Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper16
Allow me to draw up an analog to demonstrate how much you're off:
*said to a poster who studies astrophysics as a hobby*
''You're not an astrophysicist. You're some guy on a message board, like pretty much everyone else who is posting. You can read every new academic journal, break down mathematics from published studies, and write dissertations of comparative thought in the field and it doesn't make your opinion inherently worth anything more that some schmuck who's common knowledge consists of 5 minutes of reading a wikipedia article on Stephen Hawking."
|
Your analogy fails: no offense intended. In theory, astrophysics is a semi-certain discipline: or an 'exact science' as it were. It's not quite as definitive as mathematics, but it's much farther down that path than scouting players to project their future success in an entirely different league. Drafting is not an exact science.
Do you take advice about mothering from a woman who's 5 kids have all ended up on drugs or in prison just because she's been a mother? That analogy sucks, too, but it's no worse than yours. For areas that have no definitive answers, you look to past success as a means of weighing possible current and future accuracy.