FlameChampion
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2011
- 13,653
- 15,279
Another case of insomnia and being bored but thanks for posting this. Of interesting note "The Athletic" holds as many as 47 votes that I counted. Out of 170 in total. Most other publications that get to vote get one. Why on Earth is one publication granted so much voting power to decide these things? I mean I could see it being a specialist publication that focuses on sports specifically getting a few more legitimate votes than 1. But 47? These things, and how they arose should probably be questioned. I don't recall these trophies being named the Art Ross The Athletic trophy.
I mention this as well because a majority of The Athletic voters voted against Leon Draisaitl, and some with inane lists and picks. Deserves to be mentioned that Leon from what I was able to count (hard to count from those tables, Leon got 93 first place votes overall, so overwhelming majority. yet most of the 47 Athletic votes were for somebody else. So we're seeing some selective bias at work with the publication.
ftr from my count 29 The Athletic voters picked somebody other than Leon Draisaitl. Only 18 of their writers picked Leon.
So lets sort out some numbers;
Leon obtained 38% first place ballots from The Athletic voters.
Leon obtained 55% first place ballots overall, among all voters.
Leon Draisaitl obtained a whopping 61% of first place votes from everybody but The Athletic voters.
What this means is statistically significant confirmed bias of one publication, and that could have swayed voting somewhat if Leon did not have considerable support from the rest of sports journalists and sports media.
It is a strange that a relatively unknown entity a few years ago, now how so many votes and influence on things on such a large scale. Makes you wonder how these things come along. It seems really suspect to me.