A Quote by John W. Henry

Choosing players in any sport is an imperfect science. — © John W. Henry
Choosing players in any sport is an imperfect science.
Economics is a theoretical science and as such abstains from any judgement of value. It is not its task to tell people what ends they should aim at. It is a science of the means to be applied for attainment of ends chosen, not, to be sure, a science of the choosing of ends. Ultimate decisions, the valuations and the choosing of ends, are beyond the scope of any science. Science never tells a man how he should act; it merely shows how a man must act if he wants to attain definite ends.
Speaking on all of it in general, I think we, as MMA fighters, should be getting paid just as well as the NBA players, the NFL players and Major League Baseball, hockey as well, I'm not trying to skip any sport as I don't think any sport is superior to the other.
It is you who are choosing, in any moment, to be happy or choosing to be sad, or choosing to be angry, or forgiving, or enlightened, or whatever. You are choosing.
Ask any coach in any sport, and they'll tell you that cutting players is their least favorite thing to do. No coach enjoys having to tell players who have worked so hard and for so long on a dream that they are no longer on the team.
Public policy is a study in imperfection. It involves imperfect people, with imperfect information, facing deeply imperfect choices - so it's not surprising that they're getting imperfect results.
I've been asked a lot lately if tennis is clean or not. I don't know any more how you judge whether a sport is clean. If one in 100 players is doping, in my eyes that isn't a clean sport.
Everything you see is filtered through your visual system (imperfect) and your brain (also imperfect, despite what your mom told you). Witness testimony is the worst kind of evidence in science.
BMX is still a young sport in Olympic terms. So the sport science behind it is also relatively new. As a program, it's only going to get better as the sport gets bigger and more extreme.
I love science, and it pains me to think that so many are terrified of the subject or feel that choosing science means you cannot also choose compassion, or the arts, or be awed by nature. Science is not meant to cure us of mystery, but to reinvent and reinvigorate it.
Sport strips away personality, letting the white bone of character shine through. Sport gives players an opportunity to know and test themselves. The great difference between sport and art is that sport, like a sonnet, forces beauty within its own system. Art, on the other hand, cyclically destroys boundaries and breaks free.
I think that what's happening is that girls are enjoying playing. It's a lot more acceptable, and now we have a Women's Super League with hugely dedicated female role models - really committed players who people can see are dedicated and training as hard if not harder than any male players - that's all progressing the sport.
I made a better decision in choosing my team. Sure, I had a bigger choice of players to choose from - but I couldn't have asked for a harder working group of players who did an incredible job.
If, on occasion, the knowledge brought by science leads to an unhappy end, this is not to the discredit of science but is rather an indication of an imperfect ability to use wisely the gifts placed within our hands.
Sport strips away personality, letting the white bone of character shine through. Sport gives players an opportunity to know and test themselves.
I don't think we can even compare ourselves to the Japanese or the Chinese players in any way, given their richly-funded programs and their methodical approach to sport.
It's kind of interesting on a team sport because you have young players, you have older players, you have veterans. But ultimately, when you step in between those lines, you're just a player.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!