07-28-2018, 11:13 PM
(07-28-2018, 09:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Actually it's not. The 3 you mentioned are rightly ranked ahead of Watson by the committee; so I'm not sure the point you were failing to make.
My point is that they are ranked ahead of him because career numbers are more important than a small sample size.
If sample size did not matter you would have to rank Watson ahead of those guys.