I had a phone interview and then 8 in-person thirty minute interviews for my internship in junior year of college. It was a full day event for an actuarial internship. I was 20 years old in a suit and scared shitless, but hey at least I do a damn good interview these days. You learn fast when that's your first interview experience for a "real job".

Well, the data here shows they almost always fill their stadiums. Average attendance is 91% of average max capacity. That's insanely good. Means almost every NBA game is sold out.

It's explained by supply vs demand.

Baseball has 162 games per season. No other sport on this list comes close to that. Next highest is NHL and NBA at 82 games. Baseball stadiums also have relatively high max capacity as you can see.

Twice as many games as NBA and twice as much max capacity explain the bigger gap between avg attendance and max capacity. What ends up happening is that there are so many games and seats that fans pick and choose the "best" games to attend (with best opponents). In NBA seats are so scarce that you just pick whatever you can afford.

I think this is a weird way of doing it. If I understand correctly, the jump in Ballmer's line at the end of his tenure (i.e. approaching Feb 2014) is an artificial jump that you as the data visualizer caused by forcing the Ballmer line to go back to where the Nasaq's line is at so that Nadella's portion of the line gets a equal starting point to Nasdaq, yes? The price didn't actually jump up at end of Ballmer's tenure like that, right? That's deceptive, if so, even if the visualization is captioned to try to explain it.

I would've just made two different charts and then put them side by side. One for Ballmer vs Nasaq and a second for Nadella vs Nasdaq. That way you get the intended effect without that unintended deception.

I don't understand how the guy still scores so many points. He's lumbering around the court these days, but still finds points.

His game is totally different from what it was 10 years ago. That's normal for an older player, but what doesn't seem normal is how he is still so effective. Different playstyle from 10 years ago, but still scoring points left and right.

That video, and this analysis in general, is perhaps the highest quality piece of content I've ever seen on this subreddit. To anyone reading this, please take a moment to consider if this post is worth upvoting. Even if you're someone who doesn't normally upvote or downvote posts, I'd urge you to do it this time around. It deserves it.

I can be more precise: My suspicion is that offensive rating would correlate better with win rate than defensive rating would correlate with win rate.

The 49ers have one of the best offenses on this chart. Looks like 5th best. They only support my belief.

The big takeaway for me is that offense has more impact on win rate than defense.

Compare the Patriots and Chiefs. Very symmetrical positions on this chart, but Patriots are defense heavy whereas Chiefs are offense heavy. Yet the Chiefs went 14-3 and Patriots went 8-9. According to this, the Patriots had the 2nd best defense in the entire league and had a middle of the pack offense, and yet they went 8-9. That says a lot to me.

I don't like when people say stuff like that last sentence.

"You'll get where you want to be."

"You can be anything you want."

This is well intentioned, but harmful. I'm 5'11''. Realistically, I had no chance of becoming a professional basketball player.

Even with the best possible interpretation, the main problem with the sentiment is that it makes it sound like you'll get where you want to go just by continuing on the path you've been going. In reality though, chances are that in order for most people to get where they want to go they'd need to make significant changes and put in a lot of hours of work.

A much better sentiment, imo, is "there are many goals in life which can be planned+worked up to a 100% success rate, but only if you're willing. Pick your goals intelligently, don't forget to take care of yourself along the way, and make sure you're enjoying life."

I'm going to start calling people like you "picky eaters". Someone gives you a bowl of ice cream for free and your comment back is "but it doesn't have a cherry on top".

A data set can be useful even if it isn't a comprehensive representative of a situation covering every possible facet. I too often see comments like yours on this subreddit that suggest this data is lacking some key factor and therefore is flawed. You're right that there exists another factor that would help us better understand the situation, but that doesn't mean this data visualization is bad or suboptimal. You have all sorts of limitations when doing data visualizations, like limitations of your data, limitations of time (e.g. making simple 2D visualizations is MUCH faster than doing more sophisticated stuff in d3js), limitations of the READER'S ability to comprehend the visualization, and limitations of the reader's patience.

And you're going to come back and be like "oh, well, I didn't mean it that way. I just think it could be improved" blah blah blah. Nah. Bullshit. This subreddit is overrun by negative nancies coming in just smacking their lips ready to shit on every upvoted thread in this subreddit, when in reality they're perfectly respectable and useful data visualizations. Just a bunch of haters who are so negative and don't give props to the OP, and there's so many of you that comments like yours get upvoted to the top of threads. Fuck that. Ruins the sub imo.

Spanish has always seemed like a much simpler language than English to me and it's interesting to see this data sort of confirm that.

I feel like the Spanish speakers use way less vocabulary and slang than English speakers. I expect that spoken Spanish is a much more efficient language than spoken English at efficiently conveying simple communications, but that English is a much more efficient language than Spanish at conveying complex communications.

If I had to teach an Alien race to communicate with humans, I'd teach them Spanish.

If I had to teach an Alien race how to write good novels, I'd teach them English.