These discussions often rank all hires from 1%-100% as if they all fit on one dimension. That is an unfortunate simplification. I don't know what the right cla

These discussions often rank all hires from 1%-100% as if they all fit on one dimension. That is an unfortunate simplification. I don't know what the right classification system is, but it's certainly more complex. For example, teams can tolerate a certain amount of new-but-promising talent, as long as they have guidance from experienced programmers. In fact that balance is important. Secondly you need people who can work together effectively. Both of these ideas indicated that you can only evaluate a hire in the context of the team they are joining. So arguments that "you can never hire the top 1%" add nothing to the conversation.