The way people here have judged Kostka based on a few extremely poor giveaways, and one poor decision last night is all the proof you need that the eyeball test is horrifically biased.
Girardi has made a living off poor decisions and giveaways, yet he is a hero to the eyeball test warriors. Go figure.
Of course yet again no one can justify their position with anything other than attacking the numbers and banal comments regarding "watching the games."
Your post is right below someone saying that Kostka should be playing over Girardi and Klein.
Now, maybe the math is correct. But it does not matter, because it's literally never going to convince me that Kostka should be playing before Girardi. Eyeball tests are obviously going to be biased, but what is trying to be sold here is the idea that humans fundamentally cannot evaluate hockey. Flat out. Because we're not just talking about a bunch of people on the internet here. We're also talking the multiple coaches that have played Girardi tons of minutes, the GM who signed him to a big contract, the ASG selection. If all that is wrong, that means what we see when we watch hockey is basically meaningless. We flat out fail to comprehend what's important about what we're watching- and we have little hope to do so even with more knowledge, because even the people who are heavily involved in the game disagree with the numbers. We're not talking a little tweak here (like X player is secretly underrated and Y is overrated), we're talking about a BIG shift. And that's really hard to buy. Even if it's right, it's hard to buy. Because I'd like to pretend that I know what's happening when I watch a sport.
And I say this as someone with a degree in mathematics.
