Hahaha I'm going to have a field day with "please read more carefully next time" right now.

Point 1: This was written directly in response to where I quoted you saying that goals are not random. Literally right after. If goals were not random then they would be predictable - so I'm asking you to predict when they will happen. "Please read more carefully".

Point 2: I already made this point. No shit GF-GA is a better predictor of winning - the point is to score more goals than the other team. Teams that score more than they let in will win. Corsi tries to predict who will be scoring. You can't keep track of scoring by measuring scoring. It's useless. You also completely turned this argument around: me saying one way or the other was in reference to top-down vs. bottom-up, not corsi vs. GF-GA. "Please read more carefully".

Point 3: You've now changed this argument around again. You are saying that GF-GA is a better predictor of winning, I'm saying corsi is trying to predict how those goals are scored. This isn't very complicated. "Please read more carefully".

Point 4 is redundant.

Point 5: You 100% wrote it, I don't bring things in from out of the blue. It's actually quoted twice in my comment. "Please read your own comments more carefully".

In the end I'm done talking to you - I have better things to do. You seem willfully ignorant to others' opinions and I'm just not going to deal with this. You argue people in a circle and talk to them condescendingly when they challenge your opinion.

My last comment is just going to be simple. GF-GA in a single game determines who wins and loses. There are going to be outliers in corsi, just like there is in GF-GA over the course of a season (Montreal and Ottawa are the two I think of right away). Corsi is meant to show who is driving the play and getting shots towards the net.