Monthly Archives: September 2021

Photo: Visitors admire the iconic Darwin statue at London's Natural History Museum, by Thomas Fabian, via Flickr.

Evolution is best understood as a theological research program, according to a newarticleby biophysicist Cornelius G. Hunter. This stands the standard historiography and received wisdom concerning the development of modern evolutionary theory on its head. While leaders of the Darwinian bandwagon insist we all must bow to the blind, directionless forces of evolution or be forced to wear theunscientificdunce cap, Hunter demonstrates with telling accuracy, quite the opposite: it is in actuality theologynot sciencethat drives this theory. Of course this research programs principal investigator was Charles Darwin, and the epithet he chose for himself, a Devils chaplain which he shared in aletter on July 13, 1856, to his close friend and confidant Joseph Dalton Hooker is revealing:

What a book a Devils chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low & horridly cruel works of nature!

Expressed with mischievous glee while his 230-page 1844 manuscript draft lay in wait for Alfred Russel Wallaces surprise letter from the tiny island of Ternate, to prompt delivery of his one long argument into the hands of publisher John Murray some three years later, this frank comment confirms Hunters analysis.

Ill return to this in a moment, but first its important to note that Hunter answers claims of Darwinian orthodoxy. They are as follows: Darwins religious viewspreceded(not followed) his transmutation ideas; Darwins theological premises areessential(not peripheral) to his argument; Darwins references to theology attachdirectsignificance to the theory itself he is not practicingreductiotheology, employing it merely for its contrastive heuristic effect the theology and the theory are inextricably intertwined; the epistemic assistance received from theology is central to the theory itself (the scientific evidence marshalled on its behalf is pretty thin); and finally, Darwins theological claims persisted well into the period of the neo-Darwinian synthesis (1930s and 40s) and after. Readers should examine the article itself to see how Hunter establishes each point, all supported with extensive references.

But what of this Devils chaplain? Notice that Darwin is telling Hooker that thedeficienciesof nature its disutilities, inefficiencies, even itscruelties are nothing a benevolent and omniscience god would have done, therefore, his theory based on chance and unguided fortuitous circumstance must be true. He even admits to not writing as a scientist but as a Devils chaplain who sees nature for what it is. Theres not a spot of science in it. But itisshot through with theological significance; it assumes what kind of world god might or might not have created.

Hunter effectively follows up on Darwins private confession by using his public statements many of which come from multiple editions ofOrigin. Hunter observes that Darwins scientific asseverations cameafterhis religious convictions were well formed. We know this because while in Edinburgh when he was just 17 Darwin fell under the spell of Robert Edmond Grant, an acknowledged expert on aquatic invertebrates. Darwin claimed years later in hisAutobiographythat Grants radical ideas a man described by Darwins biographersDesmond and Mooreas a freethinker . . . [who] saw no spiritual power behind natures throne were received without any effect on my mind. But even an otherwise sympathetic biographer likeJanet Brownecalls this far too disingenuous and phlegmatic to accept. The Devils chaplain attended Grants seminary and his evolutionary theory was substantively informed by it. Hunters thesis is well stated and confirmed by the Devils chaplain himself!

This essay does much to set the record straight; it is an excellent distillation of some very complex issues and contains important analyses not available elsewhere. The simplistic and shallow use of Darwinism as synonymous with science is completely wrong. Readers finding this article interesting and provocative should go further. Admitting that many historical details are beyond the scope of this article, Professor Hunter offers much more in hisDarwins God,Darwins Proof, andSciences Blind Spot.

I will end with a brief postscript. I have always sharedNeal Gillespie,Silvan Schweber, andFrank Burch Brownsviews that Darwin was a positivist deeply influenced by Auguste Comte (see myIntelligent Evolution). It might be assumed that the positivists attempt to eschew all metaphysics in favor of a hard verificationism would free Darwin from any association with religion and religious speculation. But this misunderstands Comtean positivism.

