Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
It is far from absurd. A team higher in the standings has, by definition, performed better. To draw the conclusion from that that they are better is not at all absurd. Premature, as with any other stat, sure. Absurd? No. The fact that you think it is, shows again your overconfidence in your opinion.
As for the Oilers, you might want to take a bit of your own advice and consider sample size. Any team, over a short number of games, can win the vast majority of them. Sample size applies on that front too.
|
But that's exactly the point! What sample size do you need to show that games won or lost actually demonstrates that a team is better? If I can say that after 82 games, team X has 100 points and is therefore better than team Y with 96, why cant I do the same thing after ten games? If the standard being used by some that standings position is the final answer on what teams are better at hockey, sample size shouldn't even matter. If it does, it NECESSARILY implies that something else is affecting your results that needs time to work its way out of your sample.