get bought, they raise and dilute and rinse and repeat, because there is always dumb money out there willing to bet on the 26th attempt to cure alzheimer's by hitting amyloid, or the next me-too formulation of methylphenidate (now in a pez dispenser!) to treat ADHD. Any dipstick with $15m in capital can get listed on the NASDAQ. I've met a lot of them. Don't give them your money. Look at the clinical development success rates by therapeutic area, published by BIO
(warning: PDF). Make sure your model discounts back to whatever phase your target's lead candidate is in. Step 2.
Look at the actual patents
. The database is free, and reading is easy. You're not looking to do a full FTO analysis here, just see that they actually have some claims that aren't total bullshit. Search the company name in "assignee name" then search all the names of the inventors you see listed to make sure they've actually assigned the patents to your target, and that the patents actually cover the drug they're talking about in their press releases. You'd be amazed that sometimes they don't. Check the date of filing/acceptance. If it's still preclinical but has burned ten years of patent life, walk away.
There are four kinds of patents that matter to pharmaceuticals:
- Composition of matter - you'll recognize this because the claims will say things like, "compositions of...." and "a compound containing XXXX or pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof". These are the only un-fuck-withable patents you get.
- Formulation - this means the molecule is not novel, but the pill, patch, liquid, or suppository is. These can be fine, or they can be sketchy. You need to evaluate the underlying technology. Has it been used before in other drugs? Were there Paragraph IV filings on them? Was the company that licensed this technology to my darling DD target sued along with the manufacturer of that other drug? Any one of these can trip you up. Look for solid technology that hasn't cracked under a lawsuit yet.
- Method of use - these patents limit the use of the compound to a specific disease like autism. These are easier to work around, but better than nothing since they give the company a heads-up that generics may be coming (remember that paragraph IV thing I mentioned? It means that the generic makers have to file a lawsuit, followed by an automatic 30-month stay on launching their knock-off.) If all your target has is methods of use, tread cautiously.
- Method of manufacture - these are worthless.
- Other kinds of regulatory exclusivity. Yeah I said 4. This is different, but can still matter. Deal. Orphan Drug (7 years), New Chemical Entity (5 years), QIDP (5 years but just applies to antibiotics, which don't make money), Rare Pediatric Disease (accelerated review voucher, worth $50-100m if sold), Clinical Trial Data (3 years)
Look at the epidemiology - If your target company has the cure for some ultra-weird orphan disease, so what? Is there a patient registry? An advocacy group full of sad moms? A celebrity that has it? Are there academic centers treating the population currently? If not how the hell are they supposed to find the patients to charge their insurers $1m a head for this miracle cure? Also, holy goddamn, $1m a head? Is management prepared to get hauled in front of Congress to wither under national media scrutiny for weeks on end because people don't understand that nobody would develop drugs for a disease with 500 patients if they didn't make money? Pray they get bought by Alexion or move along.
If it's not an orphan disease, what are the insurers going to pay for it? New antibiotics, for example, are worthless commercial investments, because hospitals will reserve them for the absolute worst-case, dumpster fire, probably going to die anyway patients and give everyone else a z-pack or generic iv rocephin all day long. Find out what the cheapest thing to treat your target company's disease of choice is and then scour the conference call transcripts for how in the name of bleeding Jesus they're going to get those tight-fisted bastards at United Health and Blue Cross to pay for it. Gross-to-Net deductions of 50% are the low end of normal
now that there are 2-3 wholesalers and maybe ten insurers that matter nationally. Make sure you're discounting your projected cash flows appropriately. Step 4.
Now, and only now, do you even bother to see what the rest of the company looks like. Are they in Phase 2? Data reading out this year? Great. A phase 3 trial costs at minimum, $10,000 per patient per week. Double that if it's an inpatient study, or being done against an expensive standard of care (like in cancer, where you can't use placebo because ethics
.) Companies will often not tell you what these trials will cost, but you can find out. Look at the current market leading drug's label here
and find section 14 (Clinical Trials Experience). This will tell you the number of patients and how long the study ran. Regulatory affairs people like precedents, as does the FDA, so it's a good bet that your target's Phase three trials will look a lot like this. Do the multiplication, and decide if that number plus their burn rate of the past 24 months less R&D expense is > cash on hand. Step 5.
The Target Product Profile. Odds are, your prospective acquisition has talked up the benefits of their darling compound, and completely downplayed the side effects. Look at the available clinical trial results with a jaundiced eye. Pharma reps, when visiting doctors tend to show them an i-pad and say, big bar good, little bar bad
and leave it there. Because they're also buying lunch for the office and wearing a low-cut top, the 'scripts get written. We aren't going to fall for that though, are we? Was there a dose-proportional response in their target efficacy endpoint? Was the p value at the 5th decimal place, or did they barely squeak by at p= 0.0499? What about the discontinuation rate? How does it compare to the current standard of care? All this feeds back to the number one question analysts should be asking management; "How will you get insurers to pay for this?" If there's not a clear separation on efficacy versus the prior standard, or a reduction by at least 50% in a really gnarly side effect, expect the commercial launch to be a slog. Step 6
. The pipeline. Is your target going to continue to exist after Phase 3 is over, or is their plan to get bought? Look at management. Is there anyone with commercial experience on the executive team? Is there a head of sales? Marketing? Look for clues as to whether they're really cut out for this. Did big pharma (Pfizer or Genentech) license something deeper down in their pipeline, back at Phase 1 or before? That means multiple someones with budgets in the billions, access to a diligence database full of every document about the compound, and had the company's management on speed dial for months... passed on buying the thing that's in Phase 2/3 now. Step 7.
The exit. Let's say all this has lined up, and you've found a company that's got the goods, with solid data in a real market, ironclad patents, enough capital to cover the next 23 months, and a share price that's not yet north of 200x projected earnings. (Even still, do not let this little bastard become more than 10% of your overall sector exposure.) What's your exit catalyst? If you're betting on an acquisition, look at the big boys in that therapeutic area and see whether there are any where this drug actually fits. Just because Roche or Ferring has "women's health" drugs, does not mean they're going to buy Sprout. The former are in reproductive endocrinology (maybe 2,000 doctors) and the latter has a lead asset in sexual dysfunction ( that's primary care, psychiatry, and OB-GYN, 250,000 doctors at the low end.) Roche isn't going to build that sales force. Is there actually a strategic acquirer or licensee that makes sense?
If not, is there anyone on your target's management team who has commercialized drugs before? Is there a sales & marketing staff? If not, is there the cash on hand to create or rent one? If you know these things before you click "buy" you might just not fuck up.
01/07/20 - Premier League - Everton vs Leicester City - Pre-Match Thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: 32 of 38 Referee
: Daniel Cook
- Average Reds: TBC
- Average Yellows: TBC
: Goodison Park Time
: 1800BST/UTC+1, 01/07/20 Channel (UK)
: Sky Main Event / Sky Sports Premier League (no crowd noises)
Accurate as of 1358BST 01/07/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 2.87 Draw
: 3.30 Everton Win
- In the league, the last four matches have seen 2 wins and 2 losses, with 2-1 being the most popular scoreline in 3 of those matches.
- Our last encounter in the league cup was a draw at 90 minutes and won on penalties. This was the first Draw we had with Everton since early 2015.
28/06/20 - FA Cup - Leicester City vs Chelsea - Pre-match thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: Quarter Finals Referee
: Michael Dean
- Average Reds: TBC
- Average Yellows: TBC
: Filbert Way, King Power Stadium Time
: 1600BST/UTC+1, 28/06/20 Channel (UK):
BT Sport 1 [HD], BT Sport Ultimate
Accurate as of 1136BST 28/06/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 3.10 Draw
: 3.50 Chelsea Win
- Since reentering the Premier league in 2014/15, we have played Chelsea in the league fourteen times, of which we have won only twice, once in December 2015 and again in 2018.
- Yet on a positive note, in the last four league matches played head-to-head, there has been only one win, which was for Leicester at Stamford Bridge for the first win at Stamford Bridge since 2000/01, where we last pulled the double over Chelsea (P4 W1 D3)
- The last time that Leicester met Chelsea during the FA Cup was in the 2018 quarter finals. It was drawn at full time after Vardy equalified then won by Chelsea in an extra time goal.
- We have been the runners up in the FA Cup on four occasions, the most of any side to have not won it. The last time we were runners up was in 1969. This remains the last bit of domestic silverware from our collection.