PhilosopherHenry Thomashas rightly called Comtes ideas a scientific philosophical religion. Even more to the pointMabel V. Wilsonexplained long ago that Comte never made a separation of his religion from his philosophy, but always regarded the former as an opportunity for the symbolic representation of his ideas. Replace the wordphilosophywith the wordscienceand you have fairly well stated Darwins position. His attributions of an omniscient and all-benevolent god are signposts of their incommensurability with a manifestly imperfect nature. By creating god as a facile abstraction and anthropomorphizing nature as cruel (bothof which are essentially theological constructs) Darwin could play the role of reconciler. Heneeded inan immediate and literal sense what Jonathan Wells has called astraw godto bolster and confirm his science. Once Darwins straw god goes up in flames, so does his science. His theory rests upon ashes.

Excerpt from:

Evolution as a Theological Research Program - Discovery Institute

According to a fifth-century midrash, man was created on the first day of Tishrei. The Jewish New Year, in other words, is the birthday of humankind. But whereas in that biblical story man was created 5,782 years ago in one fell swoop (Vayehi, or Let there be), science demonstrates that Homo sapiens appeared some 200,000 years ago, at the end of a process lasting hundreds of thousands of years.

In fact, this process has not ended. The evolution of the human race continues, and there are scholars who claim that this is happening at a particularly rapid pace, in every one of us.

The median artery is the one that initially carries blood from the mother to her fetus forearm. Later, two other arteries develop to replace it and it usually disappears. Recently, though, researchers discovered that if in the past, cases of the median artery remaining in place were rare, they are increasingly common nowadays.

In the mid-19th century, the median artery was found in only 10 percent of adults, whereas today it is found in 30 percent of those born at the end of the 20th century a substantial increase for a short evolutionary period. By the end of the present century, researchers estimate, most of humankind will have three arteries in their forearm.

KarlSkorecki, the dean ofBar-IlanUniversitys Azrieli Faculty of Medicine in Safed, who studies the influence of evolutionary processes on human health, believes that human evolution is undoubtedly continuing. The growing population and the rise in the age of parenthood are increasing the possibilities for genetic mutations, which are the underlying engines of evolution, he says.

Culture also has a great influence on our adaptation to our environment. The behavior patterns of young people, who spend a lot of time on technological devices and social media, are likely to have implications for evolutionary developments, as may migration movements and increases in population density.

Despite the tremendous success of medications, vaccines and hygiene, despite the relative abundance of food and the unprecedented ability of the individual to control his local temperature, the three major forces of natural selection infectious pathogens, climate and nutrition are still highly relevant, as we can clearly see today.

For Prof. Zeev Hochberg of the Rappaport Faculty of Medicine at the Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, evolution hasnt stopped. Instead, it has accelerated.

Evolution depends on the environment in which we live, which is currently changing faster than in any other period, he says. In a recent study I conducted with Dr. Alina German from Haemek Hospital in Afula, and Prof. Gustavo Mesch of the University of Haifa, we examined the height of people in various countries.

We found that where there is more stress for example, in countries with a high level of violence people are shorter. There is even a correlation between corruption and economic inequality and height. Thats an example of the connection between the environment and human evolution. During the past 150 years, the average height was constantly increasing. However, thats no longer the case with the past generation. The cultural influence on evolution is faster and stronger today than previously, and this is evident in a variety of features.

The six stages of life

Cultural influences are also evident in the most basic framework of the course of our lives. Life history is an approach that explains the course of our lives from an evolutionary aspect. It was found that humankind has six stages of life that are distinct from one another in biological terms: infancy (from birth to age 1); childhood (up to the age of 5 to 6 in boys, and 6 to 7 in girls); juvenility (which lasts up to age 10 in girls, and age 11 in boys); adolescence (to age 14 for girls and age 16 for boys); emerging adulthood (up to age 24); and, finally, adulthood.

The division into stages of life developed in evolutionary terms for millions of years, Hochberg says. For chimpanzees, for instance, and in early man, there was no childhood or adolescence. Childhood as a distinct biological period after the infant has stopped nursing, but before he can be independent to some degree appeared only 700,000 years ago.

Adolescence is also a human innovation, first surfacing 200,000 years ago. During adolescence, we grow 12 centimeters [nearly 5 inches] a year, compared to 6 centimeters in childhood, and we find this acceleration only in relatively modern man. For other species and earlier human beings, growth was at a constant rate, Hochberg explains.

A series of studies found that in the seam line between each stage of life and that following it, important characteristics are determined.

