Annahnomoss
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2012
- Messages
- 10,101
I agree that if you take the Pelé example (in the OP) in isolation, it doesn't make sense not to devaluate Schuster. But Annah has clarified that the Pelé thing isn't a rule, and that people are free to interpret «impact» as they please.
The Pelé example isn't a good one, in my opinion. There's no doubt about his impact, just as there's no doubt about Schuster's. But bad example or not, it clearly doesn't mean what you thought it did - again, Annah has clarified this.
Anyway, trying to imagine how a generally sub-par player would work in a fantasy match is difficult enough. Trying to figure out how a 50% X would work with a 70% Y - and so forth - would be hopeless.
Well, Pele 1958 wasn't the player of the tournament because of that reason. Had he played from the start he would have been possibly challenging up there so I don't think it was a bad example. He already suffered from not playing every game and if someone says that Didi/Rahn/Hamrin were better than him in '58 they wouldn't be wrong. Can you sport Pelé from 1958? Obviously. Is he going to have the competitive advantage over Muller? Surely not.
Also @oneniltothearsenal I think you believe people rate Schuster higher than they do. I think almost everybody takes it in to account already as you've made that point.