- In Brendan Rodger's entire managerial career, he has never beaten Chelsea.
- We have yet to concede a goal in our FA Cup run this season, being the only team to do so in the competition.
Edit: I had to repost with the correct date.
How To Counter Burn (An In-Depth Analysis)
| || | submitted by Andoni95 to LegendsOfRuneterra [link] [comments]
Hello everybody, Crixuz
here again back with another guide! This time how to counter Burn decks (Elusive Burn, PZ Burn). This guide was written to address the growing frustration on this subreddit. I’m currently experimenting with the format of the guide. Whether you enjoyed or disliked this guide, feel free to leave comments as I love to hear from all of you. In the guide you will see a "Control Player" being mentioned. It does not refer to a control deck like Braum Anivia but rather the player that is defending against the Burn player.
Contraction refers to predictable
plays as players seek to minimise suboptimal/bad plays.
Consider how you would play out this hand. https://preview.redd.it/0goq8zaqm6851.jpg?width=1823&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dc96011313bd8d11658164afaefd588c51d0573f
Would you play turn one Precious Pet into turn two Imperial Demolitionist? Probably not as it would require you to sacrifice Precious Pet, resulting in loss of tempo, card disadvantage, and not getting the most value out of your cards. This is a hand that people typically mulligan away. If you are stuck with this hand post-mulligan, then you probably take a wait-and-see approach rather than playing Pet and Demolitionist in this first two turns. The player is hence also more likely to play Pet into Pet.
Once you understand that players actively seek to prevent suboptimal plays, the number of possible plays significantly contracts
. This extends not just to turn by turn play, but mulligan as well.
This makes the job of writing a “how to counter xxx” guide a lot easier. I only need to teach you how to counter a handful of possible plays rather than an infinite number of them.
If our opponent does play turn one Pet into turn one Pet, then spells like Make it Rain will make quick work of Burn. There aren’t many teaching points to be made from this scenario. Opponent mulligan badly and played a bunch of one-health units while you had the correct answers.
To increase our win rate against Burn, we need to familiarise ourselves with cards that are integral to executing Burn’s game plan and counter those cards. Although card games are very contextual (sometime this card is good, other times not so much), we can try and identify cards that are more consistent in carrying the game than other cards. 1) Transfusion https://preview.redd.it/oc0t0132n6851.jpg?width=774&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3ac6285d73b719570a4daef12d9d893709554794
Why is Transfusion such a strong card?
Transfusion, often played in the early
game, is a card that deals one to an ally to give a +2+2 buff to another unit. For now I am only going to focus on its defensive
ability to give a unit +2 health.
This card is a nightmare. Imagine the Burn player has a high value unit (Solitary Monk) on the board. To kill it you need to deal 3 damage. Suppose we play Grasp of the Undying. If the Burn player plays Transfusion, Solitary Monk Will now be at 5 health, out of Grasp range. The implication for the Control player is huge. He has (1) spent all his mana, (2) is unable to kill a high value unit, (3) forgo his chance to develop his board, (4) and lost a turn. Another way of phrasing this point would be to say that the Control player has wasted his turn doing nothing.
- Removals that deal 3 are already expensive as it is. Get Excited requires a discard, Grasp cost 5, Noxus Fervor requires you to sacrifice one unit.
- Transfusion adds 2 health to a unit you are trying to remove, making it almost impossible to kill in the early game.
- If the enemy has Transfusion, playing around Transfusion means over-committing to a removal. Say Thermogenic Beam for 5 damage onto a 2/3. It also means spending a ridiculous amount of mana and, by extension, loss of tempo.
- Not playing around Transfusion and dealing 3 damage to a 2/3 unit when the opponent has Transfusion means you wasted a turn.
- I used the example of dealing 3 to a 3 health minion. But playing against Transfusion means that a Vile Feast onto a one health unit is potentially a risky play.
In summary, going against Burn means that the Control player has to potentially take into account that the unit they are trying to removing may end up with 2 additional health. Hence they are forced to grapple with the decision of (1) going ahead anyway and hope opponent doesn’t have Transfusion while risking a huge loss of tempo if they do, (2) find some way to deal an additional 2 damage, or (3) waiting for the opponent to tap out and potentially risk passing their turn if the opponent chooses not to tap out.
(1), (2), and (3) all put the Control player in a very bad spot. So far the discussion assumes the Burn player has at least two units and two unspent mana. To counter Transfusion, we need to deny the ability’s conditions of requiring two units on the board preemptively
. Countering Transfusion
There are two ways to counter Transfusion. A hard
counter, and a soft
counter to Transfusion requires the Control player to preemptively prevent the Burn player from having two units on the board. This means that for every unit the Burn player play, if you remove it with a removal there and there, you never have to worry about Transfusion. This seems obvious but I often see players make the mistake of taking a “wait-and-see” approach when it comes to removal. For example, the Burn player plays Precious Pet and the Control player is not convinced he has to remove it right now. The justification, if any, for holding onto a removal against a turn 1 unit from the Burn player cannot
be ’wait-and-see’. It needs to be stronger
such as, “I’m saving thermogenic beam for his crimson disciple that he will likely play in turn 2” or “my hand is light on removals, if I use my only thermo, I may not be able to respond to higher value targets my opponent play in the upcoming turns”. However, due to the problems Transfusion pose for the Control player, the latter reason for reserving a removal for more important targets may not be a strong justification as by allowing the Burn player to develop the board, Transfusion will prevent you from successfully killing the target.
*Another consideration is how many units can you allow the Burn player to have at any point in time. Some players think it’s less than 2, but the answer depends on who has priority. Transfusion is a burst
spell, and when the opponent has priority, they can play the second unit and
play Transfusion before
your spell can connect.
counter to Transfusion is useful when you can‘t remove the Burn’s player units efficiently. The Control player cannot be expected to play Piltover&Zaun all the time and have an opening hand of 2xThermo, 1xMystic Shot, and 1xStatikk Shock. The soft counter exploits Transfusion's requirement of needing to deal one to an ally. If you can’t limit the Burn’s board to fewer than two units, at least try to keep their health to one. If every unit on their board is at one health, it means that casting Transfusion will necessarily
require sacrificing one unit and by extension, a loss of card advantage for the Burn player. There are going to be situations where the Burn player would not mind it such as killing a Precious Pet to save his Solitary Monk, but then those matchups are “unwinnable“ anyway. Elixir of Iron & Twin Disciplines
So far we have focused on the defensive aspect of Transfusion and considered how problematic giving a unit +2 health is in the early game. Elixir of Iron and Twin Disciplines are cards that give a unit +2/3 health, and thus we need to justify why they aren’t equally
Unlike Transfusion, Elixir and Twin...
- are not combo pieces
- and hence, one less reason to keep in the opening hand
- some Kinkou deck don’t run three copies of Elixir of Iron and some Burn deck don’t run three Twin Disciplines, but almost every Burn deck run three Transfusion
- Twin Disciplines cost 3 mana and a Burn player has a much harder time banking 3 spell mana compared to 2.
- The last and most important consideration pertains to the offensive aspect of Transfusion. Transfusion also adds +2 to the unit power. Typically if you have enough mana to try and remove a 3 health threat, it is likely you do not have board presence or blockers. When you cast a spell like Grasp and fail to kill it, then the unit will attack for a large amount of damage. Thus the unit boosted by Transfusion and Transfusion itself would have already done a considerable amount of damage that the other cards in the Burn player's hand can finish the job quite consistently.
So far we have discussed Transfusion and if you are observant, we have not made mention of its synergy with Crimson Disciple. 2) Crimson Disciple https://preview.redd.it/9080rr84n6851.jpg?width=816&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6e4a4257b27261b617b9cc551f53547e4a66bd5a
A lot of people give way too much credit to Crimson Disciple when the actual problem is Transfusion. Disciple is a card that is often paired with Imperial Demolitionist and together they deal four to your nexus. If four burn damage is problematic, we would be hearing more complaints about Decimate. Disciple+Demo combo cost four mana, while Decimate does the same job with one card for just an additional mana. The only difference is that the Disciple+Demo combo actually gives you two bodies, and that Disciple has a way of generating even more value over time, especially when combined with Transfusion. Countering Crimson Disciple
If you can, it is paramount to kill Disciple in turn two. The best answer to a Disciple in turn two is Thermogenic Beam or Culling Strike.
