This is such dumb logic. Sure a 10 game winning streak won't happen again but that doesn't mean it makes sense for you to remove the whole thing from the data set. They've had periods of good and bad play this season, and you decide to prorate the best of the season based only on the most recent bad period. It's just ridiculous.
Like I said, if the Sabres had lost a couple of extra games in the 10 game streak people wouldn't be arbitrarily removing the entire 10 game span.
Removing outliers is not "dumb logic" nor "arbitrary". As with any outlier, "if it was less outlying then it may not actually be an outlier"...k. Thinking that the sabres are going to keep playing how they've been playing for the past now 23 games, instead of their 48 game season average which is elevated due to a 10 game winning streak that you admit is not likely to happen again, is not "ridiculous". But believing that an average developed from a large sample is going to hold over a small sample is the fallacy of averages. The sample of games played is larger and growing. The samples of games remaining is smaller and shrinking. Season average means less and less for protecting remaining games with every game that passes. My argument is that recent play becomes more significant than average play. I didn't cherry pick some bad stretch to project, I picked the group of games that started after the win streak, and they happen to be really bad. Its not like its some 5 or 10 game bad sttetch, its a pretty significant stretch of games now. I could easily see the argument for removing the 5 game losing streak immediately following the winning streak from that sample as another outlier, which causes the sabres to project out slightly better but still not great.
In the end, the only statement I was making was, here's how the sabres would finish if the keep playing how they've been playing since the streak ended. I did not say this is how they definitely will play, but I do believe they're more likely to keep playing how they've been playing than hold to some larger sample season average over the remaining games. How they finish will depend on whether they can get hot again at some point in the remaining games, because outside the 10 game stretch they've been average to very bad. They're likely to keep being average to very bad unless they have another hot stretch of play. You're free to disagree with me. I'd be happy to hear some actually reasoning for why you think I'm erring, but I'm not replying to another no substance post where everything is just "dumb logic" and "ridiculous" just because...
