David McGoldrick

Yeah, fella in work, a Forest fan,  always refers to him as such.

Whats selective about it? That's his Championship record from 2014-19 (ie the time he's been available to us). Judging goals based on appearances is an inferior measure to goals per minute, and using that more accurate measure McGoldricks record is much better than Premadonna's stated "best case scenario" of 1 in 4.

How dense do you have to be to not understand that judging a player on a goals to minute ratio examines their performance on a more precise basis than goals to games ratio? Any sort of understanding of basic statistics would confirm that. Good stats are derived from as precise information as possible;"1 game" is not a precise basis to judge something on because 1 game ranges from 0-90+ minutes. Obviously judging based on those minutes themselves is far more enlightening. If you're comparing two players for example, one who has 4 goals in 10 games and another who has 2 in 10, you might easily come to the conclusion that striker A is twice as prolific as striker B. If you did a little deeper though and see that it's taken striker A 900 minutes to score those 4 goals, whereas striker B only needed 100 to get his 2, then obviously that initial conclusion would need to be re-evaluated...

You're moving the goal post for every player though doing that, you can't just make it a per minute evaluation and then claim that is a less than 3 per game basis as you'd then have to do that for every other player he is being compared to as they are all getting subbed on and off at different times  so either way its the same whether you judge per minute or per game relative to other strikers he is equally unprolific in comparison so its just splitting hairs.