Suppose you don’t have Thermogenic Beam or Culling Strike, your best bet may be to deal two to Disciple, either with your own unit (e.g Jagged Butcher or Fleetweather Tracker) or a spell like Mystic Shock. Disciple hates to be at one health.
At one health, turn three would be awkward for the Burn player. He can’t play Demolitionist as it would kill his own Disciple.
A common mistake I see is players not blocking Disciple with their own 2/2 unit. Do not be so adverse about the two damage you are receiving now
from Disciple’s ability that you end up losing the entire game. 3) Noxian Fervor https://preview.redd.it/laf92g16n6851.jpg?width=781&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f5f34e9137a133aac17e255fcdb261672c2fe625
Noxus Fervor is a late
game card that is used reactively by the Burn player to deny the Control player from removing their units while dealing three damage to the Control player’s nexus. It can be used proactively as well but it is less concerning when used this way. The best way to use Noxian Fervor is when the Burn player attacks with a wide board, with at least one unit being Legion Grenadier. The Control player, likely to have fewer units than the Burn player, is forced to block Legion Grenadier (due to it being 3 attack) and hence leaving another unit unblock. This is futile because the Burn player has Noxian Fervor. Countering Noxian Fervor
If you are holding onto a removal, wait for him to play Noxian Fervor and tap out before using your removal. If you try to remove prematurely, he can cast Noxian Fervor after
you cast your removal, negating your spell.
- Boomcrew Rookie and Legion Saboteur both deal damage to the nexus even if they are blocked. For the control player, you need to remove them before they have a chance to attack.
- Cards like Used Cask Salesman and Legion Grenadier do not require them to hit the nexus directly in order to deal damage. This inevitable damage is why many in the community feel that the deck is not interactive.
- Have access to more Burn spells than Elusive Burn. For example, Get Excited.
- PZ Burn struggles with card draw and cannot refill their hand reliably. If they run out of cards, you win.
- They have no mid-late game potential. If you can heal, one for one removal of their units, or deny their spells, they cannot win.
- Elusive units
- Card advantage due to Shadow Assassin, Navori Conspirator, and Solitary Monk
- Strong defensive tools like Twin Disciplines, Retreat, and Deny
- They have a stronger mid-late game potential as a result of 2. and 3.
- Not as vulnerable to heal as PZ Burn
- They struggle against decks that play elusive units (e.g Vimer, Kinkou).
- They struggle against overwhelm units like the new Mono Noxus decks.
Hope you guys found this guide helpful. I apologise if the Transfusion segment is a little verbose. There are just too many considerations and nuances that need to be addressed. I wrote it to address the wave after wave of people complaining about Burn decks. After writing this guide, I went on to play control decks and had a very good win rate against Burn decks. It is not fruitful to complain about how unfair or overpowered a certain card is. What are you gonna do? Quit the game? Since you probably are staying, it’s better to channel those energies into analysis.
If like this format, do let me know so that I can write stuff like "How to Counter Heimerdinger" etc in the future. For now, I'm taking a break from the Master's Toolbox series
Thread posting my trades with basic explanation for any novices...feel free to ask questions.
| || | submitted by mbhudson1 to options [link] [comments]
5/18/20: Update: I've been super sick for a week and half and basically been borderline functional. I'll try and update this and how I managed these trades in the next couple days.
Today's trades: The usual, selling outside the money calls and puts. However, slightly riskier with some expiring in 9 days. Just the way the timing worked out. Still looking at PTON and a few others. https://preview.redd.it/4hw5sul7t6x41.png?width=546&format=png&auto=webp&s=db31fe5a336c02c6a3bc1100ede50012d006f38d
Just over $2,200k in profits in closed trades since starting this last week, and several trades still open.
Closed DIS for $217 profitClosed GM for $75 profitClosed WING for $178 profitClosed SHOP for $400 profitClosed ATVI for $100 profitClosed AMZN for $360 profitClose CLX for $200 profit
TRIP: Currently $15 profitX: Currently $20 profitMCD: Currently $60 profitC: Currently $30 profitLUV: Currently down $159
I'm "defending" my LUV trade by "rolling it out" to June and also selling a May call. Specifically, by roll out I mean I buy to close the current LUV put and then sell to open June 19 put at the same strake (at the same time). I'm also selling a call at the same strike (27.5) with the expiration (June 19). This creates a "short straddle". Received $430 credit.
More earnings trades later today. And you if you haven't figured it out yet, I'll be selling calls and puts. If I have a slightly bullish stance (ie. think the stock will go up) I usually sell two puts and one call. If I have a slightly bearish stance (ie. think stock will go down) I sell two calls and one put.
Earnings trades: https://preview.redd.it/zcjg1w2w30x41.png?width=669&format=png&auto=webp&s=c41f1b388e98d8b99b8d0190f7df6f1419baf73b
Another busy day, but I'll get to question soon.
Closed half of SHOP (the call credit spread, aka closing both calls) for about $0 (i think actually $5+).Leaving the puts (the sold put and the bought put) going into earnings. This is now a put credit spread (bullish trade). Same thing with AMZN.
LUV naked put is now in the money, which is fine (like I said I don't mind buying 100 shares if I get assigned). If IV (aka volatility) goes up a little I will probably sell a call.
IV has gone down in many underylings (stocks) and the job report comes out friday so I may close a lot of positions before the end of the week.IV dropped a ton in MSFT and TWTR:Closed MSFT (bought to close the call and put) for $150 profit (74% profit)Closed TWTR (bought to close call and put) for $80 (64% profit)
New trades:*Beginner trade:
I think CLX will keep going up and CLX IV rank is 28-ish. A year ago this would be high IV, but in this market it could be debated if this is high or low. However, I think IV will go up again in the future in CLX. Thus, I bought a call. However, I rarely if ever just buy a call. I also sell a call. This creates a call debit spread. Research indicates this is strategy has a higher probability of profit, and research also indicates the most profitable call debit spread is to buy the (approximately) 60 delta call and sell the 40 delta call approximately 45 days out. Also, it costs less than buying a call. Here was the trade: https://preview.redd.it/azbrtepknzw41.png?width=481&format=png&auto=webp&s=f290809934c05c24c11f5d7cf8948e867cfb6e23
If i had just bought the 195 strike, june 19 call it would have cost $960. This trade cost me $635.
Other trades (I actually made this yesterday and closed it today because IV dropped and I made 50% profit, just didn't have time to post it yesterday): For $60 credit
I'm going to look at earnings trades later today (for companies announcing earnings throughout the week) and will post those. Looking at the ones with the highest IV like PTON, ATVI, GM, BUD, ETSY, BYND.
Might do a YOLO play as well. I typically reserve 5% of my account for YOLO trades just for fun.
5/4:Crazy couple days with work, but I'll try and get to everyone's questions later today.
Notes/thoughts from over the weekend: I love Tesla and think long term they are the future. However, those who saw my comments below or were on discord saw my comments about Tesla (TSLA). New people love to trade "sexy" companies like Tesla. ...But you never know what Elon is going to say and the swings in price are very unpredictable. This is why I avoided TSLA and typically avoid companies like TSLA.
**Trade:**AMZN 1 15-May 2120 put (bought put)
\-1 15-May 2130 put (sold put) \-1 15-May 2500 call (sold call) 1 15-May 2510 call (bought call) Cost
: Received $265 DTE
: 14 days (which is about as short as I go). 45 daysish out required to much "buying power" (ie. them holding to much of money as sort of collateral that I then couldn't trade with). Strike prices
: TLDR: I wanted to sell options in AMZN because vol is high, but AMZN share price makes that to risky of a trade (very high $$ potential loss). I limited potential loss (and also some of the credit aka $ I received) by also buying options.Longer: Based on delta. Sold the 20 delta put and sold the 15 delta call. This is a slightly bullish trade. Generally speaking a 16 delta call or put is 1 standard deviation out. I will explain this later. But I considered doing selling a 16 delta call and a 16 delta put. However, I think the stock might go up so I slightly shifted the strike prices to a more bullish trade by moving the put up to the 20 delta put (higher strike price) and the sold call to the 15 delta (higher strike price). However, have a naked call (ie sold call) and a naked put (ie sold put) in a $2300 stock is to risky for me (and not allowed in my small account for Reddit) because if the trade goes against me (ie. goes really really bad) I could be required to sell 100 shares of AMZN at 2500 if AMZN goes and stays above 2500 or sell 100 shares of amazon at 2130 if goes and stays below 2130 (and I don't have any amazon shares). So I bought the put at the next lowest strike and bought the call at the next highest strike. Max loss now is around $700.
