5 minutes ago, austinfan said:

So you avoid mirrors?

no sometimes theyre practice. 

 

Out of the six first-round WR drafted (Ruggs, Jeudy, Lamb, Reagor, Jefferson, Aiyuk), how would the blog predict their rookie rankings in receptions and yards?

I’d be inclined to rank them:

1.  Jefferson — think he’ll be a volume target for the Vikings

2.  Reagor — he will be a tonic for a speed-lacking offense

3.  Ruggs — not a huge number of receptions, but big yards

4.  Jeudy — not sold on Drew Lock yet as his QB

5.  Lamb — great skills but he’ll be third target behind Cooper and Gallup (+Zeke)

6.  Aiyuk — Niners have some injuries but still lots of young talent at WR, plus Jimmy G might struggle 

1 hour ago, DEagle7 said:

The attending levels directly coorelate to the resident experience in most cases and I do not see the rampant toxicity that you're describing. And it's not just my school/residency experience. Between school and residency and now attending life for my wife and I we have gotten to know dozens from various and assorted programs, from Penn to small osteopathic schools and private offices, and no where have I seen this dissuading you're describing.  Surgical specialists are without a doubt more toxic from top to bottom interpersonally and financially OBGYN departments are far less squeezed than pretty much any generalist outpatient office, virtually any pediatric division and many hospitalist divisions. And that's not just my opinion, that's we'll documented from reports from plsces like Merritt Hawkings on revenue production.

They're somewhere around the 10-12th highest compensated specialty with one of the highest demands in the country. Physician satisfaction surveys they're typically smack dab in the middle. Again the data is readily available, robust and clearly does not support what you're saying. If you're looking solely to make money and work as little as possible sure maybe an advisor will steer you towards something else but by in large any training program is universally steering students away they are in the minority and doing their students a massive disservice. 

Eeh, I would strongly, strongly disagree with that.

Pediatrics is at or near the top of every quality of life and resident wellness metric.  Post-training, the financial situation is fairly dire and limited.  The result?  Peds internal medicine residencies are highly non-competitive.

Neurosurgery is at, not near, the bottom of every list for resident wellness, satisfaction, and abuses.  Quality  of life at the end of training is excellent...and it’s one of the 3 most competitive residences.  

Surgical specialties are certainly more toxic...but that’s the training, not the financial conditions imposed upon them afterwards, as it is with OB.  

Sure, there are options like plastics and derm that are excellent for both.  
 

To say that OB departments are not financially squeezed is just not true.  They are bleeding money across the country.  A private group in a wealthy suburb?  Sure, they are fine.  That’s not what we are talking about here.  A professor of obstetrics at Penn or Jefferson?  I'm sure they (personally) are doing just fine too.  But what they won't tell you is that the dept at Penn is bleeding over $30m per year and the university needs to redirect the revenue from other surgical subspecialties to keep them afloat.  

35 minutes ago, Desertbirds said:

Hard to repair a dead person.

Or put a limb back on.  But standard of care will differ as will what the physician is faced with. Very few people are killed by a doctor, they just aren’t saved.  Big difference but not to a lay jury who sees a grieving family versus a presumably rich doctor with plenty of insurance.  Hard to win with science to a lay jury.  Too often their eyes glaze and they don’t even consider the science, they just go with their emotive response.  Sometimes they will go with whose presentation they liked the most.

Biggest trial of my career had billions in damages really suffered. But not from any breach of duty but rather an act of God.  You can’t collect against God so they had to blame someone. Bring in hired experts and drum up a theory.  The plaintiffs experts were giving out junk science. It was bunk.  Our experts were superior and we had real science on our side.  We went with a trial to the judge, which is always a risk but motion practice had clearly revealed that the judge got the science. In about a couple hundred pages of his Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, he clearly laid out that he got the science.  It costs tens of millions to get that result.  

3 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Or put a limb back on.  But standard of care will differ as will what the physician is faced with. Very few people are killed by a doctor, they just aren’t saved.  Big difference but not to a lay jury who sees a grieving family versus a presumably rich doctor with plenty of insurance.  Hard to win with science to a lay jury.  Too often their eyes glaze and they don’t even consider the science, they just go with their emotive response.  Sometimes they will go with whose presentation they liked the most.

