That's because knowing every possible stat, calculated or descriptive, about a player doesn't necessarily tell you something you didn't already know about them. There's a pretty reasonable case that even batting averages, being an arithmetic mean, don't tell the full story anyway. For those of us who work in the actuarial fields, in the absence of proveably accurate measures of whatever it is you're trying to measure, getting a bunch of qualified or experienced people to make decisions about whatever it is turns out to be a pretty defensible methodology for finding solutions anyway. It obviously doesn't have the same checks and balances but generally-speaking, they get it right.
As for people here being better able to select an international team, that's a joke. Let's be serious about this; it's all too easy to Monday-morning quarterback team decisions but when you're actually in the position of having to do it and be accountible for your decisions, it would be far tougher than any of us imagine to get it right. And even then, just because a selected player fails, doesn't mean it was a poor decision; the players have to do their bit too. In terms of Australian teams, Andy Symonds, despite all the luck he's had, has turned out to be one of the better decisions even if it looked a bit iffy at the time. Picking Stuart Clark was an absolutely inspired move, Mike Hussey similar. What the selectors see (that none of us do) is a player's form in the nets, what other players are saying about them ("The deck the other day was a road but Stuey was hitting the gloves hard" or "Huss is nailing his cover drive these days"), how they're presenting themselves when put into pressure situations, etc. All of that probably turns out to be far more important in selection than anything you can mine from StatsGuru.