Intermediate level explanation: I thought about doing a strangle but did an iron condor instead to reduce risk. Why this strategy:
I noticed AMZN volatility was still high after earnings (which is not common). I expect volatility to come down over the weekend. The ideal scenario for this trade would be that vol drops to 0 and the stock price stays the exact same. What helps me in this trade:
Time (ie. every day that passes), decreased volatility or no change in volatility, AMZN stock price staying between 2130 and 2500. What hurts me:
Increase in vol, stock price going above 2500 or below 2130.
Probability of profit if hold this to expiration: ~65% Trade hack:
If you are selling a call or put you can estimate the chance of profit by subtracting the delta of the call or put from 100. Example, selling the 20 delta put has an 80% chance of making a profit.
Note: Sometimes delta is in decimal form (ie. 0.2 instead of 20) or negative for puts (ex. -.2).
For those that are interested in a more advanced (mathematically) explanation of how "expected move" of a stock/underlying, here
is a good video
I'm terrible with technology. If anyone wants to help with editing videos DM me. In exchange I'll give you some of the Reddit gold kind strangers gave me!
Power just went out in Philly, sorry to those on the live stream. I need to double check some things are work are fine with the brief power outage. Livestream to resume at 3:30
. Sorry all.
Since I have a quick break at 3pm EST today I will be streaming live here
. Numerous people have asked, "Should I buy a call in XYZ". Specifically, I will explain why i'm not going to buy a call in X (literally the US Steel, X) even though I think it's going up, and explain the trade I am going to do instead.
Trades i'm considering for today:
UUL earnings tradeAAPL earnings tradeAMZN earnings trade (maybe, have the same concern I did with TSLA)Visa earnings trade (maybe)Short position in RLLong position in X (steel)Still look for longer term oil (or related to oil) trade: Previous trade updates:
Closed FB for $450 profit. All other trades still open. I SOLD calls and put in all trades so time is in my favor. Thus, now I wait.Current profit/loss since opening: https://preview.redd.it/pc8d0158kzv41.png?width=247&format=png&auto=webp&s=f39484805b3a50387f11fc25c04d3d331a170a82
To people asking me if they should buy options and don't understand selling options (or why I'm selling options) here
is a good video to start with (fast forward to 1:50).
Yesterday and today I am fairly busy with work, but I'll get to everyone's questions go over yesterdays trades. Now that my tech naive self finally figure out streaming and uploading YouTube videos I may answer questions and go over trades there. I'll post a link here if I do.
If you have a specific question (or comment) about a video it might be easier just to comment in the YouTube comments.
Also, if people are interested I can try and do a live stream this afternoon, just let me know. Related to videos, if someone wants to make me a super cheesy YouTube thumbnail I'll happily use it. ...i've never been able to tell if 'influencers' and who not make those as a joke or seriously...
______________________________________________________________________________________________ 4/29: Today's trades:
Details coming soon but all similar reasoning to the TWTR. https://preview.redd.it/nhwyf1738tv41.png?width=481&format=png&auto=webp&s=505be81e17e4127b384d010c960f7b46f6326916
Video of TWTR trade with reasoning and thought process here
Not going to live stream today, but can tomorrow if there is interest. Potential trades I'm looking at today:
-MCD earnings-MSFT earnings-Create synthetic stock position in an oil company (or company related to oil)-Short XBI (biotech ETF) position-TSLA (maybe)-SPX (maybe)
Current trades (approximately):
LUV +$30SHOP +$140C -$45 - I need C stock to stay between 35 and 55. It gone up since i opened the position and is now at 49. I'm watching this one (I set alerts so I don't have to literally watch), but if it C stock hits 55 I'll make an adjustment. Specifically, I'll "roll up" the sold put. Meaning that I sold a put with strike price of 35. If C hits 55 ill buy to close that put and sell to open a new put with a higher strike price.
General advice after talking to some people who work for me: If you don't have a ROTH IRA and you are eligible to open one, you should do that ASAP. Even if you only have $100 to put in it. Happy to explain why if you want. Eligibility is based on a couple things (students loans, annual income, marital status, etc.) but if you are single will make under $124k in 2020 or married and will make under (combined) $196k you are definitely eligible.
I opened a new account with $5,000 to show how I would (and will) make trades in a smaller account. I realize some of the trades I posted here are a little complicated, so I'll definitely make some basic trades and post those. Also, I know the livestream had some technical issues and in retrospect some of the things I talked about were more complicated than I had planned, but I'm happy to do another one and answer questions or actually make trades.
I'll also keep track of profits/losses, mainly because I feel like there are a lot of scammers out there who try and sell all sorts of stuff that falsify trades and profits_______________________________ Live stream
will be at 3:00 pm (EST) here
. No set plan, so come and ask any questions. Especially very entry level or beginner questions.
Update for 4/28 Updated Discord link here
Thoughts: All trades from yesterday appear to be profitable (or will likely be profitable outside of some crazy event). Meaning that I'm not going to do anything with those trades (ie. I'm not adjusting them). A mistake I made when I was younger (that typically led to losing money) was constantly tinkering with trades. But all of my trades have time to their advantage, so now I just wait.
I had a request on discord to do some more simple trades. I have to do some work to do during the day today (and everyday) but will take a break at 3:00pm to stream live where I will demonstrate some trades and answer questions. I will post the link here and discord.
To the people that I asked, I use the TastyWorks platform and will give examples on there. I have no affiliation with them, but if you are going to download it you can use my referall and I think you get something free (link here
3:15 pm. That might be all my trades for today. Since I trade mainly based on mechanics and odds of potential profit it doesn't take me much time to find/place the trades. Plus I have real work I do most of the day, trading is just a nice break. But I am looking at a few more trades before close. I'll update if I make them. Earnings trades: LUV
Sold the May 18th put with strike price 27 Cost
: $95 credit. Strike price and DTE
: I'll explain in the why this strategy part.
Why this strategy: To extremely and way overly simplify...in general there is more money to be made by selling puts vs selling calls for reasons that don't really matter at this point. But you can basically thing about it like a put costs more than a call. So when you sell a put, you get more credit ($) than selling a call.
"Hey mbhudson1, you sold a naked put in an airline? Isn't that a bullish trade meaning that you think the price of the stock will go up after earnings?! You realize nobody is flying right now, right?"
Another good question person that doesn't exist.
In this circumstance I'm using an interesting strategy that not a lot of beginners typically know about. In the long run I don't think airlines are going out of business, especially LUV. At some point I plan on buying stock in LUV. Ideally I would buy at the bottom of the market, just like everyone else wants to do. However, nobody can predict the bottom. So what i'm doing is selling a put with the full expectation that this might expire in the money and I get assigned 100 shares of stock. This is almost always how I buy stock because it's sort of a win-win. Scenarios
: LUV stock goes up: I keep the $95 LUV stock stays the same: I keep the $95LUV stock goes down a little: I keep the $95LUV stock goes below 27 (and is below 27 on May 15): I now own 100 shares of LUV....and I keep the $95.
___ C (Citigroup) strangle
Also not a beginner trade, but you could turn this into an iron condor. Cost
: Received $170 credit DTE
: I could have done this for a shorter DTE since it's an earnings play, but 53 days out is much less risky for naked options. Strike prices
: Picked strike prices that are outside how far the stock price is estimated to move after the earnings announcement. This can be estimated several ways, but I just went with closest call and put to 15 delta (which is around 1 standard deviation out). I could have gone even farther out on the strike prices (ie. higher call strike and lower put strike) to be less risky, but there is very limited profit potential in a lower priced stock (lower compared to something like SHOP) when you get out to 5 and 10 delta options. Why this strategy
: Volatility almost always goes down after an earnings announcement. Instead of trying to bet on which way the stock price will go on the earnings announcement, I'm essentially just betting that it won't go below 35 or above 55.
Other strategies here: I considered a ratio spread (which I can explain to beginners later) and also just considered selling a put.