In a study I conducted with Prof. [Kerstin] Albertsson Wikland of the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, it was found, for example, that our height is to a large extent determined in the transition from infancy to childhood, Hochberg continues. The living conditions of an infant during the weeks when this transition takes place determine 13 centimeters of his final height out of the 25 to 30 centimeters thats the total difference between tall and short people.

Similarly, he adds, part of the difference between peoples life expectancy is determined in the transition from juvenility to adolescence. Those who mature late will live longer, Hochberg declares.

Another Swedish study discovered that what determines life expectancy in men includes, among other things, the living conditions and quality of life during the transition to adolescence. When the conditions are better, sexual maturity comes earlier accompanied by a certain shortening of life expectancy. In all other stages, good living conditions do not harm life expectancy. Early maturity means that fertility comes more quickly, which is what interests nature, Hochberg says. But this earlier onset comes at the expense of years of life.

The stages of life, which were determined throughout evolution, continue to change even now, at an accelerated rate.

Adolescence, for example, underwent a major change in recent centuries, Hochberg notes. If 150 years ago the onset of menstruation was at the age of 16.5 on average, today its at the age of 12.5. On the other hand, emotional and behavioral maturity is actually later.

The infancy stage is also undergoing great changes.

In early human societies, all the children nursed until the age of 2.5 to 3, and the transition from infancy to childhood took place at age 3, he says. Today, the transition takes place at age 1 and sometimes even earlier, since there are babies who dont nurse at all, and some who nurse for half a year to a year (based on the parents decision). Incidentally, the transition takes place at an early age even for someone who nurses for three years, because its already in our genes.

Because infancy is shorter, childhood begins earlier. The transition to the next stage remains unchanged, though, so childhood has become much longer. This shows that the invention of childhood was a very big success in evolutionary terms, Hochberg says.

Evolution is a random process and here this random thing was successful. Why? Because when theres childhood, the mother nurses for two to three years, and then she can have another child, and meanwhile the tribe will take care of the child or the grandmother, who plays an important biological role in human society. Among chimpanzees, on the other hand, the mother nurses for five years. In other words, until juvenility, and then she can only have another offspring once every six years.

In other words, the addition of a stage between infancy and juvenility enabled man to have more offspring. Today, infancy has become even shorter and its possible to give birth every year. There are some people who do that, and in evolutionary terms theyre actually more successful than those who have fewer children.

Moving up the adolescence stage, on the other hand, did not lead to its lengthening, since it continues, like before, for about five years for boys and four for girls.

What has lengthened is the next stage, that of emerging adulthood, which begins earlier and lasts as in the past until age 24. Until that age, Hochberg says, there isnt really adulthood: the sex hormones are different from those in adulthood, as is behavior and decision-making ability.

Its a particularly dangerous stage, because although they look mature, these young people still behave in a thoughtless manner. In Africa, its clear to members of the Maasai people that at the age of 18 they can play sex games, but wont marry before the age of 24. Those who marry at an earlier age are actually acting against nature.

There is a good reason for the prolonging of the emerging adulthood stage, he adds: Its very complicated to be an adult in the modern world. You have to learn a lot, especially in terms of emotions. If the stage is longer, theres more time to prepare you for adulthood.

Cultural changes trump genetic ones

Dr. Oren Kolodny of the Hebrew University also deals with the influence of culture on evolution. Im often asked whether human beings have been released from evolution does natural selection still work? Does survival of the fittest still operate on us? It seems as though these are no longer relevant. But the answer is that evolution is definitely relevant to us. Diseases, for example, have always been a major selective force, and repeatedly we find that adaptations that occurred were strongly related to changes in the immune system due to dealing with pathogens. This is still happening, as we can even even see in the current COVID pandemic. So, evolution in the classical sense continues, he says, but its not the most important or interesting thing happening in human beings.

He continues: The more interesting aspects of our evolution relate to our interaction with the environment and the way we shape it and how these influence us in return. If you think about the theory of evolution as an attempt to explain the place and trajectory of species in the world over time, then the direction in which humankind is going is dictated far less by genetic changes and far more by cultural ones.

Genes dictate the translation of proteins, Kolodny says, but they also affect behavior, and behavior determines how we shape the environment.

In order to understand the place of an organism in the world, I look at its phenotype, which is an expression of the genes. But the nest a termite builds is part of its phenotype just as much as length of its antennae or its hind legs. In the same way, our entire world of beliefs, our language, what we build, is our expanded phenotype, and it changes much more, and much faster, than genetics, he explains.

