Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h
You literally picked the cut off point to exclude Pitts, Washington and TB from the first group. (7 cups)
Why is 3 the magical cut-off to show "no correlation" or Botton 5? Why not 2 bottom 3 picks? You made up a stat to match your narrative.
Also a team picking bottom in the last few years may have no/little return on those players. There is obviously a lag in success vs drafting stars
|
I stopped at 4 because that constituted 67% of the picks (44% of the teams, won 48% of the cups). Big whoop
If I had made the cutoff at 3, that would have been 20 teams (vs 12), and 89 of 106 of the available picks. Of course they would have the majority of cups (but still not as many as the draft picks would imply), and it would tell us nothing.
Also, 3 is the median, so 4 was all teams above the median.