Adjusted stats - how valuable?
View Single Post
11-07-2012, 05:31 PM
Just a Fool
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Originally Posted by
Czech Your Math
The 1% is a "special case" compared to the rest of the NHL... but then NHL players are a "special case" compared to the group of players which at some time played a relatively high level of organized hockey, such as collegiate, junior, minor league, etc.
I understand your skepticism, but to say that it's purely "common sense" is quite assumptive IMO.
The very top NHL players are best compared to those of similar ability/performance, but as we know, as one gets farther to the extreme of the spectrum, there are fewer and fewer players who are somewhat comparable.
I believe there are some ways to study this that haven't been fully explored, but it will take some time and effort on the parts of people who understand the problem, the factors involved, and the techniques that are most likely to yield an eventual (at least partial) solution to improving the comparison of players across different seasons/eras.
No one is saying that Adjusted Stats are insignificant or completely devoid of value.
AGAIN, it's when people use them at the expense of everything else available that they become an issue.
When someone bases their entire argument purely on what AS's says then we/I have a problem and it happens far too often.
You keep taking an extremist view every time someone has the slightest issue with AS's.
99% of the time the issue isn't even with AS's themselves, it's the value being assigned to them or that they are the only thing being used, that is.
Far too often I hear the response..."You don't agree because just don't understand them" when the reality is that one doesn't even have to fully understand them to understand what they are saying compared to everything else.
There's a difference between understanding AS's and understanding their value or weight in the equation.
Last edited by Rhiessan71: 11-07-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Rhiessan71