This is not a beginner trade FYI. I'll let you know when I do what I consider beginner trades. Iron condor in SHOP https://preview.redd.it/xyai5w26fev41.png?width=401&format=png&auto=webp&s=86c5ac485abeb2570ac7a293a79e583389c87dc5
FYI: In case you don't know -1 means it's a sold options contract +1 means i bought a contract. Cost
: I received $605 credit for this trade. This does require a lot of buying power (ie. collateral). Days to expiration
(DTE): I do most options trades around 40-55 DTE. I'll explain why later. Strike prices
: I like to sell calls and puts out of the money. Specially I like to use what is referred to as delta to determine which strike prices to sell. Typically I sell 10 delta calls and 5 delta puts. It might sound complicated but the delta is given in many trading platforms (here is an example on Tasty Works: https://ibb.co/ThkKqnM
"Hey mbhudson1, you said you like to sell calls and puts and that -1 means it's a sold options contract. Why are there also bought options in your trade?". Good question person that doesn't exist. Selling a call and put in SHOP (which is called a strangle) is to risky for me. Selling an option alone is called a naked option. Naked options have a lot more risk (technically unlimited potential risk). By buying a call at a strike price higher than the sold call and by buying a put at a strike lower than the sold put I have made this a "defined risk" trade. I do sell naked options many times, but typically not if the underlying (ie stock) price is in the triple digits. A lot of big time options traders lost a lot of money on naked calls in TSLA back in Feb. Why this strategy
: I'm betting on volatility dropping here. SHOP currently has relatively high volatility. I can tell that by looking at the implied volatility rank which on an overly simplified level is where the volatility ranks today vs days in the past. Right now it's at 67%.
Also, time is to my advantage here. If nothing else changes (volatility, price of SHOP stock, etc.) every day that goes by I make money.
Plan moving forward on this trade: If I make 50% profit I will close this trade. To close this trade I would buy the 930 call and buy the 385 put while selling the 960 call and selling the 300 put. If the trade "goes against me", I will defend it but will wait until that happens to explain it.
Summary of this trade: I try and use as many things as possible to my advantage. In this trade time is to my advantage, decrease (or no change) in volatility is to my advantage, and changes in SHOP price don't really effect anything (unless they are massive like to 930 or 385). When you hear people at wallstreetbets
complaining about how everyday their calls or puts are decreasing in value...i'm one of the people on the other end of those trades.
Calculating win probabilities form closing price odds - HKJC
submitted by jsmit332 to horseracing [link] [comments]
I am becoming interesting in algorithmic horse racing betting and was looking into Hong Kong racing, due to the ease of collecting data.
I am interested in using the public's opinion on a horse as a part of my model, therefore I am looking to scrape the closing odds of the horses.
I want to convert the closing odds into probabilities and use these as the "public's predicted probability of a horse winning".
I want to use these probabilities in a similar way to how Bill Benter used them.
Does anybody know if the odds presented in the results table (e.g. https://racing.hkjc.com/racing/information/english/Racing/LocalResults.aspx?RaceDate=2020/06/27&Racecourse=ST&RaceNo=2
) are starting or closing odds?
Another problem is that when converting the odds into probabilities by taking the reciprocal of the odds (1/decimal odds), the resulting probabilities sum to be greater than 1. I am aware that for fixed-odds betting this expected as this is how the 'house' makes money, but i thought that in a pari-mutuel system the odds should sum to 1 as they are calculated based on the amount of money placed on a hose relative to the total amount of money bet on all the horses.
I can renormalize these reciprocals so they sum to 1 by dividing each reciprocal buy the sum of all the reciprocals, this gives numbers that sum to 1 and could be interpreted as probabilities. Does anyone know if this is a valid thing to do?
I know that in the paper 'Searching for positive returns at the track' ( http://ruthnbolton.com/Publications/Track.pdf
) they calculate these public probabilities by looking at the amount of money in betting pools, is this data available somewhere for horse races?
23/06/20 - Premier League - Leicester City vs Brighton - Pre-match thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: 31 of 38 Referee
: Lee Mason
- Average Reds: 0.13
- Average Yellows: 3.36
: Filbert Way, King Power Stadium Time
: 1800BST/UTC+1, 23/06/20
Accurate as of 1345BST 22/06/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 1.60 Draw
: 4.00 Brighton Win
- We have had no losses to Brighton in five matches with Brighton failing to keep a clean sheet in their past nine matches against us (P5 W4 D1)
- In 11 league matches played between the sides at both PL and Championship level, there have been 6 red cards.
- In the reverse fixture, we beat them 2-0 at the Amex Stadium including a penalty from Vardy to seal the win.
- Of the 15 home matches for Leicester, we have lost only thrice to Liverpool, Man City, and Southampton. (P15 W9 D3 L3)
Aiming for the eyes without "aiming for the eyes": A breakdown of how to explain abstraction to your players while still having descriptive combat.
submitted by shostakofish to DMAcademy [link] [comments]
If you're a DM and you and your players have a firm grasp of abstraction and how it fits into the game mazel tov! you probably don't need this.
But if you're having trouble explaining how the mechanics interact with the fiction of DMing stick around! I might have useful advice I learned from my table (and at worst, it probably can't hurt). Most of this will be 5e focused.
The super base level of keeping your fiction and mechanics balanced (that I've found) is players can describe exactly what their character is trying to do, but the GM controls how the world reacts to their attempt.
Let's look at one of the most common (on this sub) examples of this to break down.
My players want to be able to aim for weak spots on enemies to gain additional effects. Should I let them?
Obviously every table is different, but as 5e has been pre-balanced for your convenience the safest bet for not accidentally screwing with the mechanical feel of your game is to say "no, you have to work within the attacks/abilities you already have". This isn't just to be mean either! There are a lot of subclasses that specialize in those "extra effects" players want to gain by aiming and allowing other classes to gain those effects can trivialize or invalidate certain class options.
But obviously just saying "no" feels so boring! After all it's a good
thing that players are invested in the fiction of the world! But don't forget improv doesn't have to be just "yes, and" it is also "no, but"
What ended up working out for my players was explaining that no, aiming would not mechanically change anything because AC is not "how much armor is this person wearing" it is actually "how difficult is it to hit this person" this is including things like eyes, mouth, neck etc. It it assumed
that your character is going to be aiming for enemy weak spots. In addition, you can absolutely state what your character is trying to do if they were to completely succeed
, where how successful you are is determined by:
Your attack roll and
Your damage roll
Let's say that my ranger PC has said that "they're aiming for the eyes" of my Orc War-chief. They manage to hit his AC, they roll a 25 damage (a solid hit) but he still has 40HP left. I describe the Orc War-chief moving out of the way just in time for the arrow to miss their head, but the arrow still manages to lodge itself firmly in their bicep. The PC was still aiming for the eyes and made a successful shot, but the mechanics are upheld and balanced per RAI/RAW.
And if your characters manage to kill an enemy with their hit? They can absolutely use their narratively aimed shot idea! That is after all why Matt Mercer's "how do you want to do this" gained such popularity. It's a good tool to let players feel more in tune with their characters.
This can work for things outside of combat as well, this sub has a lot of excellent examples of "a 20 on persuasion will not make a king give you his crown, but maybe he'll laugh at your bravado and offer you a different reward instead."
It can be used to explain why a good argument fails to be convincing in the hands of a non-charismatic character. "You make your point about how helping to drive out the bandits will only help the town, but all the people can focus on is how terrifying your speaking voice is and you stumble and cut short some words, they doubt your ability to lead"
Even the whole concept of rolling a die at all is the abstraction of the randomness of the world. You may be the best hunter on fantasy earth, but even that can't help that the culprits tracks were decimated by the footprints of the morning's market goers, completely ruining the trail.
And finally, let's say you're talking about how abstraction works in D&D with your players and they just hate
it. "That makes no sense"
they may say, "I want to be able to do things that would make sense and these mechanics feel limiting/not fun"
I would highly recommend, before trying to completely re-write the mechanical balance of D&D, look into some other systems! Most famously Powered by the Apocalypse has Dungeon World, which is a narrative logic driven system and there are plenty of other narrative driven as well.
Anyway hope my struggle through finally figuring out how to explain abstraction to my players can help someone else skip some of the confusing bits. Happy GMing all!