Biggest trial of my career had billions in damages really suffered. But not from any breach of duty but rather an act of God.  You can’t collect against God so they had to blame someone. Bring in hired experts and drum up a theory.  The plaintiffs experts were giving out junk science. It was bunk.  Our experts were superior and we had real science on our side.  We went with a trial to the judge, which is always a risk but motion practice had clearly revealed that the judge got the science. In about a couple hundred pages of his Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, he clearly laid out that he got the science.  It costs tens of millions to get that result.  

I'm going to flip sides for a second and acknowledge that this does happen, more often that we may like to believe.  It doesn't mean the doctor is bad or negligent, but it happens.  That's why malpractice litigation does exist.  

2 hours ago, Desertbirds said:

Yes indeed. The Republican Party will have to re-invent itself after Trump. The question, of course, is whether Trump has caused irreparable harm.

I genuinely hope that the progressive Democrats and the hard core conservatives in the Republican Party cause Main Streeters and Moderate Democrats to form a Moderate Party.  I believe such a party could be dominant in four to six years because I believe that the majority of people are in the middle. 

5 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I genuinely hope that the progressive Democrats and the hard core conservatives in the Republican Party cause Main Streeters and Moderate Democrats to form a Moderate Party.  I believe such a party could be dominant in four to six years because I believe that the majority of people are in the middle. 

That's a dream scenario if there ever was one.

41 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I genuinely hope that the progressive Democrats and the hard core conservatives in the Republican Party cause Main Streeters and Moderate Democrats to form a Moderate Party.  I believe such a party could be dominant in four to six years because I believe that the majority of people are in the middle. 

It would be fantastic and would unite the country,  but the initial steps in that direction are both brave and self destructive for a politician.  Not all independents are actually moderate, but the ones that are often find themselves with 2 massive enemies rather than a bridge between 2 allies.

Everyone expects Biden to choose a left wing radical as his running mate.  Imagine if he chose a Republican!!! The election would be over already.  Or imagine if the Republican challenger in 4 years chose a Democrat.  
 

I think the country, despite the video clips and sound bytes, is asking to be pulled together.  Such a gesture might be unbeatable in a general election.  

1 hour ago, Alphagrand said:

Out of the six first-round WR drafted (Ruggs, Jeudy, Lamb, Reagor, Jefferson, Aiyuk), how would the blog predict their rookie rankings in receptions and yards?

I’d be inclined to rank them:

1.  Jefferson — think he’ll be a volume target for the Vikings

2.  Reagor — he will be a tonic for a speed-lacking offense

3.  Ruggs — not a huge number of receptions, but big yards

4.  Jeudy — not sold on Drew Lock yet as his QB

5.  Lamb — great skills but he’ll be third target behind Cooper and Gallup (+Zeke)

6.  Aiyuk — Niners have some injuries but still lots of young talent at WR, plus Jimmy G might struggle 

I hope Reagor is #2.  Lamb will be going against the 3rd and 4th CBs.  I think he could have a good season, and with McCarthy they will throw much more than they have in the past.

52 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I genuinely hope that the progressive Democrats and the hard core conservatives in the Republican Party cause Main Streeters and Moderate Democrats to form a Moderate Party.  I believe such a party could be dominant in four to six years because I believe that the majority of people are in the middle. 

The Democratic Party is already split in 2, I can only hope something like this happens in the future where we’d have a little more consensus on social issues and climate change. 

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

To say that OB departments are not financially squeezed is just not true.  They are bleeding money across the country.  A private group in a wealthy suburb?  Sure, they are fine.  That’s not what we are talking about here.  A professor of obstetrics at Penn or Jefferson?  I'm sure they (personally) are doing just fine too.  But what they won't tell you is that the dept at Penn is bleeding over $30m per year and the university needs to redirect the revenue from other surgical subspecialties to keep them afloat.  

