Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I'm suggesting they play the same sport in the same fashion with a different level of skill.
Not sure the model would fail to capture those affects in a counting exercise.
So I wouldn't say I'm "wrong"
I do admit that a unique situation is always different, but I just don't think one team can find a way to measure higher in a model consistently than their peers to change the outcome.
That seems like a huge stretch to me.
You'd have to be bad in way that shows counts aren't that bad for bad events, while also making the bad events even worse, and you'd have to find a way to do that consistently.
|
Well, the standings suggest some teams are bad consistently.
When we see bad records with high goals against, but the stats say their goals against shouldn't have been that high, there are two possible reasons: one, it's just been luck so far, and it should even out, or two, the stat isn't capturing what's happening.
Both are possible, but to suggest the latter isn't likely, is where we are going to disagree.