aaawall91 wrote:But from this small sample it can be said Chad benefits from Henry being absent much greater than Hous does (if he benefits at all).
On the contrary, that's not really what it's saying. It's saying more that Chad is hurt more by Henry having a big week, that's not the same thing.
Since we're using small sample sizes, if we want to determine who is effected more by Henry being gone we have exactly that same sample size to look for exactly that same thing as Henry missed 3 games last year. No need to stretch the other into something it's not when we have the exact measure we're looking for available to us.
In the games Henry missed:
10rec 106yds 1td
Average: 6rec 83.3yds 0.33tds
Average: 5.66rec 64yds 0tds
So, when Henry missed time Housh was better in every receiving category overall, and was better all 3 weeks that Henry was absent. How exactly does that lend to CJ having a "much greater" benefit from Henry being gone than Housh does again? If you mean to say that Henry being gone helps CJ a lot more than it does Housh, and he STILL performed worse than Housh every week that Henry missed, then why exactly are we talking about CJ going 2+ rounds before Housh, much less ahead of him at all?
In the same terms you defined it:
Housh's year-long avg: 10.75ppg
Housh without Henry: 10.3ppg
CJ's year-long avg: 11.07ppg
CJ without Henry: 6.4ppg