Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
LOL at the bolded.
My point was ultimately semantic. If you pick such an obviously cherrypicked number of teams, it makes you look like a cherrypicker, even if the data really IS objectively on the side of the point you're trying to make. That's all.
As for the significance of shot-based stats, meh.
You can just as easily put it this way: the shot-based stats in combination with the standings and goals differential suggest Jets are about as good as us even when they get dominated in shots. That suggests we need to dominate them in shot attempts just to make the series as close as the standings were, and even then we'd be slight underdogs (because of what the goal differential says). Additionally, shot-based stats remain relatively weak predictors especially in small sample sizes.
However since all data is months old anyway, what ever. None of the team stats are super relevant anymore. There's no harm in talking corsi while waiting for the puck to drop.
|
He wasn't cherry picking stats just because it wasn't a usual number like top 10, 15, or 20? those are technically just as arbitrary when the point he was making was that LA is the only team with good numbers who aren't living up to potential.
I for one would like to know the exact number when making a point like that as opposed to cutting it off at 10 because that would be a less accurate stat