I never said that I said the Sedins put up below average first line production.
If you're all going to foam at the mouth and jump all over every post I make because I don't blindly hate or throw juvenile insults at management every day at least read them.
I said Naslund's production was average for 1st liners because he was PPG. Henrik had a 0.9 ppg and Daniel had a 0.8 ppg. Go look at the data yourself and tell me they didn't cluster with the lowest tier of top line production.
But you predicated this with the following statement:
That's also making the assumption that there are 30 first line centers in the league at any given time.
My response was to the notion that this was an "assumption" rather than a mathematical truth. The top 30 scoring centres are what define what a "first line production" is. Without taking that into consideration how can you possibly say anything about production being high, low, or average? You can't without accepting that assumption first. You then complained about a cut off that unfairly defined a player as having "1st line production" or "2nd line production" by something as small as being 31st instead of 30th. Yet you make a similar distinction by defining Naslund as "average" and Henrik as "below average" by virtue of being 4 points or roughly 5% apart. Are you being any less unfair or are you simply defining them mathematically as I was?
At some point you have to make these distinctions based on something - percentiles being the most objective - and that's ok, since we also have brains that allow us to put those distinctions into the proper context.