The behavioral phenotype of activities like termites building a nest is described by an important evolutionary concept called niche construction.

The classical concept of the evolutionary process is that theres an environment, and organisms have to adapt themselves to it. Occasionally, theres an environmental change and then an individual that is more adapted to the new environment thanks to a genetic variant that it carries will be more successful, Kolodny says. Thats the basic model for evolution and adaptation.

But in effect, the situation is more complex and more interesting: Many species not only adapt themselves to the environment, but also change the environment to suit themselves. Beavers, for instance, can build dams that create lakes that are many kilometers in size and change the ecosystem even for a period of 10 generations into the future. This is the source of the idea that theres a hereditary system parallel to the inheritance of genes inheriting the environment, or the niche, from my ancestors, which I changed a little more, and transmit to my offspring, who will continue to nurture it and transmit it further: to work the land and preserve it.

A unique case of niche construction is building a cultural niche. For beavers, for example, building dams is an instinctive act. An experiment found that if a beaver hears the noise of running water, it will build a dam even if its cage is dry. Human beings are also intensively engaged in building niches, Kolodny says, but for us, the knowledge is mainly cultural rather than instinctive.

For example, early humans and Neanderthals who lived up until 50,000 years ago did not build walls at all, says Kolodny, not even on the level of a few stones to protect them from the wind. Architecture appeared late, although its very useful, and its not quite clear why this was the case. Part of the answer is that if you arent exposed to a cultural concept, you wont be able to implement it. If you never encountered something built, you wont build.

The emergence of the concept of building is an Archimedean point. What little children can now do without any problem, our ancestors were unable to do even though their cognition was similar to ours. It simply didnt occur to them. So in evolutionary terms, were exposed to a physical environment but also a cultural one, and it is no less important.

A key characteristic of our species, according to Kolodny, is the construction of niches in a way that enables entry into new environments. Thats how we spread to all the habitats on Earth, and are even thinking of spreading beyond it. Changing the environment is nothing new. For example, in traditional Middle Eastern societies, they began to cut down forests to make room for agriculture thousands of years ago and thats what shaped the environment we see nowadays. Today, were doing it on an unprecedented scale, some of which isnt in the best interests of our species.

Contrary to common belief, Kolodny adds, evolutionary processes do not always lead to long-term adaptation. Even environmental changes that organisms make to their environment might help them in the short term but prove destructive in the long run.

Predators, for example, are likely to destroy the species they prey upon if the system gets out of balance for some reason, he says. A virus, a bacterium or a parasite may be so lethal that they kill all their hosts and thus destroy themselves.

Human beings are also sometimes pushed into such an activity. Recently, there was a stretch of dry years in the Namibian desert and the hunter-gatherers in the region were forced to strip the bark from trees there, to serve as nourishment. They did so knowing that it would kill the trees, a critical resource for their long-term survival. Human culture is also developing today in a very destructive direction not for lack of choice, as happened in Namibia, but out of choices made for economic, social and cultural considerations.

We live in a world thats no longer very suitable for us, sighs the Technions Hochberg. We were created in Africa, where day and night were equal in length, and now theres electricity and we live in the light 18 hours a day. We were created to live a simple life, and were living in a world full of stress.

This has no positive consequences, he says. Man today is in a process of deterioration. Up until maybe 50 or 100 years ago, the world in which we lived improved. But in recent decades it has become worse in various ways, and natural selection is accelerating that. Man today as a species is less suited to the environment, which he has created.

Visit link:

Modern life is accelerating human evolution and that can prove destructive - Haaretz

Esports has grown exponentially in recent years, expanding into a major industry that shows no signs of slowing momentum.

Indeed, the esports ecosystem is on pace this year to surpass $1 billion in revenue for the first time.

Yet, even as esports is coming into its own, not everyone understands exactly what it is and why it matters.

TechNewsWorld spoke with several esports aficionados to hear what they had to say about the evolution of esports, whats driving its popularity, and what to expect from this burgeoning industry going forward.

The growth of video gaming itself is well-documented, to the point that I would say that gaming is no longer a subculture gaming is culture, Luke Cotton, COO Code Red Esports, an esports agency in London, told TechNewsWorld.

