[QUOTE=Itse;6646701]Again, primary stats are the bed predictor of outcomes, by far. I know people don't like this answer because it's such a banal answer. It's still the truth.
Quote:
and help determine personnel usage, strategy, matchups and even things like trades or call ups. [/
As far as I know there is little to no evidence that they actually do any of these things. I'm sure some new stats do something, but for the most part the jury is probably very much still out.
True, that's not what makes them useless. What makes them useless is the existence of other, better stats that are so much more predictive that it's questionable whether their predictive power can be enhanced with secondary stats.
Although since secondary stats have existed for years now, I think we can safely assume that people have tried this and mostly failed. Because if they had succeeded we'd likely know about it, as development is reported while non-development is not.
It would surely be if anyone had said something like that.
Wasn't what I said though.
Yes, it's pretty noticeable that you don't actually read the statistics, you just comment on them as if their usefulness was a rhetorical matter.
|
It's an interesting debate, fundamentally though I find that the best way to analyze/ predict behaviour is to actually watch the games in person. Furthermore it should be a location between the blue lines and not too high.
The games are much faster on tv and you miss a lot of what's going on. When I attended 20-30 games I pretty much new how the flames were going to play at home games. It's also easier to analyze the opponent as well.