先頂一下。本來要睡覺去的，看見這麽認真的帖子不發個言不厚道。

There is an assumption upon which he drew the conclusion.  The assumption is: it is the same group of squads, whose size is expressed as the Y value in the figures, that gives the X value for the offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency respectively.  Said differently, he confuses the identy of the group with the identity of the squads.  The above-articulated assumption is incorrect.  The reason is straightforward: a squad with a Y coordinate of 5 (meaning in the same group with 4 other squads) for offensive efficiency not only can have but also often does have a Y coordinate of 10 (meaning in the same group with 9 other squads) for defensive efficiency.  

Thus, his conclusion "great offenses tend to be 'better' than great defenses, and terrible offenses tend to be 'worse' than terrible defenses" is erroneous.  

Let me try to say this again, he assumes a squad will have the same ranking offensively and defensively.   We all know that is not true.

所有跟帖： 

• Please consider the above discussion in the context of say the r -Francine- ♀ (0 bytes) () 02/03/2014 postreply 22:03:26

• 這個分析沒有假設一個隊的進攻和防守效率。 -ctgolfer - ♂ (0 bytes) () 02/04/2014 postreply 04:27:38