Eastern Conference final: (1) New York Rangers vs (6) New Jersey Devils

[hockeyfan1]

What they mean obviously is that it took 3 teams to score 13 whereas one team (the Rangers) scored 11.  The other teams combined had more, at first glance,  but not when one defines the statistics more accurately.

It specifically says the Rangers 11 goals was more than the combined total of 13 (hence the phrase "that's more than the combined total"). It's really that cut and dry, and that wrong.

BTW the statistics were taken from a posting on SLAM! Sports/Canoe by non other than...Steve Simmons.  :

 

[hockeyfan1]

What they mean obviously is that it took 3 teams to score 13 whereas one team (the Rangers) scored 11.  The other teams combined had more, at first glance,  but not when one defines the statistics more accurately.

How does one define statistics so that 13 isn't more than 11?

Don't ask me, ask Steve Simmons, configurator of brand new mathematical quotations! 

Here is the exact Simmons posting (found on SLAM! Sports/Canoe):

The New York Rangers have 11 goals from their defence in the playoffs. The other three remaining teams have just 13.

 

[bustaheims]

Don't ask me, ask Steve Simmons, configurator of brand new mathematical quotations! 

Here is the exact Simmons posting (found on SLAM! Sports/Canoe):

The New York Rangers have 11 goals from their defence in the playoffs. The other three remaining teams have just 13.

That's significantly more accurate than what you previously posted (assuming those numbers are correct, of course). Steve Simmons is not to blame here.

 

[Kin]

Here is the exact Simmons posting (found on SLAM! Sports/Canoe):

The New York Rangers have 11 goals from their defence in the playoffs. The other three remaining teams have just 13.

Right. And nowhere there is the claim made that 11 is more than 13.