And to make it out as if they're primary culprits of financial strains on a hospital is just silly when we have annual revenue reports that show they're pretty much middle of the pack as a specialty.  Hell the backbone of Pennsylvania Hospital is their OBGYN department and it's literally the oldest hospital in the country. 

So to recap you've wildly exaggerated 1) OBGYN relative academic acheivement 2) the toxicity of OBGYN practices/programs/life 3) the financial strain that exists within the specialty and 4) the idea that schools push students away from the specialty. And again that's not opinion, that's fact based on AAMC resident match and demographic data, salary data, hospital revenue data, and quality of life surveys that are all readily available to the public. 

It's time to accept the L here. OBGYN is objectively a bad example to try and prove your point. Hell I'm a Pediatrician and even I'd admit thats a much better example of field with questionable cost/benefit academic achievement and systemic financial strains. 

On 6/24/2020 at 9:58 PM, BigEFly said:

When I get knocked off the ads pop up until I log back on. I got a Pray for Trump ad.

I made a change a few days ago, have you (or anyone else), seen any political ads when you're not logged in, in the past few days?

13 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

And to make it out as if they're primary culprits of financial strains on a hospital is just silly when we have annual revenue reports that show they're pretty much middle of the pack as a specialty.  Hell the backbone of Pennsylvania Hospital is their OBGYN department and it's literally the oldest hospital in the country. 

So to recap you've wildly exaggerated 1) OBGYN relative academic acheivement 2) the toxicity of OBGYN practices/programs/life 3) the financial strain that exists within the specialty and 4) the idea that schools push students away from the specialty. And again that's not opinion, that's fact based on AAMC resident match and demographic data, salary data, hospital revenue data, and quality of life surveys that are all readily available to the public. 

It's time to accept the L here. OBGYN is objectively a bad example to try and prove your point. Hell I'm a Pediatrician and even I'd admit thats a much better example of field with questionable cost/benefit and systemic financial strains. 

You are just plain wrong on the financial strain of OB/GYN.  Wrong.  Hospital systems across the country are scrambling to reallocate funds and constantly battling with other subspecialties.  It is the largest drain based on specialty.  I can speak for 3 large medical schools when I say they push students away from the specialty.  It's fact, as you say; you are just on the wrong side of it.  Just because scores and match rates aren't at the bottom does not mean that there is not talent re-direction and drain.

Do you have any idea how much money the OBGYN department in the Penn health system loses?  You literally just mentioned Pennsy.  Have you ever sat in on a conversation between the dean going to war with other surgical chairmen sucking money out of their departments just to keep OB running?

You are talking about the Penn system.  CHOP is profitable.  OB, inclusive of Pennsylvania hospital, is not.

OB/GYN is not the "culprit" here.  It's not their fault.  It's the system.

The worst is the Emergency Dept, but that's a different issue altogether.

7 hours ago, TEW said:

I was thinking this year. I love sports betting, and the more I've thought about it, the more I think there might be opportunity for a high upside value bet.

Last year he had 800 rushing and 500 receiving yards on 179 rushing attempts and 63 passing targets. That was sharing time early with Howard as well, and I think with the lack of depth at RB this year he's going to get a lot more reps.

From a team analysis view, he has little competition at the position AND I think the offense is set up perfectly to inflate his receiving numbers. With all of the speed we now have at WR plus Ertz and Goedert, plus Sanders'offseason emphasis on pass catching, I think Miles is set up perfectly to have a massive breakout year.

You put it at 15-20%, I'd put it at about a 10% probability.  But I wonder if the bookmakers might have it even lower at about a 5% chance, in which case with that kind of payout I'd be very interested in making the bet.  I think 1000 and 800 might be close to 50%, and I could also see the bookies putting that at 30% or so.

Agreed.

I think he has a better chance than most in the league.

I think the odds are probably much lower than that just based on how few have done it in the past.

I think Sanders will have over 1000 rushing and 600 to 700 receiving.

Would only take a couple break away plays for him to go over than, which is possible.

I think it's kind of tough to see how they use Miles this year with so many changes.

