Dan92

I have been reading these posts for a while but do not comment because I normally do not want to get involved. But I do agree with the previous person that said that these statistics do not mean what you think they mean. I like Mccaffrey just as much as the next person, but CLT/SE/LLN aside, you cannot make the claims you are making from this sample. I am currently getting my PhD in statistics, do not feel like I have to prove that to you so you can believe it or not. I do not care what types of statistical summaries and tests you would like to conduct on this data. I hate arbitrary cutoffs for things like sample size, so whether or not you think this data meets the CLT criterion whatever. But, you can't just go using this data to make claims like what you did before..."Based on inferential statistical analysis, Luke won By a landslide this year (5% error allowed). " No, I don't believe it, and no one should for that matter. No matter what you believe, this was not a random and representative sample. Sure, its "random" in that they have different plays in different orders blah blah blah, but that is not what is meant by random sample. Was the sample of games that Mccaffrey played representative of all the times he could have been put into play... no, probably not. And this is all observational data anyways, so you cannot make large sweeping overarching claims about the comparison between the two quarterbacks, as much as we would like. So while sure, his numbers might be better based on some type of specific statistical test. However, you cannot use these tests to make these types of conclusions about the data.