Quote:
Originally Posted by edslunch
In my industry we pair a domain expert with a 'data scientist' to come up with new insights and correlations. The data scientist understands stats to the nth degree and has a toolkit that goes lightyears beyond comparing shots for and against, the domain expert provides input on which factors are important to consider and helps apply the findings back in the real world. It's a good mix.
|
This is exactly what I'm getting at.
Quote:
Originally Posted by edslunch
Edit: I should add that my industry is bound by the laws of physics and chemistry, so that no matter how surprising a correlation may be if it exists it exists. That doesn't apply so cleanly when humans are involved.
|
And here is where I think the so-called stats revolution has substantial room to grow. How do we take measurements of on ice events? What sorts of data do we collect? How do we weigh various factors? etc. As near as I can tell, the systems invented and presently employed are still very much in an emerging phase of development, and have not yet adequately addressed these many troubling nuances.