Sham, please!
Since that debate is not online anymore, you can say and color it in whatever way you want. It will be a waste for both of us to bring it up again.
Quote:
wasn't it you who was making the point that numbers don't mean anything without a deeper analysis??
Looks to me like someone just made an about turn
|
Not at all. I did exactly what I said. PWC ratings IS a deeper analysis. The whole idea behind the ratings is to provide a deeper and less flawed statistical analysis than what the averages reperesent. That's THE WHOLE POINT of using the PWC ratings, something more accurate than the stupid averages. Because along with averages, it takes into account other factors. Are you so elated to have a go at me that you had to abandon rudimentary reasoning?
But you do have a point on dropped catches. It has irritated me too. PWC ratings do not take into account the dropped catch factor. And they have been asked why they don't do it. Hundreds of times. And they have given explanations. If you want to know why, then go to their website and read the explanation. Or maybe I will find it later.
Just be aware that you are not the first one to realize that dropped catches, the player's mental condition, home crowd support, a sudden wind facilitating swing, wet outfields preventing boundaries, players being caught on no-balls, the ball loosing its shine earlier than expected, heavier bat, blah blah blah blah --- these ALL play a role. The ratings guys must have thought of these too. But they chose the ones that THEY deemed most important. That's why they also say that their rating is NOT infallible. Since my rating is based on their ratings, so do I. But still, it's the best damn "objective" statistical analysis we have. If you can come up with something better, present it here by all means. I will be interested.
But please, I thought you were above all this.
[Edited on 2-10-2003 by Arnab]