View Single Post
02-14-2012, 04:23 PM
Registered User
BM67's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,618
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yes, but it shouldn’t be a mystery why. Gretzky and Lemieux for reasons already discussed, plus one beneficiary linemate.
Removing the lowest #2 point total between 72-73 and 97-98, excluding the 95 lockout season, as an outlier is crazy.

The “undesired” effect of the latter is infinitesimal compared to the former.
Changing below average seasons into way above average scores is hardly infinitesimal.

I mean, I can see what you’re saying about using the #1 (Bossy, par example) if there are multiple outliers above him removed, but it seems like such a petty issue in comparison to the issue of whether to remove the outliers in the first place.
I don't have a problem removing outliers. I do have a problem with removing outliers that aren't outliers, and it seemingly being done with no more thought than "I have removed outliers, so it must be better".

Even 140 would be crazy for that year.
You have no problem using 139 in 1982. Why is 140 crazy? Show some examples illustrating how wrong it is.

BM67 is offline