Adjusted stats - how valuable?
View Single Post
11-15-2012, 09:12 PM
Just a Fool
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Originally Posted by
Czech Your Math
That's where we disagree then. It depends on the amount and nature of data available, but it seems the other choices are:
The Eye Test- Arguing about what one thinks one remembers one's eyes seeing over (in most cases) a limited sample. Sure seems like a lot of room for bias, subjectivity, etc. Esp. difficult to reach consensus with others when there is initial disagreement.
Rankings amongst peers- From what I've seen, mostly or completely ignores the changing quality of peer talent, which has changed dramatically over time.
Awards- Same failure to recognize changing peer talent, but add in the bias and subjectivity of some oft-ignorant sportswriters.
Cups/Playoffs- Even those who use adjusted stats effectively often forget that playoff stats were affected in mostly very similar ways that effected regular season scoring. The role of team quality, % teams in playoffs, league size & parity, etc. are also often ignored by many or not fully appreciated.
They all can be used for evaluation. I don't tell anyone else what to use or that it's "wrong" when context is properly considered. However, there's a reverence, esp. for O6 players, that seems to prevent the realization that they were big fish in a much smaller pond... when it's a lot easier to be one of the big fish. Smaller population... no Euros/Russians to deal with... no huge leagues where lesser players can have fluke big seasons instead of being relegated to the third line on a powerhouse. I see respected posters claiming Howie Morenz should be highly ranked based on being a big fish in a much, much smaller pond... an ancient poll... and some yearly polls of "the usual suspected experts"... and I'm supposed to bow to that and agree that preferring objective evidence is "wrong." I can't see that happening.
Translation: You start with Adjusted Stats and discard anything that doesn't agree with them.
Exactly what I said you do, earlier in the thread.
And hey, that's fine. If that's the way you chose to evaluate players, that's your choice.
I'm just glad to finally get a straight answer about it.
I'm good now, got the confirmation of my suspicions and won't continue "muck up" the thread any more.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Rhiessan71