People love to compete and to watch competition, so the growth of esports is natural. Young people are growing up with the internet, with games, with esports, and with YouTube and Twitch being their primary forms of entertainment where they are consuming gaming and esports content, he noted.

Every year, the esports audience increases, as young people growing up dont know a world different from this one.

At a time when people are turning to a variety of alternative digital arenas for entertainment, esports has emerged as the activity of this era.

Esports just makes sense, Andy Miller, CEO of NRG, professional gaming and entertainment company in Los Angeles, told TechNewsWorld. One in three people on the planet play games every week, [so] of course they want to see the best in the world play the games they play and love.

The average age of the NRG fan is 25, he continued. They have grown up playing and watching others play games, and this has chipped away at traditional media consumption.

Restrictions caused by the pandemic, as well, have helped to fuel an industry that had already been taking off.

The global esports and games streaming business has indeed grown exponentially the last few years, but [it] spiked significantly last year due to stay-at-home restrictions, Aaron Speach, CEO and founder of Esports Technologies, explained to TechNewsWorld.

His company is a provider of esports product, platform and marketing solutions that is developing wagering products for esports fans and bettors.

People were looking for a community and a way to connect with others during that time, and the online nature of esports contributed to this perfect storm of events that helped boost its popularity, Speach noted.

Though esports began as a cottage industry of people connected by a passion for video games, its quickly grown to become a multimillion-dollar market.

Initially, esports was a grassroots pursuit, driven by passion, with events mostly taking place online, or sometimes in school halls, in hotel ballrooms, or at LAN centers, rather than the sold-out stadiums that we see today, said Cotton.

Whilst there were occasional major events with prize money, players were rarely paid and were playing solely for the love of the game. Whilst that love remains, it was a distant world from the multimillion-dollar contracts signed by professional players nowadays, colossal prize pools which rival and often eclipse traditional sports, and the associated celebrity status, he observed.

The growth in esports has been as much about the evolution of technology as anything.

The most transformative moments for esports were technological: the introduction of free online broadcasting services, such as Justin.TV which later became Twitch was the catalyst for making esports widely accessible from a viewing perspective, enabling drastic audience growth, said Cotton.

Prior to such services, broadcasting was very challenging, with significant bandwidth costs to broadcast video even to a small number of viewers, he recalled. Widespread high-speed home broadband enabled increased participation and the consumption of such broadcasts.

The growth in esports has, in turn, attracted investment dollars that have helped to facilitate even more growth.

Recently there has been a large influx of investment dollars into the space, with more and more mainstream acceptance, Bill Elafros, founder of Toronto-based Elafros Consulting, told TechNewsWorld. Hes also co-founder of Beat Invitational; an esports consultancy and tournament organization service in Canada.

Thirteen- to 34-year-olds no longer watch as much television and are turning to other outlets to spend time. When I started a decade ago, the stakes were much lower overall in the esports space. Investment dollars have funneled in, competition is stiffer, sponsors are more selective, and production demands are much higher.

You could get away with smaller prize pools before, whereas now, a live event can run in the high six or low seven figures, depending on scope.

Years ago, you could potentially get away without having a broadcast, without instant replays. Now its become common practice to have that and an additional production staff on top, he explained.

One significant shift in the esports arena has been the growth in spectatorship.

The most recent evolution of esports has seen it somewhat split into two different forms, observed Cotton.

The more traditional form of esports, which is the pinnacle of competition, with the best players in the world competing in stadiums for huge prizes; and esports as entertainment, with Twitch-native personalities creating competitive gaming content and interacting directly with their fans and entertaining them, rather than having their sole focus as winning, he described.

I expect both paths to continue and thrive, [and for] there to be continued increased interest from traditional sports and entertainment, he predicted. As esports audience continues to grow, its young audience goes through life and increases their disposable income, and as such, brands place more focus on the sector.

As both technology and games evolve, so will esports itself.

New games come out all the time, NRGs Miller told TechNewsWorld. The next big esport is around the corner. New ways to view streaming and interact as a fan are also developing in the esports and game streaming space. Virtual reality is also a super-exciting prospect for the future, with the ability to merge human athletics within video game settings.

Along with the types of games available, the definition of esports is, itself, changing.

The definition of esports is continuously evolving over time. Competitive gaming has evolved from the 1v1 shooter arena days into a much broader category of games, said Elafros.

You have a lot of crossovers from traditional sports now, with F1 sim racing, soccer, and more trying to get that lucrative 18-to-34 audience to convert them into regular fans, as well. Additionally, many roles and job opportunities that do not exist in the esports industry will become in high demand soon, as the industry continues to evolve and mature, he explained.

Ultimately, esports will continue to take the lead in an ever-evolving digital ecosystem that its helped to create.

Esports is growing rapidly year over year and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, Seth Mason, founder and CMO of The Esport Company, in Johnstown, Pa. told TechNewsWorld.

Professional athletes in the major sports play and market esports, [and] musicians, artists, and more showcase that its not just for the person in moms basement anymore, he maintained.

Esports is beginning to shake off the negative stigma that surrounded it during the early 2010s, Mason contended. The future for esports is around education and developing the career fields around esports to create a pipeline of opportunities to work in the industry.

Read more:

The Esports Evolution: Out of the Basement, Into Arenas - TechNewsWorld

When I first started trading and investing, I held a set of very traditional beliefs about the stock market. Some of those beliefs were developed in business school at the University of Michigan, and some of them developed from listening to 'experts' in the popular media.

The conclusion that I reached was that if I wanted to be a great investor and make a lot of money, then I should approach the market like giant mutual funds and institutions. These pros were often on television talking about how they were buying certain S&P 500 stocks and were holding them for years. Warren Buffett was held in god-like esteem by many who believed it was simple to do what he did. It seemed logical to conclude that to outperform these folks, all I had to do was use the same style but pick better stocks and wait for my genius to be proven.

There were several problems with this thinking. The first was I didn't have the patience for it. I sat on some big-cap stocks like IBM (IBM) and Coca-Cola (KO) for years and had some gains, but there was no way I was going to produce substantial gains with these boring big caps.

It eventually occurred to me that the experts that champion this approach to the stock market aren't trying to produce exceptional gains. They are just trying to hold on to client funds and don't want to take too much risk. The main goal of much of institutional Wall Street is to gather assets. The way that a big fund or money manager makes money isn't by producing returns but by having billions of funds under management.

I can't beat these funds at picking S&P 500 names. They have far more money than I and they have a tremendous advantage as far as information and research. Their analysts could pick up the phone and talk to management any time they wanted. How can I compete with that?

It makes no sense for a little guppy like me to compete head-to-head with Wall Street whales. They have done a magnificent job of convincing folks that they hold all the answers to navigating the market, but that is just a marketing tactic. The truth is that they really have no interest in helping me produce a great return.

Rather than try to be a mini-whale, perhaps I should try a totally different tactic. What advantages do I have over institutional Wall Street? The primary advantage is flexibility and speed. I can enter and exit a stock in the blink of an eye. I can trade thin small-caps that move quickly, and I can control my risk by simply moving to the sidelines when conditions are difficult.

Why not focus on enhancing those advantages that I have rather than pretend that I'm going to beat a huge fund by doing exactly what they are doing on a much smaller scale.? The funds don't even care about great returns. They just want to sell their services to investors.

That is the foundation of what I call 'Shark Investing.' Sharks and whales coexist very nicely, but the shark is always in motion. They take big bites, feed in a frenzy, and quickly move on to the next opportunity. It is a perfect metaphor for what small investors should do if they want to outperform the whales of Wall Street.

For about 25 years now, I have been refining the Shark Investing approach to the market. The primary proof that it works is that there are still investors that have been working with me since the 1990s. It isn't easy, and many fail, but many have found this approach to the market to be life-changing.

I still find it fascinating that nothing much has changed in the financial media over the years. They still worship slow-moving big-cap names and pretend that the only valid way to approach the market is through a buy-and-hold strategy.

There has been some acknowledgment of the social media trading movement recently, but this really is nothing new. These are fledging sharks that are doing the same thing many of us have been doing for decades. Many of these new traders are learning some very hard lessons, but some of them will develop lifelong skills that will serve them well for the rest of their lives.

If you want to be an Investing Shark, the first step is to develop the right mindset. Stop looking at the market like a Wall Street whale. Your job isn't to gather assets by offering profound investment wisdom. Your job is to produce the best returns that you can. When your agenda is clear, it changes the process you use to achieve it.