He's could probably only be even better 8n the passing game with D's having to focus on Djax (when on the field) and Reagor. That should open thing up for him even more one would think.

It's going to be fun to watch. That much is certain.

3 minutes ago, VaBeach_Eagle said:

I made a change a few days ago, have you (or anyone else), seen any political ads when you're not logged in, in the past few days?

I haven’t. Only been kicked off once though. Some sort of arthritis ad. 

1 hour ago, BigEFly said:

I genuinely hope that the progressive Democrats and the hard core conservatives in the Republican Party cause Main Streeters and Moderate Democrats to form a Moderate Party.  I believe such a party could be dominant in four to six years because I believe that the majority of people are in the middle. 

We just had this same exact conversation when my sister came down to visit last week.  
 

Sign us all up!  Moderate/Center Party 2020! 
 

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

You are just plain wrong on the financial strain of OB/GYN.  Wrong.  Hospital systems across the country are scrambling to reallocate funds and constantly battling with other subspecialties.  It is the largest drain based on specialty.  I can speak for 3 large medical schools when I say they push students away from the specialty.  It's fact, as you say; you are just on the wrong side of it.  

Do you have any idea how much money the OBGYN department in the Penn health system loses?  You literally just mentioned Pennsy.  Have you ever sat in on a conversation between the dean going to war with other surgical chairmen sucking money out of their departments just to keep OB running?

I think some of his family practice in that area, IIRC. 

3 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I think some of his family practice in that area, IIRC. 

This isn't something to take personally as a slight on OB/GYN.  It's a SACRED field.  It's not their fault.

Unwarranted outside influences on the medical field have turned OB/GYN, at a system level, into something that is financially non-viable and is seeing talent and resources drift into other...frankly...less essential and less important subspecialties.

So it's not a slight on them.  It's a warning sign as to what could be to come elsewhere. 

11 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

You are just plain wrong on the financial strain of OB/GYN.  Wrong.  Hospital systems across the country are scrambling to reallocate funds and constantly battling with other subspecialties.  It is the largest drain based on specialty.  I can speak for 3 large medical schools when I say they push students away from the specialty.  It's fact, as you say; you are just on the wrong side of it.  

Do you have any idea how much money the OBGYN department in the Penn health system loses?  You literally just mentioned Pennsy.  Have you ever sat in on a conversation between the dean going to war with other surgical chairmen sucking money out of their departments just to keep OB running?

You are talking about the Penn system.  CHOP is profitable.  OB, inclusive of Pennsylvania hospital, is not.

OB/GYN is not the "culprit" here.  It's not their fault.  It's the system.

The worst is the Emergency Dept, but that's a different issue altogether.

What "large" medical schools?  Because Jefferson, Penn, PCOM, Temple, And Drexel absolutely do not. Nor do any school in New England I've encountered since moving up here.  Nor should they considering the compensation and demand. It's just a ridiculous claim to make. 

And again the data on average revenue produced by specialty clearly demonstrates that, like so many of your other previous claims, are completely false. It sounds as if you have some very hospital specific very anecdotal evidence to back up your feelings but on the whole you're very simply wrong. 

4 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

What "large" medical schools?  Because Jefferson, Penn, PCOM, Temple, And Drexel absolutely do not. Not should they considering the compensation and demand. It's just a ridiculous claim to make. 

And again the data on average revenue produced by specialty clearly demonstrates that, like so many of your other previous claims, are completely false. It sounds as if you have some very hospital specific very anecdotal evidence to back up your feelings but on the whole you're very simply wrong. 

Interesting, because we are talking about the same health system.  You just used the word revenue.  OB/GYN revenue is not the problem.  The fact that you are referring to revenue suggests that you aren't grasping the whole picture here.  I'm no economist or accounting, but you know the difference between profit, loss, revenue, etc. Revenue is not the problem.

And if you think for a second that Penn & Jefferson's guidance teams aren't working their hardest to stuff their match lists with derm, ortho, radiology, and plastics, then you are naive about the process.  

