« Maps and dots 2 | Main | Water and wine »


Jon Peltier

Nice job. Do you have the raw data or the file(s) you used to build your version?

Nick Barrowman

the spacing between the tick marks represent proportional differences in the underlying metric

Do you mean that you used logarithmic scales?


Very nice, gives much more information than original without adding much ink. Defining scales is great improvement since from the original it's impossible to figure that out.


I felt like the scale was backwards though. At a glance if you miss the "best" and "worst" labels, I assumed moving the right on each scale was better.

Why would one direction be preferred over the other? Do I just have a left to right (english reading) bias or since each of the chosen metrics a larger number is better would following a traditional number line direction make more sense?


Nick: I didn't use logarithmic scales. The original used rank-scales, which removes any information about the magnitude of the difference. For each of my graphs, the length of the axis is fixed and scaled to fit the range of the data. So in effect, each graph has its own scale.

9.2.5: I retained the left-right orientation of the original chart. It is indeed somewhat unnatural. But recall that the original works in rank scale so rank 1 is best and rank 8 is worst.

college football team names

There has also been a greater emphasis in training on strengthening the muscles of the neck and learning good tackling techniques. This is particularly important in the younger age group.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Link to Principal Analytics Prep

See our curriculum, instructors. Apply.
Kaiser Fung. Business analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker.
Visit my website. Follow my Twitter. See my articles at Daily Beast, 538, HBR.

See my Youtube and Flickr.

Book Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read

Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter