Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeah15
Definitely, but in sports it's pretty ridiculous to negate a player's career game in an argument using statistics from one season. It's pretty easy to pick and choose which games they're going to include for each player to make their argument look better in a headtohead comparison.

Well removing one game, shouldn't be an issue...unless that game is an anomoly. In gagners case, it is. It's an extremely rare occurrence. To get a better idea of a sample, you take every sample within a range...and exclude the extremely rare anomaly's that stand out as not in the norm.
Knowing the above, it almost makes sense to leave out the phoenix games...as it has no effect on his play since arriving to ottawa.
It's just simple math practices to find out what usually happens. Outliers pull the average one way or another...which is not giving you proper data to evaluate. It's swaying it.
I'll give you the simplest example i can.
You have someone taking 10 exams...on 9 exams, he gets 10% on each...but on one he gets everything right plus bonuses and gets 125%.
His average would be 21.5%...but it would be smarter for you to assume his next test will be 10%...therefore you take out the outlier to make a better measurement for the future. It's actually a very common practice.
Taking away 1 players 8 point game to get a better idea of how that player regularly produces.
I also understand your side of the story that you can always hand pick things to include or exclude to make your point look better.
I think the right way to go about it would be to bring up both sets of data...one with outliers included...and one with outliers not included...and people can draw their own conclusions...don't trash either set of data, because both sets data are useful.