Portland, Blazing A Path Towards A Promising Future
Over the last 6 years, Portland has been nothing but consistent, it’s been in the playoffs year after year with little signs of slowing down till this year. In a season following a Western Conference Finals appearance many people, me included, had high expectations for this Blazers squad. With Dame at the helm and CJ, Nurk, and the rest of the squad to back him up a top-three finish in the wild western conference didn’t seem outrageous. Hell, maybe they’d catch a break with another team suffering an injury and make a run at the Finals. Instead, this season, the Blazers were the ones getting injured. Nurkic missed the whole season due to a gruesome leg injury that he experienced towards the end of last season. C.J. struggled to stay on the court consistently. Similarly, Collins missed extended time due to a shoulder injury that required him to have surgery, said surgery would sideline him for four months. These injuries, along with the loss of defensive stalwarts Mo Harkless and Al-Farouq Aminu decimated any hopes Portland had of being a contender this season. Instead, Dame was forced to spend a majority of the season backpacking the whole team, in an attempt to blaze his way towards the playoff (see what I did there). Despite Dame going demigod mode and dropping averages of 28.9 points, 4.3 rebounds, and 8.9 assists on 45.7/39.4/88.8 splits it’s not looking like the Blazers will be making their seventh consecutive trip to the playoffs. But it’s not all bad for Blazers fans. Dame is signed through the 2024-2025 season, C.J. is locked up through the 2023-2024 season, and Nurkic is on a team-friendly deal for the next two years. But what I wanted to talk about is the young blazers. The youngsters that will shape this franchise's future and ultimately decide whether Portland will be in the race for the title in the coming years. So without further delay let's talk some Blazers! submitted by SundaeSports to nba [link] [comments]
Simons is perhaps the most hyped up of the young blazers. The 21-year olds game is reminiscent, funnily enough, of C.j.’s. He projects to be a three-level scorer, who can get you a bucket from anywhere. He uses his speed and crafty ball handling to break down defenders, creating separation so he can get his shots off. Simons, in limited minutes, has shown to be able to get to the basket with relative ease, his shots don’t always fall when he gets there but he shoots solidly enough at the hoop. He’s shown glimpses of an ability to finish through contact, giving Blazers fans hope that he could one day be something more as an interior scorer. His shooting from both the midrange is impressive for his age. He’s shooting 45.2% from 15-19 feet away from the basket. To get these buckets he uses his arsenal of stepbacks and fakes to create separation and get his shot off. Can’t get to the midrange, no problem. Simons has shown the ability to be a high-end three-point shooter despite his career 33.9% shooting from behind the arc, he just needs to be more consistent. There are nights like April 10, 2019, where Simons shot 7-11 from downtown, scoring 37 points when it was all said and done. But there are also nights like December 3, 2019, where he will 1-5 from three. His shot looks good and he looks confident taking them which gives me hope that he will figure it out. He is a career 78.7% free-throw shooter as well, which points to him being able to one day knock down threes at a high clip. If Simons can improve upon his finishing at the basket and improve from deep I could easily see him being a three-level scorer who puts up 20+ points a night at his peak.
How’s the passing? Well, his 1.5 assists a game this season may not stand out but in his limited minutes, he has shown to be at least an adequate passer. Similarly to his shooting he just needs to be more consistent. For every full course pass or perfectly placed lob pass, he makes there will be another moment where he misses the open cutter or shooter in the corner. It’s more of his pass perception that needs some work, not as much his passing fundamentals. Despite the stats, I have faith that Simons will develop into a 4-5 assist guy in his prime.
What about his defense? For now, it’s pretty poor, but I do have hope for Simons on the less glamorous end of the court. Simons is an elite athlete which points to defensive upside. He has the lateral quickness to guard the perimeter while still having the hops to get up and contest shots around the rim. He lacks the strength to be an effective interior defender but with some NBA weight lifting training, that problem could be solved in no time. Simons is yet to fully understand how to defend opposing offenses and isn’t too great and reading passing lanes which limits his ability to disrupt the other team's offense and come away with steals. If Simons can figure out how to read other team's offense and get more steals it could be huge for the Blazers as Simons is an absolute menace in transition. If he can get on a fast break with the ball few players can stop him as he uses his speed blow by defenders and throws down some rim rocking dunks. His biggest fault on defense is his inability to be reliable on that end. He lacks awareness on that end, often losing his man and forgetting to provide help defense for his teammates. In the long run, I think Simons could be a strong perimeter defender and a blah interior one. His strength will likely always hold him back on the inside but if he can figure it out on the perimeter he will at least be serviceable on that end.
So the Blazers have a potential star on their hands. If Simons realizes his potential I could see him putting up 20+ points, 4-5 assists, and 4-5 rebounds on strong efficiency. All while being a solid defender. Of course, there are a lot of questions with Simons, but if it all works out I believe the Blazers have a star on their hands.
Coming out of high school Nassir Little was one of the nation's top-rated prospects (#2 overall). He had an underwhelming season at UNC which led him to fall to the 25th pick in the 2019 NBA Draft where the Blazers snagged him up. His first season in the big leagues was a mixed bag. His stats were rather underwhelming and if you didn’t watch the games you’d think this guy is a bonafide scrub. After all, he did put up just 3.6 points, 2.3 rebounds, and 0.5 assists on some garbage efficiency (23% from three). But where some see a dumpster fire I see potential. So what does he have going for him? Let's talk about it!
Little's biggest draw as a prospect is his freakish athleticism. We're talking about a 6’5, 220lb small forward with some serious bounce. I mean pretty much every highlight of this guy is either a dunk or a put-back. He’s got the ability to quickly accelerate and then just like that, stop on a dime. That same acceleration allows him to rapidly reach top speeds, making him a potential force in transition. He’s also pretty strong considering his 6’5 frame, however, a few extra pounds may not hurt.
His athleticism alone has allowed Nassir to be an average defender thus far in his career but it’s clear he has room to improve. He’ll use his speed to keep up with most players on the perimeter and use his strength, agility, and bounce to get up to contest shots at the hoop. He’s even shown to be able to get up multiple times in short succession, allowing him to block multiple shots in quick succession. He’s adept at covering for his teammates and being in the right position to assist his teammates on defense. Like many rookies Little struggles to consistently give 100% on defense all the time but on most nights he manages to stay locked in for the most part. He will hustle for open balls and try to make plays on defense, even if it doesn’t always work out. He’s also not too great at reading opposing offenses. He’ll miss out on steal opportunities because he’s unable to predict what the offense will do next. Similar to Simons, it would be huge if Little could improve upon his defensive awareness as it would lead to more steals which would result in more transition buckets for Little. Little could be a really good defender given some time, he has all the physical tools to effectively guard other forwards, he just needs to learn the mental part of the game.
Offensively Little is pretty limited. He’s proven to be an effective lob and put back threat, he’s shooting 59% at the rim. He’s also been able to use his athleticism to help him burst past defenders and get shots up 5ft-9ft away from the basket where he shoots 66.7%. That's it, there's not much to his offensive game. His playmaking in both College and thus far in the NBA is non-existent. His shooting has been poor from three-point range and from the line. His handle is okay, but not good enough to reliably create space and get shots off. I see some potential with Little as a shooter simply because his form looks solid enough, but it’s not assuring that he’s shooting 63.6% at the charity stripe. Still, I wouldn’t be shocked if he managed to shoot something like 33% from three in his prime (he’s 20, he has time). I see Little as a player that will need his offense made for him, whether it’s through lobs, cuts to the basket, or put backs off the rim.
I seriously doubt Little is ever going to be a star. He’s got all the physical tools to be a proficient offensive player but it’s his skills that are keeping him back. I think Little, at his peak, will be a 10-12 point scorer who operates mostly down low for his points. As I said previously I don’t think his shot can’t improve, I'm just not sure it will ever be even average. I have faith in his ability to become an above-average defender due to his physical prowess however it’s the mental aspect of the game that will decide if he will be a good or great defender. Ultimately I think Little’s best-case scenario is a fourth or fifth starter on a good team. If the Blazers can turn this athlete into a basketball player, they could have a very solid player under their wings.
Coming out of college Collins was seen as a perfect player for where the league was going. His crazy 47.6% from three in College to go along with his high-end blocking ability had scouts drooling over the possibilities with this near 7-footer. But thus far in his career, only one of those skills has come to fruition. That would be his shot-blocking. In his two full seasons as the Blazers center Collins has routinely shown the ability to keep up with ball handlers on the interior and swat away their shots at the basket. This has been his hallmark skill so far in his career but if he ever wants to be the player people projected him as coming out of college he’s gotta start hitting from outside. Between his rookie and sophomore season Collins has shot just 32.1% from three, not bad for your average center but a far cry from his 47.6% in college. So his shooting isn’t there yet but is he likely to improve. Hell yeah, he is. For one his shot looks clean and he seems to be fairly comfortable taking them (both of which are good signs). His free throw percentage, while not great at 72%, is still solid enough to make you think that he just hasn’t hit his shooting stride yet. He’s also improved all his shooting percentages from his rookie year to his sophomore year, giving further hope that he will figure his shot out.
Collins scores most of his buckets on the interior. He’s very skilled at using fakes, turns, hook shots, and even the occasional fade away to score within ten feet of the basket. Collins also uses his 6’11 stature to his advantage, always cutting to the basket or positioning himself to throw down a well-placed lob pass. Collins doesn’t have a go-to move, rather he uses a wide variety of post moves to get his shot up around the rim. Despite not being the fastest player on the court Collins still manages to be a threat in transition as he uses his size and length to his advantage, throwing down dunks with little regard for the defenders in front of him.
As a ball-handler Collins is subpar. He lacks the acceleration/burst to blow by defenders and he doesn’t have a crafty enough handle to make up for it. I don’t think being a shot creator will ever be one of Collin's main skills. But I do see some hope for him being a playmaker out of the post. In games, Collins has shown the ability to see cutters and get them the ball for an easy bucket. He hasn’t shown to be a good outlet pass to the perimeter but any sort of playmaking from the center position is a positive (even if he’s never anything special as a playmaker).
Collins isn’t a great rebounder for a center. He has the length and athleticism to be a solid rebounder however it’s his strength that has held him up to this point. He’s not weak, he’s just not as large as many other centers. Like if it’s between Collins or Karl-Anthony Towns to grab a rebound you can bet nine times out of ten Towns is getting that rebound simply because of his size and strength. This leads me to my main concern with Collins. I’m not sure that he’s ever going to be big enough to hang defensively with the upper tier of bigs in this league. He gets bodied by the larger bigs in the post and it makes me wonder if he can play the five long term. Ideally, Collins puts on some muscle to address this problem (hopefully he does) but even then I’m skeptical that he will be able to hold his own against the Embiid’s, Jokic’s, and Giannis’s of the league (then again few big men can). On the perimeter, Collins can hold his own against most other bigs but I would by no means call him a lockdown perimeter defender at this point in the league.
So what do the Blazers have with Collins? Well if he figures it out I believe they will have an ideal modern NBA big man who can score from both the interior and stretch the floor while playing plus defense. He could be the type of player that any team could want, not because he’s a star, but because he does everything you want your center to do. If he doesn’t figure it out he has at least shown to be a solid bench big who can score a bit and play some solid defense in limited minutes. Collin’s future is in question, his potential is not.
Gary Trent Jr.:
Gary Trent Jr. showed out this season. He emerged as a bench scoring option when the Blazers needed it. With McCollum missing time in the middle of the season, Trent showed what he could do to the tune of 7.7 points on 38.8% three-point shooting on 3.8 threes a game. This shooting ability along with some semi-respectable defense made him an attractive option off the bench for the crippled Blazers squad. His shooting from the rest of the court also impressed, shooting 45.8% from 10-14ft and 56% at the basket and 83.3% at the line. His handles are nothing to brag about but it was good enough to occasionally break down his defender and get an open shot off. He’s also a threat in transition as his speed allows him to cruise down the floor and get open for attacks at the basket or transition threes. Other than his shooting, transition scoring, and occasional shot creation Trent didn’t bring much more to the offense. But I mean our boy was selected in the second round (37th overall) so let's cut him some slack. Him being a contributor at all is a dub. He lacks the passing vision and accuracy to be an effective playmaker and isn’t much of an offensive rebounder (or rebounder, in general, to be honest).
Defensively Trent is just okay. His perimeter defense is better than his interior defense, which is not surprising considering his 6’5 stature and 210lb weight. He’s light on his feet which allows him to keep up with most guards. The problem comes when bigs get switched onto him as he’s not exceptionally strong or lengthy, leading him to being pushed to the side like Will Smith in his relationship with Jada (poor Will). He seems to have a solid idea of how to read opposing offenses as he’s been pretty good at identifying where passes are going and accumulating steals.
Of all the young Blazers we’ve talked about Trent is probably the least interesting in terms of long term potential. I don’t know that he will be anything better than a solid bench shooter who provides a bit of defense but that's alright. Considering his draft position (37th overall) the Blazers getting Trent was absolutely a win. I think Trent will be a 9-10 point scorer on good efficiency for years to come. That’s not bad for a second-round pick.
The Young Blazers:
If we look at all the young Blazers it’s pretty impressive what Portland has been able to do with their late lottery and non-lottery picks. Simons is a young, athletic guard who has all the potential in the world as a scorer. Collins has the makings of the perfect modern NBA big man. Little has starter potential with his interior scoring and high-end defensive upside. Trent was a nice pick up in the second round a couple of years ago. The Blazers have done an impressive job not only competing in the present but setting themselves up for a promising future. Maybe one day these young players could blaze Portland towards their second championship.
20/06/20 - Premier League - Watford vs Leicester City - Pre-match thread
submitted by MadlockUK to lcfc [link] [comments]
Key Facts Round
: 30 of 38 Referee
: Craig Pawson
- Average Reds: 0.17
- Average Yellows: 3.76
: Vicarage Road Time
: 1230BST/UTC+1, 20/06/20
Accurate as of 1145BST 19/06/20 (Decimal, lower is more likely
): Leicester Win
: 2.00 Draw
: 3.50 Watford Win
- Neither team has beaten the other when away since Leicester's title winning season where Leicester won 0-1 in 2016
Rodger's first victory against Pearson was the home win in December where we won 2-0 as part of record-equalling run of wins.
- Neither team has drawn against the other since last playing each other in the Championship where we drew 2-2
- Jamie Vardy has scored in each game for Leicester since 2018 including 2 penalties
- There hasn't been a goalless game between Leicester and Watford for thirty years when the sides drew nil all in the 5th Round of the Championship 1990/91.
[OC] Subdued but Still Grandstanding (PRVerse 10.3)
(Prev) (Wiki) (Next) submitted by Fearadhach to HFY [link] [comments]
Enibal walked into the Council Chambers the morning after his conversation with his Queen with hunched shoulders. The emotional high he’d felt from his Queen’s friendship and confidence still carried him, but the upcoming task weighted heavily on him all the same. I hope the Duke arrives soon.
Henry had apologized to him again on their secure channel (some crazy little bot the Humans invented had run a hard-line between their embassies so that they could talk securely without meeting face to face), then they’d gone over what would happen today. I am glad Henry and I were able to talk last night, though I do miss talking to him in person. Still, he’s right, we can’t be seen together too much if this is going to work. Something about the conversation has been bothering me, though. I just wish I could put my finger on what.
He watched the other Ambassadors trickle in to their seats. Henry in particular caught his eye. Something about him seemed off. Understanding hit him like a freighter: Henry is worried
. Most wouldn’t know it, but I’ve been around humans enough to know.
He took a look around, and saw the Arabso and Themircn also cast a few sidelong glances at Henry. Apparently someone has been paying attention to their new Embassy guards, at least enough to recognize worry in the species.
Just then Killintar finally strode out onto the speaker’s platform. Something about him is different, something more than that ridiculous piece of jewelry he decided to start wearing last week. He still walks with the same swagger, but something about it is different. It almost feels like the swagger is an act? Yes, that may be it. He doesn’t stand quite as straight as he used to, his eyes shift too much, and what used to be a grin is almost a grimace. Wait… that micro-expression when he looked at the Xaltan ambassador. What is going on?
Killintar made it to the podium and began speaking. No call to order, none of his usual grandstanding and relishing his position: he just… started a speech. “We have been called into an early session because, once again, the humans have decided to break with civility, rational action, tradition, the spirit of the law, and normal procedures of this council.
“Last night you were all sent a brief on the situation. To put the matter simply, the honorable Galshan Conglomerate entered into a mining compact with the humans on one of their worlds near Human space.
“As is inevitable when dealing with humans, friction arose. The humble and gracious Kothro took these frictions in stride. They made few protests, but were ignored when they did. Then humans began their bid for power within the League, and the stalwart Kothro could no longer bear to remain in partnership with the humans who threaten us all, particularly when they – a truly peaceful people – realized how much of the fruits of their labors were intended for war.
