PDA

View Full Version : don't compare apples and oranges...and say oranges broke the all-time record



MarcStarnes
03-11-2015, 09:46 AM
We must remember that things change, and without being aware of those changes, we can give too much or too little credit to certain accomplishments. This is where we must be careful with ACC hoops statistics, as some of our definitions of "records" are tarnished by these changes. See Barry Bonds...

For example, 1) first team all-ACC, and 2) finishing in the top three teams in the league, are different between an 8 or 9 team league and a 15 team league.

In the 80s, for example, finishing as a team in the top 3 in the ACC used to mean being better than just 5 other ACC teams. Now top 3 is much more of an accomplishment, being above 12 teams, being in the top 20 percent of teams. Making the quarterfinals of the ACC tourney is also much harder. See UNC-Louisville potential matchup.

And making all-ACC once meant you had to beat 35 starters to be in the top 5. Now we have 75 starters (instead of 40) and you must beat 70 of them to be first team all-ACC.

I could go on and on. Younger players can set more freshman records, because they get more minutes and shots than in past years, when so many of the best players have already gone to the pros now....Imagine Grant Hill's freshman stats if Hurley and Laettner had gone pro. Our freshman don't have Rivers, Parker, Hood to compete with.....OK, I'll stop.

I just request that we remember this when we talk about records being broken over time. 8 teams is not 15 teams. Top players going pro often leads to younger teams and more minutes and shots for freshmen. Just like 16 NFL games is not 14....more than one ACC team now gets into the NCAA tourney...3 point shots didn't use to exist...

I say this because many DBR historical analyses of "records" should be adjusted according to the changes over time. Or atleast mention briefly that you are comparing apples and oranges. More teams in the league and less upperclass stars makes this a different era.

Heck, Romney got more votes than FDR, but that is because we have lots more citizens....so stats can't be ignored when making comments.

Just ask the baseball historians.

blazindw
03-11-2015, 10:35 AM
Records are records. They are meant to be set and they are meant to be broken. This isn't money, and we're not adjusting for inflation. These are just records...numbers next to a name in a book. If one is higher than the rest, then they rewrite the book. Simple as that.