To be fair, predicting the past is easier. It’s already happened. We’re just looking for which metrics help explain something that has already happened. To it’s credit, attack efficiency differences between two teams in a single set is wildly indicative of who won that set. So yes, we do care about attack efficiency, definitely don’t ignore it…but due to set by set variation even amongst the top teams, we cannot accurately rely on this metrics as means of predicting the future.
Here’s how we explain the past, using attack efficiency.
So that’s really all I have to say about that. Don’t ignore attack efficiency – it’s clearly an important indicator when you look back and reflect on why you’ve won or lost, but don’t make the mistake of thinking your team’s attack efficiency going into your next set has the same ability to predict the future as it does to explain the past.