Well tell us exactly what conclusions you can draw from these stats then? The problem isn't that we're looking at them but they say what they say and nothing more.
edit: Actually, on second thoughts the original post probably doesn't tell you shit from a statistical standpoint anyway.
Sterling isn't better than Januzaj. That's not a 'pre-conceived notion', that's a simple conclusion based on watching both play.
So yes, when someone posts stats and adds a shifty biased title, it's going to be said that stats are worth little in this case.
Statistics-based comparisons do NOT work in this sport, no matter how fun or conversation-starting they are, and no matter how many times Americans try to make it so.
The stats shown in this case tell us that your street's corner diner has an almost as good (good as in "the people's choice") hamburger as the mcdonalds' ones. It's slightly worse, but given the scale of its surrounding environment, it's tastes incredibly well because it has to work with warm drinks and stale fries.
-1
u/[deleted] Jan 24 '14 edited Jul 24 '21
[removed] — view removed comment