Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelson
https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2...-blocked-shots
5 v 5 CF% has a % correlation of 37.1. 5 v 5 FF% has a % correlation of 33.0. 5 v 5 SF% has a % correlation of 32.6%. These metrics are actually pretty important when you consider that PP% has a % correlation of 7.3% and PK% has a % correlation of 3.9%.
I'm not saying any of the stats tells the whole story. But, if you look at all of them in context and over time, they can be helpful.
I don't think they should be written off.
Rob Vollman says you can explain about 35% of success through the analytics we currently have. There is a lot of room to improve (just look at baseball), but that's a pretty sizeable contribution.
|
I don't know how much you use stats to explain things in your field, but those correlations are really low for anyone trying to explain results. It's just not enough to have any kind of confidence to draw conclusions from. 70% is really ambiguous for explanatory purposes, never mind 35%.
But again, it's not just the lack of clarity in the numbers, it's the conclusions people draw from them. If your performance sucks, and an analytical number that explains about 35% of the results is telling you that you're actually doing better than the results say, you should be looking for other explanations.