I appreciate this concept, as I have thought for a while it would be cool to have some sort of collecting statistics akin to the on-field statistics for players.
But while this one may work in some scenarios, there is something keeping it from being universal because it doesn't work it my situation. Mine is an easy test case because I am a player collector exclusively and limited to nearly just one, so it would seem I should have a scatter factor near to 1, but the math as is works out to 16, which seems antithetical to the spirit of the initial post.
So similar to the conundrum of how to account for company sets (and I agree it seems most sensible to take each together as a 'single' item), it seems the same should apply to a player set.
So instead of taking the value of a literally single item I instead take the value of that entire single-player segment of my collection, then divided into the total I get 1.05. That number does seem more representative of the reality in my case and more in keeping with the spirit of the meaning for 'scatter factor' as I interpreted it in the OP.
I realize it's much easier in my situation to estimate the $ numbers since my collection is comparatively much smaller by volume than the average, and so also easier to keep track of because it is focused, and that instead, the initial equation was meant to be a quick way for a more complex collection to estimate itself. I'm just suggesting we could trial enhancements to the equation to perhaps make it more meaningfully universal.
|