Once you recognize that most Wall Street experts really aren't trying to help you produce maximum gains, then you are on the road to being an Investing Shark.

Get an email alert each time I write an article for Real Money. Click the "+Follow" next to my byline to this article.

Follow this link:

The Evolution of a Stock Market Shark - RealMoney

Anthony Edwards had a turbulent start to his career with the Minnesota Timberwolves due to early-season scoring inefficiencies. One of the biggest knocks on Edwards as a prospect was his inefficient shooting. Besides shot selection and an inconsistent motor, there was no reason for concern with his interior finishing. Unfortunately, Edwards had poor shooting percentages from nearly every area of the floor, which prompted the early consternations of, Is this really happening again?

Edwards being an inefficient scorer right away was not a surprise. With basically no off-season, early-season injuries throughout the roster, and a coach hanging on by a thread, it would have been a miracle if Edwards would have significantly fixed his worst offensive habits. I was resigned that Edwards would produce a nightly highlight, but the process and overall results would be rough throughout his first season.

Then something happened that is incredibly rare for rookies: a switch flipped in the middle of the season. Essentially overnight, Edwards went from an offensive liability to an at-rim scoring phenom. The pre and post-All-Star Break splits for Edwardss interior scoring are eye-popping. They are numbers that reflect entirely different players.

In the first half of the season, Edwards took 42.4 percent of his shots inside ten feet, where he shot 48 percent, and 15.3 percent of his shots as pull-up two-pointers where he shot 26.8 percent. After the All-Star Break, Edwards took 46.2 percent of his shots inside ten feet, where he shot 59.2 percent, and 9.4 percent of his shots as pull-up two-pointers where he shot 28.6 percent.

Edwardss nearly overnight change in scoring philosophy did wonders for his effectiveness and the teams offensive success. His drives per game rose from 8.9 to 12, and his field goal percentage on drives jumped from 39.2 (a horrific number for someone of his size, skill, and athleticism) to 52.4 (same realm as James Harden, Ben Simmons, and Jamal Murray). Edwards went from drawing a foul on 8.7 percent of his drives and scoring on 58.3 percent of them to 10.4 and 68.5, respectively.

Those changes are so substantial that it makes you pause and question which half of the season was the fluke? That is until you watch the tape.

But what actually changed?

The coaching change immediately comes to mind and helps explain the shift in Edwardss shot selection. The rise in foul rate also suggests that referees were giving Edwards a more favorable whistle. Both of those can be true, but they dont explain the upsurge in scoring efficiency. Changes and influences on the periphery are feasible, but Edwards was the one who still had to execute the adjustments.

Seemingly overnight, Edwards realized that his mediocre, which has always passed for brilliance, was no longer acceptable in a league where brilliant is the expectation. Instead of relying purely on his explosiveness or strength, Edwards added craft, deceleration, and angle manipulation. Edwards made changes we see as players develop over their careers, but he did it in the middle of the season.

To understand what changed, we must first figure out what wasnt working. If Edwards could simply flip a switch as he did, why did he start the season in such a ghastly fashion?

Ryan Saunders always preached about eliminating (or at least minimizing) the mid-range jumper. Still, it wasnt until Chris Finch came aboard until we saw that philosophy implemented by Edwards, as we saw earlier. Plays like below were a regular occurrence. After coming off the stagger screen, Edwards has a clear lane to the rim and should cut it to a three-point game. Instead, he passes up the open drive for a step-back 17-footer.

Early in the season, fans were frequently up in arms about Edwards not getting any calls. In many cases, this was fair. However, Edwards brought a lot of those non-calls on himself as he was poor at initiating contact and disrupting the defenders balance. Most of his Euro steps took him away from the rim instead of towards it. Edwards also didnt get into the defenders body to negate their shot-blocking ability and would frequently let defenders off the hook by carrying his momentum on drives away from the rim.

Even when Edwards did initiate contact, there was an apparent learning curve on how to finish through it. Edwards struggled with the NBAs physicality and was even affected when the contact never came. He has always been the strongest, most athletic player on the court until he got to the NBA (and hes still pretty damn near the top of that list).

