View Single Post
11-14-2012, 05:17 PM
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,509
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Sooo...that's a yes to inaccuracy then or am I due another wall of text explaining why it does that, without ever answering the question?
The rounding part could be called an inaccuracy, I suppose. But it's never going to be a large amount, and you could work with decimals (ie, don't round) if you really wanted to.

As for the part about removing the individual player's numbers from the denominator, wasn't it you earlier in the thread who pointed out how tiny an effect this has for modern players? It really has a tiny effect for the players in question.

Stats, even raw stats, will never be a precise measurement of players' relative abilities. You can say adjusted stats are inaccurate because the differences between two players sometimes changes by a couple of percentage points, but the fact is the raw stats are imprecise enough that this makes no difference. Just because a player outscores another by 110-100 doesn't necessarily mean he was 10% better in offensive ability, because some portion of those scoring totals are governed by chance.

By calling adjusted scoring inaccurate, you're assuming a level of accuracy in the raw stats (in terms of what they mean in player comparisons) that simply does not exist.

Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote