Quote:
Originally Posted by Regorium
I also apologize if this has been posted, but I think we should set the baseline as to why "advanced" stats are useful.
http://corsihockeyleague.com/2014/11...-the-playoffs/
If you have a score-adjusted Fenwick of >=50%, you have an 80% chance of making the playoffs. <=50% and it's 26%. The author seems to have double counted 50% making the two percentages not add up to 100.
That's a significant deviation from an expected random result of 53% chance of making the playoffs. A sample size of 210 (30 teams from the past 7 seasons) is more than enough to show a significant statistical deviation of greater than 25 percentage points.
It seems pretty obvious that higher possession scores correlate well with success. Why are people having a hard time accepting it? |
No one has a hard time accepting that possession scores correlate with success. I don't need to see the numbers to know that they would be fairly strongly correlated.
What people have a hard time accepting is the conclusions some people draw. Too many people are too quick to say 'it won't last, look at the numbers: they have to regress'.
Nothing wrong with the numbers, it's shifting from observing correlation (and not a perfect one) to drawing black and white conclusions that gets people into trouble.