User blog comment:SirAston/Theorycrafting: New Phage/@comment-4888212-20130830194632/@comment-5961106-20130904000123

But under 'Theories' we see an ANALYSIS of where this might lead. It is a more opinionated form, but it is an analysis following 'what could come of this'.

Additionally, "if you say youre gonna theorycraft about the new phage" you don't usually do math between the old and new variants on an item, instead you propose a new variant/upgrade of the item and defend why the item would be a good remake/addition not solely with mathematics, but also with examples.

An example would be http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:TheTobarMethod/Do_AP%27s_Need_A_QSS_Upgrade%3F

Here it is proposed that Quicksilver Sash acquires an AP-centric or AP-styled upgrade and the reasoning is solid: The alternative would be Zhonya's Hourglass, which is not always useful if you're being shut down by CC. The reasoning behind adding the item would be that Mercurial Scimitar's statistics are not useful to warrant being bought, but there is no other upgrade for the item-- which makes it feel akin to a trapping item, you can't upgrade it into something more useful, but one should get it because of how strong the active is-- yet having a different item, more useful in another regard, may prove to be stronger in the end... and then the player feels bad because they already have the QSS but need something else that simply does not exist.

And that's also item theorycrafting, despite the amount of actual math basically being non-existent, since it's a concept and theory-- the theory being 'if this item is added, what happens?', with good representation (this is the wrong word to express this concept but I cannot think of a better one): 'then AP carries can become more popular'.

And if you STILL don't think that a concept/theory/analysis can truly be itself without math, then.. I don't know what to say, other than the fact that I give up.