[Amarillo]

what I meant by mentioning those two moves

---

Well, I've never really seen a good stall team use Taunt for those purposes: they have phazers for stopping setup sweeps anyways and defensive taunt users are often too slow to stop the setup right away. Same goes for stopping hazards and you usually stop them from coming up through good play and Rapid Spinners (which you should have on stall.) Sub without recovery is a hallmark of an offensive Pokemon, like Gengar. But Sub isn't exactly an offensive measure in its own. Rather, Sub is arguably Gengar's (and other frail sub-users') sole defensive mechanism. I know that most gengars do not run either set, but I don't see why Sub+3 Attacks should be considered less stally than an all-out attacking set.

/end rant

Now that's out of the way, I am curious about something. You mentioned Stall relying on frequent switching and all: how does your stalliness index correlate to how often a team switches in on the opponent? You mention how you can figure out turn / KO ratio. Can you do something similar like turn / Switch ratio?

Idk if you have time for all this, but you could go further. You could analyse the ratio of turns for the type of move you make. 'Offensive Moves' (Damage Dealing moves / Boosting setup moves for example), 'Defensive / Utility Moves' (recovery, hazard stack, toxic, burn), 'Switching' (when you switch something in and it doesn't die), 'Sacrifice' (switch something in and gets KOed, or you leave in something to die), and 'Others' (Double Switches, etc, I'm sure I covered most of my bases)

By definition, if you are sponging around by switching, you are making a defensive play. If you are sacking and attacking, you are making an offensive play. Instead of looking at the team you look at how they play. I hope this would bring up a very to-the-point correlation.

Unless, of course, if this is too hard to implement.