YOU think JFresh is bad. I think his information is actually quite useful. Why does your opinion reign supreme? Its honestly super weird how against him that you are.
The only people who continually argue about "analytics are not the be-all end-all" are people like you who choose to tear them down. People that enjoy and support analytics in sports NEVER say that they are the be-all, end-all. I've never seen one person say this.
Lou sucks and has sucked for a decade now. I don't know what he has to do with anything.
Well yeah no one is going to outright admit that they are doing something like this, but it is without a doubt implied by how those folks respond to any questioning of the analytics being presented.
How many times have you and others posted xG or heat maps and heaven forbid someone expresses skepticism of the measurement with questions about how it doesn't seem to be capturing x,y, and z element and your response is a snarky dismissal..."it's just showing the facts, I gUeSs YoU dOn'T bEliEvE iN fAcTs LOLOL".
Well Mr. Snarkypants, it's not just simply facts, it's actually an interpretation of how meaningful or impactful any given action/event within the game was. That's what makes it "analytics"...a fact is team X took 20 shots (which by the way is not even a fact itself in the strictest terms considering that the manner in which its recorded is somewhat subjective, but I digress). Interpreting which of those shots are "high danger" is the part that makes it "analytics". You are conflating that interpretation with "fact". It is not a fact. And the problem here is that some of us look at that interpretation and it doesn't seem to pass the smell test from an observational standpoint. And your dismissive response to that potential skepticism absolutely does scream "these analytics are the end all be all".
Now, our observations are not the end-all be-all either. We should treat those with a healthy dose of skepticism as well. But if there is a large chasm between how I interpret what I'm observing in the actual game vs. what a specific analytics model is spitting out, then that absolutely should be questioned. Not with the goal to dismiss the analytics, but with the goal to understand why that chasm exists, and determine if there's a shortcoming from one or both of them that needs to be looked into and addressed. If you took this approach, you wouldn't react to skepticism with dismissiveness, you'd take the time to address the specific questions or criticisms and if the analytics don't have an answer for the question/criticism, you'd acknowledge that without defensiveness. But that's not what you do.
I understand there are people on the opposite side of the spectrum who think what they observe with their eyes is all that matters and any analytics that contradict that must be useless. Those folks have made themselves abundantly present in recent times with their never-ceasing sarcastic quips about heat maps and pie charts whenever the Devils are losing a game. But please, don't act like you are not on the flip side of this coin.
