New club: Hockey Statistics -- Reference and Discussion

[Weave]

So when does this conversation actually transplant into the Stats club?

 

Asking for a friend.

[TrueBlueGED]

1 minute ago, Weave said:

So when does this conversation actually transplant into the Stats club?

 

Asking for a friend.

IMO, it shouldn't. Unless we're also going to start an eye test club, and a hockey management club, etc. There's no good reason to split hockey talk into its own space. 

Edited July 17, 2019 by TrueBlueGED

[Weave]

13 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

IMO, it shouldn't. Unless we're also going to start an eye test club, and a hockey management club, etc. There's no good reason to split hockey talk into its own space. 

*sticks tongue out*

[triumph_communes]

23 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

In this case, the context is Schultz had a career year and had considerable drop-off in 2017-18: 

Then again in 2018-19: 

But hey, good on you for picking out the obvious outlying season in an ill-fated attempt to show Risto will blossom elsewhere. Schultz was great in 2016-17, but it's pretty clear that season is not representative of who Schultz is as a player. 

Again, the argument isn't that context is irrelevant, it's that context is not transformative.

Some players are the same year after year. Others have career years, but not until after being traded to good teams. 

 

So so what’s to say Ristolainen wouldn’t have a career year after being traded to a good team like Schultz did?

 

When you start making crap like that, maybe your stats need context...