“So, last night, they made a last attempt to negotiate with the humans. I will give credit where it is due: they did come to me first and ask me to negotiate, but we all know how the humans respond to Xaltans these days, so I suggested that they ask the Venter for aid. What a clumsy lie! They asked me first, and then asked him if he had a problem with it! Why make such a lie?
Then Killintar locked eyes with him for just a moment with a hard, challenging stare. Enibal kept his face even and didn’t blink. That is why. To test me, see if I would call him out on the lie: He doesn’t entirely believe that we intend to remain neutral in this.
Killintar seemed to take his lack of expression as compliance and continued, “The Venter graciously agreed, and attempted to mediate with the humans. The noble Kothro sat for hours and pleaded with the humans to end their destructive course towards the rest of the League, and to swear that the fruits of their joint venture would not be used in war.” Ha! That prat handed over a list of demands as long as my arm, none of which said anything about how the metals of the mine might be used.
“When the humans refused, he tried to compromise on many of the points, to bargain and barter them down to something the humans would accept. I know that the honorable Venter Ambassador proposed many compromises as well. The Kortho even volunteered a great deal of their own treasure on some of the points, just to try to maintain peace within the League.” Oh, by the grace of Hishia! He made a bunch of mealy-mouthed noises about compromise, but made it clear that he expected humanity to comply with the list, which included enough reparations to the Xaltan, and a few races who have fought their mercs, to bankrupt nearly any government here!
It was all Enibal could do to keep his face still as Killintar continued reading –yes, reading! Enibal blinked in surprise, then composed himself again. Killintar never read anything in Council, he enjoyed the sound of his own voice too much.
The Prime Minister continued, “I spoke with Ambassador Roonda shortly after the meeting was abruptly cut off by the Human ambassador. Roonda was literally shaking, he had feared a violent outburst from the humans in the room. He gave me an extensive account of his attempt at negotiation, and I have read Ambassador Enibal’s report as well.
“Those reports are not for the faint of heart, my fellow sentients, and I will not have this Council divided over picking at the wording within them. I also wish to save you the stress of reading the threats made by humanity.”
Movement caught Enibal’s eye, and he saw Henry stand abruptly and start mashing buttons. Nothing happened of course. Henry got a strange look and pulled out a device. It fritzed in his hand so violently that Enbial could see it from where he stood. You knew that trick wasn’t going to work twice, Henry.
A small flicker of amusement crossed Killintar’s face, so fast Enibal nearly missed it, even with his skills. Normally he takes more joy in seeing a rival, particularly someone like Henry, stymed. I don’t like how subdued the man is.
Killintar continued. “The important point is the threats made by the humans. Just before abruptly ending the meeting and storming out – a serious breech of protocol and etiquette .” Yea, you old wind-bag, and one of your favorite tactics.
“the humans informed –did not negotiate, just informed – Ambassador Roonda that they would be retrieving everything they put into the project from the site: many millions of CSC’s worth of equipment and material.
“This would, of course, cripple any attempts to work that land. Ambassador Roonda attempted to negotiate a way for the humans to leave the material at the site, including generous payments and an agreement to share the profits until the material was paid off with interest, but the Human simply stated that they would be taking their material –by force, if necessary, and stormed out.” I am going to have no choice but to refute this! Why is he being so outrageous? Roonda offered a pittance, at best, for the equipment: not a fraction of its worth, and flatly informed Henry that Humanity would not be allowed to buy the products of the mine at any price.
“It is unconscionable that any Ambassador would take such unilateral action and declare such a naked threat of force without even coming to the Council for mediation. I do not say this to impugn our good Venter Ambassador, I know the Venter in general and our good Ambassador in particular have worked miracle after miracle in trying to bring the Humans to civilized behavior.
“However, one Ambassador is not the Council. Threats of war are a thing to be made openly, where others can hear perceived grievances and judge them on their merits; not whispered threats in back rooms.
“The humans then compounded their heinous offences by sending military troops – who they mysteriously, somehow, had stationed nearby – to oversee the removal of that equipment and their personnel. That the Humans abused the comms network meant for peaceful communication between worlds to send such a diabolical message is a point to be discussed in the future.
“They landed many battle-ready troops at the mining site, men who sprang from their drop-ships with weapons pointed at innocent miners, yelling conflicting orders and pushing them to the ground.
“This sort of violent response to a peaceful notice can not be tolerated. As Prime Minister, I put the following proposal before this Council:
“The humans will be given an official Censure by the Council.
“They will pay for the therapy required by so many peaceful mining men and women who were traumatized by angry humans threatening bloody murder with the guns we have all come to fear.
“They will pay damages in the amount of the cost of the equipment that they illegally removed from the site, as well as the costs associated with replacing it.
“They will then pay punitive damages, half to the Roonda and half to the League, in the amount of twice the costs mentioned above. This amount may seem steep, my fellows, but I think you will all agree that a strong message must be sent. We may not get so lucky next time, if the humans are allowed to run rampant like this.
“I will now put the proposed sanctions to a vote.” Killintar leaned forward over the podium, and Enibal had to work to keep from leaning back. For just a moment, as the lizard’s eyes swept the room, the old Killintar was back, with a gaze that promised dire retribution to any who opposed him.
The moment passed. Einbal took a deep breath, and waited for the Arabso Ambassador to make his move, as Henry had planned. He looked down to Henry and saw the man give a subtle signal – he scratched his nose – to the Arabso Ambassador. Wait. That isn’t the signal to proceed. That was the abort signal.
He looked at Henry’s face, and could see the man was worried. He turned his eyes back to the Arabso Ambassador, and his breath caught in his throat as he watched Ballud hit the button to signal for attention. He missed the cue! Not good. I know Henry had to have a good reason for aborting. What am I going to do?
Ballud’s request was not recognized, so he began to shout instead: Something about calling for a vote of censure and refusing to allow dissent being against protocol. Other voices joined him, and soon a general shout echoed through the chambers.
Killintar made a half-hearted effort to stare them down, but quickly relented with a flick of his wrist, then hit the button on his console. All of the mics in the Council Chamber went live at once, and all of those shouting voices were suddenly amplified. Enibal winced as so many voices exclaimed in surprise and pain, then everyone went silent. That rat bastard. He didn’t wince at all. I bet he had ear plugs in to start with!
Killintar stood there, arms folded, contempt on his face, and seemed to dare anyone to be the first to speak.
(Prev) (Wiki) (Next)
----------------------------------------------------------- So... a day later than usual posting this one: had a 1.2K mile or so round trip this weekend to see my nephew graduate, and didn't get home until \
far* too late. Thankfully I can flex a few minutes out of my work day today to get this one up now. This one is a bit shorter, because there isn't a half-descent stopping point for far too many words after this. Comments and corrections welcome, of course. Enjoy!*
(EDIT: 1.2K miles, not 12K miles. Missed a decimal. LOL.
The rest of the world uses Decimal Odds, in part because it’s easier to convert them to implied probabilities than American Odds.Decimal odds represent the amount a bettor wins for every $1 wagered.And the number represents the total return, not just the profit like American and fractional odds.. The Packers would be 1.714 in decimal odds as a -140 favorite in American odds. Divide 6 by 5. This equals 1.20. Add 1, and you had the decimal 2.20. How To Convert Decimal Odds To Fractional. There are two steps to convert decimal odds into a fraction. Step 1) Convert decimals odds into a fraction by subtracting 1, and using 1 as the denominator. Example: 3.40 – 1 = 2.40. This creates the decimal odds of 2.40/1. So 5/2 in decimal odds would be 3.5,6/1 would be 7.0 and so on. Odds, Probability & Implied Probability To make money out of sports betting, you really have to recognize the difference between odds and probability. Betting Odds Converter - Fraction to Decimal Convert those Betting odds from Fractions to Decimals or Decimal to Fraction using the chart below. TIP : Did you know that most online bookmakers allow you to select either the traditional Fractional odds or the Decimal equivalent when viewing their available books. For Negative Odds: 1 – (100 / American Odds) So converting the Bills from -200 is slightly different. 1 – (100/-200) = 1.5. Converting Decimal Odds to American Odds. If you still want to use American odds but only see a line in decimal odds at a European sportsbook, you can make the conversion.