A reader, luislandry, writes:
I think people assume that when you use stats you apply them like a caveman would use a club instead of like a mathematician that was intelligent enough to devise the stats in the first place. They aren’t just looking at a combined stat and making decisions. That would be the equivalent of saying “since rock beats scissor and scissor beats paper, I will choose rock to battle paper”. It’s not that simple. Just like “skill” and “heart”…their relative importance depends on the level of skill. Heart isn’t that important when the skill level is very low. You can put a number on anything, just the model will get increasingly complex if you want to combine the things you’re looking at. The smart thing to do if a perfect model isn’t available is exactly what the Rockets are doing: looking in parallel at a variety of stats, observations, conversations, etc.