Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
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.
|
You are taking their point to the extreme to try and prove it wrong.
You agree that Corsi isn't a perfect predictor and sample size matters, but when it comes to the standings it has to be absolute or people are wrong to refer to it?