Finally, Edwards lacked the craft of elite scorers. He frequently took off too far from the rim and rarely changed speeds. Everything was a straight line or an attempt to use brute force to succeed. It is nearly impossible to succeed in the NBA at a high level relying purely on athleticism.

The first half of the season was a painful experience, but then everything changed with what seemed like a snap of the finger. The game seemed to slow down for Edwards as he used his freak athleticism in many ways while also combining craft, guile, and authority to his drives.

Edwards still used plenty of his explosiveness, but he also implemented more deceleration to his game. His freak athleticism shines brightly at both ends of the spectrum. When defenders were tight on his hip, Edwards simply planted a foot to halt his momentum while the defender flew by. A subtle adjustment that significantly increased the quality of his shots.

Edwards also adjusted to NBA physicality much quicker than most rookies tend to do. Edwards became more earnest about initiating contact, ensuring he got to the line more. Additionally, by getting into the rim protector, Edwards negated their shot-blocking ability because they could not fully explode at the rim or were put off balance. Edwards is a freakishly strong and explosive athlete, so it was incredibly refreshing to see him utilize his gifts.

One of the most impressive changes that Edwards made was his improved understanding of angles at the rim. When players slash across the lane to finish on the opposite side of the rim, there isnt much room for error. Since their momentum is taking them away from the rim, it is challenging to initiate contact to negate the shot-blocking ability of the defender. This reality is what makes using the rim as a shield so important. Earlier, we saw Edwards get to that opposite side of the rim relatively quickly, but he angled too far from the rim, which allowed the defender to heavily contest or block his shots. Here, we get a great view of how Edwards corrected his slashing angles. Edwards gets to the opposite side of the rim but stays within the restricted area. This allows him to use his shoulders and the rim to protect the ball while not drifting too close to the weakside defender. Edwards even gets a slight bump in his defenders chest as icing on the cake.

Seeing Edwards adjust on the fly in these specific ways was incredibly encouraging after a highly discouraging start. However, the most encouraging evolution of Edwardss at-rim finishing was how he put it all together in the pick-and-roll. Edwards has the athleticism to score whenever he wants in isolation, but being a threat as the pick-and-roll ball-handler adds an entirely new dimension to the offense. It gets other teammates involved, forces the defense to make proper reads and rotations, and creates easier scoring opportunities for Edwards.

Here, Edwards dribbles tightly off the screen and gets his defender on his hip. As Edwards attacks the free-throw line, he executes a perfect hesitation. By hesitating, Edwards allows his defender to seemingly get back in the play (Edwards is too big and strong to enable him to reestablish position fully), which is the drop defenders queue to recover to his man. Once Edwards sees the drop defender move to recover, he explodes to the rim. The drop defender attempts to recover and gets in a pretty good position, but Edwards has already beaten him off the floor. By aggressively attacking the rim, Edwards initiates the contact, mitigates the shot blocker, and has the strength the hang in the air and finish through the contact.

Again, Edwards dribbles off the screen and hesitates at the free-throw line. He glances over his shoulder while simultaneously reading the drop defender. Edwards recognizes the drop defender is more concerned with recovering to Naz Reid, so Edwards explodes to the rim to finish with ease before his initial defender can recover.

This time, we see Edwards attack with hostility. As Reid sets the screen, Edwards launches into his attack. The drop defender attempts to step up to corral Edwards at the free-throw line, but the defender is in a square stance and doesnt have the agility to dissuade Edwards. Edwards blows past him to the opposite side of the rim, allowing him to shield the ball from the block attempt.

Rookies are always expected to grow and improve their games, so I wasnt entirely crestfallen (albeit slightly perturbed) over Edwardss start to his rookie campaign. Edwards is too strong and too good of an athlete to be that poor of an at-rim finisher, so I knew the growth would come. However, I expected it to come in the offseason, as we see from essentially every player. Changing a substantial aspect of his game in a myriad of ways in the middle of the season continues to amaze me. It shows me that so much talent is still waiting to materialize and that the kid who doesnt like basketball may actually care quite a bit about it. Edwardss natural gifts are beyond rare, but knowing that he is aware, willing, and able to improve his inefficiencies with a snap of the finger engenders an uncommon sense of optimism.

See the original post here:

The Evolution of Anthony Edwardss At-Rim Scoring - Canis Hoopus