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

Interesting, because we are talking about the same health system.  You just used the word revenue.  OB/GYN revenue is not the problem.  The fact that you are referring to revenue suggests that you aren't grasping the whole picture here.  I'm no economist or accounting, but you know the difference between profit, loss, revenue, etc. Revenue is not the problem.

If we're talking about the same systems then yes you're absolutely wrong about those systems pushing students away from OBGYN. I personally know OBs from every one of those schools in addition to going to one of them and attending classes/seminars in others. I don't know who told you that but it's undoubtably false. 

Then show me numbers. It's hard to take your claims seriously when you've been so clearly off on things like academic acheivement of the field. I have clear revenue  data that shows they bringing in plenty of money, and that's not even including the revenue from NICUs that come along with OB numbers. Again I know both doctors and admin at major hospitals  with large emphasis on OBGYN (pennsey (Penn) , Women and Infants (Brown) and Brigham (Harvard). OB isn't a massive breadwinner but it is far from the worst offender here. 

29 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

We just had this same exact conversation when my sister came down to visit last week.  
 

Sign us all up!  Moderate/Center Party 2020! 
 

Take gun control. Majority of voters, both Republican and Democrat, support expanded background checks, waiting periods of three days, "red flag” laws and some voluntary buyback programs.  To a lesser margin but still a majority, in both parties, voters favor bans on bump stocks, silencers, high capacity magazines and assault weapons. Yet Republicans see this as a third rail issue. Well moderate Republicans don’t tend to agree.  

Take Medicare for All.  The progressive wing of the Democrats want it and want it yesterday.  The moderates in the party favor universal availability of healthcare but not under government control of all healthcare with strict price fixing  

I suspect moderates and independents from both parties could get behind both positions but you wouldn’t be ostracized from the party if you had a contrary position. 

16 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

If we're talking about the same systems then yes you're absolutely wrong about those systems pushing students away from OBGYN. I personally know OBs from every one of those schools in addition to going to one of them and attending classes/seminars in others. I don't know who told you that but it's undoubtably false. 

Then show me numbers. It's hard to take your claims seriously when you've been so clearly off on things like academic acheivement of the field. I have clear revenue  data that shows they bringing in plenty of money, and that's not even including the revenue from NICUs that come along with OB numbers. Again I know both doctors and admin at major hospitals  with large emphasis on OBGYN (pennsey (Penn) , Women and Infants (Brown) and Brigham (Harvard). OB isn't a massive breadwinner but it is far from the worst offender here. 

Here you are talking about revenue again.  Let’s talk about costs.  Do you know what it costs to insure an obstetrician annually?  Did you know that Penn, for a few years, sent their med students to outside health system community hospitals instead of HUP to avoid the situation there?  They couldn’t afford to send them to their own OB department for liability reasons.  (They did still send students to Pennsy).

Aside from the ED, the most money is redirected from other depts into OB at Penn.  And it’s not close.  Granted, that was several years ago.  But where I went after Penn had the same parallel. Where I am now...same difference.

This debate is boring for everyone else.  It’s not even politics...now it’s about the esoteric finances and happiness index of one medical subspeciality. 

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Here you are talking about revenue again.  Let’s talk about costs.  Do you know what it costs to insure an obstetrician annually?  Did you know that Penn, for a few years, sent their med students to outside health system community hospitals instead of HUP to avoid the situation there?

Aside from the ED, the most money is redirected from other depts into OB at Penn.  And it’s not close.  Granted, that was several years ago.  But where I went after Penn had the same parallel. Where I am now...same difference.

Yes actually.  And Penn medicine departments are notoriously toxic. Hell their Urology department had their residents working 120 hours a week (even after the hour restrictions), copying paper charts because they didn't feel like learning a new system, and threatened firing and legal action to the whole class when someone reported them. A Penn medical department being too toxic for students absolutely does not prove your point at all. 

And again, if you don't like revenue show me profit numbers. Because you've been dramatically off on testing numbers and the idea that people are getting pushed away from the specialty so it's very very hard to take your word in something at this point. Show me cost vs revenue of your average OBGYN department and associated units (PETU nursery and NICU). Because that's not even close to what I've seen at all.