Thursday, August 24, 2006
Indianapolis Colts: Suckers!
Bill Barnwell crunches the numbers -- and I mean crunches -- and determines the Colts were wrong to go with Adam Vinatieri over Mike Vanderjagt, though his correlation coefficient analysis doesn't prove or disprove whether the the Pats' made the right move to forego Vinatieri for Stephen Gostkowski. I began to trust Bill's analysis after reading the following paragraph:
Anyone care to argue? ... Screw the Sox. I can't wait for the Pats, though I think they're probably going to disappoint as well.
Bill Barnwell crunches the numbers -- and I mean crunches -- and determines the Colts were wrong to go with Adam Vinatieri over Mike Vanderjagt, though his correlation coefficient analysis doesn't prove or disprove whether the the Pats' made the right move to forego Vinatieri for Stephen Gostkowski. I began to trust Bill's analysis after reading the following paragraph:
For those of you forgetting high school math, the correlation coefficient expresses the strength of a relationship between two variables. A value of 1.0 represents a perfectly positive relationship, in that an increase in one variable will always result in an increase in the other; for example, there is a perfectly positive relationship between each beer you drink and the body's desire for Chinese takeout.
Anyone care to argue? ... Screw the Sox. I can't wait for the Pats, though I think they're probably going to disappoint as well.
