View Single Post
Old
11-15-2012, 04:42 PM
  #411
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco MacArthur View Post
Who is telling you, in this thread or otherwise, that Adjusted Stats are the be-all and end-all final answer?
I guess I misunderstood all of you telling me straight up that Jagr had more value than Gretzky from 90/91-98/99. Was that not a final answer on your part? Did I miss a follow up conversation or explanation of other factors and how they were applied for you to make that determination that Jagr had more value?


Quote:
Anyone who has told you that Adjusted Stats are perfect is lying to you. However, I haven't seen that claim offered up in this thread.
I know, I'm confused too.
Why would anyone advocate the complete throwing away of Raw Stats if you didn't have something perfect to replace it with?
I mean, that's the only conclusion I can come up with when it seems much more rational and correct to me, to keep and use both at various weights.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote