View Single Post
09-27-2011, 12:16 PM
Registered User
phillyfanatic's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,631
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
No, empirical evidence suggests that there is irrefutable fact based information that suggests that the preseason is a waste of time if you're drawing conclusions from it.

As to the second bolded comment... that would be a comically stupid argument to trot out. There's a bunch of guys that have awesome preseasons and are terrible... and there are a bunch of guys that have awesome preseasons and are awesome (this ignores the guys that have terrible preseasons but are awesome)... preseason means a lot!

Actually, that empirically supports my argument that you can't draw strong conclusions from the preseason. It can go either way, and does so with regularity. I think Jagr is going to have a good season, I don't think Read is going to lead in the NHL in scoring.

People debate empirically untrue claims on here all the friggin time, dude.
Anyboby who "observed" Jaromir Jagr this preseason would agree that he is still a top 6 forward on most teams in the NHL. Matt Reads preseason, rookie camp, AHL 10 games suggest he is ready to make the jump into the NHL. Since there is no data for NHL regular season for these two players to use how else do you suggest we analyze their future regular season succcess? We have to look at something? You are saying the preseason is useless, so shall we keep quiet on the subject until the data in the regular season clearly shows the answer? Perhaps we shall wait until game 40 before we have a proper opinion of whether Jagr is going to have a good season or not. Sounds good.

phillyfanatic is offline