Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheerio
Look up a term called sample size. Great we went 5-6 in the playoffs while giving Engelland big minutes. Having the worst possession numbers during the playoffs as well as having a losing record isn't great.
|
Are you really going to whine about sample size to challenge my argument and then deliberately use a small sample size yourself?
But okay, lets go there. Your argument is that we would be drafting top 5 with Engelland playing more than 12 minutes a night.
At a very quick count, it seems Engelland played 46 regular season games where he saw more than 12 minutes of ice time. The Flames record in those games was 25-16-5. That is a .598 points percentage, or a 98-point pace. Or, one point better than we actually did.
AFTER Gio went down, Engelland played 20 games over 12 minutes - a majority of those over 20 minutes. The Flames went 12-5-3. A .675 points percentage, or a 111 point pace.
As a disclaimer, I did this quickly, so there is a risk of a small adding error. But you are unquestionably wrong in your assertion. The only question left is whether you are prepared to admit it, or if you are going to continue doubling down.
Quote:
|
How about instead of personally attacking me you actually use stats to back up your arguments rather than making baseless claims.
|
How about instead of moving the goal posts because you got caught making an idiotic statement, you actually use stats to back up your argument that "If Engelland is playing more than 12 minutes a night all season we will be picking in the top 5."
I'm waiting.