View Single Post
11-13-2012, 08:21 PM
Just a Fool
Rhiessan71's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,590
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
Indeed. If one player dominates the other that season but only has 60% of the normal number of games to accumulate totals, he's going to be shortchanged when looking at the aggregate of 9 seasons.
No more than Gretzky missing half the season in 92/93 did or Jagr missing a 1/4 of the season in 96/97 did.

At the end of the day, no matter what metric is used, Gretzky was still the more effective point producer from 90/91-98/99 which is all that was being asked in the first place.
Gretz 1.37PpG
Jagr 1.32PpG

Gretz 1.30PpG
Jagr 1.29PpG

I'll end it here though, it's not going any where.
I'm not ever going to accept that converting same seasons to Adjusted Stats would ever be valid over the actual same season data(or that I will not continue to find it one of the most idiotic wastes of time ever!). Nor do I believe Adjusted Stats was ever intended to be used that way either.
No point in continuing.


Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote