Godymas wrote:tsherkin wrote:Godymas wrote:
you don’t explain why something isn’t true
good bye forever
I'm not going to teach you basic math, friend. Perhaps take your own advice? The burden here is on you to explain why 16 games is a meaningful sample, especially in the context of visibly-unsustainable shooting percentages with the weight of nearly a century of basketball behind them (even factoring in modern trends).
16 games is an inherently noisy sample. It's the same line you hear every year at the beginning of the season when someone is championing something happening over the first 10 or 20 games of the season, before that eventually evens out. Same same with a single playoff run. It's something to be viewed with at least SOME skepticism until and unless it is repeated. And especially so when there are some eye-popping numbers so discordant with RS production (and league/personal averages).
In any case, take care.
it appears that you did not see the article i shared with you in the post you quoted, therefore let me give it to you again https://www.statisticshowto.com/large-enough-sample-condition/
That article is about chi-squared tests, which examine correlation to determine whether one can regard two variables as independent. Which two variables do you think we are or should be testing the independence of?