You know the funny thing about stats? A team like Melbourne which scores a lot of points quite correctly has great stats. So stats matter. What stats don't measure is prejudgement, prejudice, jealousy, pettiness, bias and agendas.As ive said before, stats in rugby league do not indicate how well a player is playing, althought a good measure of physical output.
Stats do not measure attitude or effort well. They do not take into consideration positions - ie that a 5/8 should be steering a team creating this and that and manipulating a game or the attack. They don't read that as fullback, he wasn't in position X amount of times or that he could have been in the right position. It wont tell you that his effectiveness is near blot as a play maker because every joe is able to stifle his line running and forces him to pass because he has no other option. Theres no measure on how many defenders hold off on his attack or how many become confused......Stats don't even measure choices vs pay cheque vs captaincy!
See where im going?
Years ago Steve Price was considered the best prop in the game and it turns out he had the best stats. Narrowly mind you but the best stats. In second place, by the tiniest margin was a prop who on this forum and in the view of the state of origin selection panel was shit, not good enough. The props who were third through tenth read like the a top ten should, their stats were all good and they were the talked about players.
My point is simple. People always trot out he line that stats mean nothing when it suits their narrative. In my example the stats were spot on for everyone in the top ten except one, the unfashionable prop who was number two. Then, in his case alone, apparently stats meant nothing.