Game Thread GAME# 25: SUNS @ BLAZERS - DECEMBER 6, 2018 - THURSDAY, 7:00 PM, NBCSNW

[hoopsjock]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/friv/proj_draft.html

BNM

So that is simulated draft lottery position, not percentage chance they get that pick if that makes sense.

 

[BBert]

It could be the setting for the feel good story of the season. The Blazers showing tremendous resilience after losing their owner and weathering losses as bad as 30 and 40 points have come back in a huge way winning 35 of the next 40 then sweeping their way into the Western Conference Finals. Who would have thought a team that lost by 20 to the lowly Suns in December would have reached such heights?

How does that sound?

Improbable, to put it mildly.

 

[Boob-No-More]

We have some bitter little men here.

BNM

 

[Darkwebs]

 

[Boob-No-More]

So that is simulated draft lottery position, not percentage chance they get that pick if that makes sense.

Yes, we'd need to tank the shit out of things to "pass" MIA and all the other teams in between us and them.

BNM

 

[kjironman1]

Okay, I'm calling out anyone who posts this stupid bullshit.

How do you propose doing that?

Hoops could it happen that they tanked enough to get in the lottery and then did well enough in the lottery to get a pick that could get them their choice?

 

[LayneStaley]

Oh my god, your posts are moronic. You took a personal jab at Bones about something that isn't going to happen because that player isn't playing. Then you saw my post that Booker wasn't playing and tried to play it off as a joke and not serious. So instead of just owning up to it you have to be a hypocrite too?

This had nothing to do with a debate.

lol proving my point in your first sentence is pretty funny. Owning up to what? You think I give a shit either way if I did or didn’t know Booker was playing?? Anyone who would be worried about what someone would think about that is pretty pitiful. The post was a joke, I fully expected zero people to respond to it except maybe bones. All messages don’t need to be full of stats, biased opinions, and insults towards people who threaten your facts(opinions)some can just be for fun. I’m done, nice talk.

 

[hoopsjock]

Yes, we'd need to tank the shit out of things to "pass" MIA and all the other teams in between us and them.

BNM

But just doing that doesn't guarantee us anything.

 

[hoopsjock]

Hoops could it happen that they tanked enough to get in the lottery and then did well enough in the lottery to get a pick that could get them their choice?

Say for the sake of argument that I ignored that a team with a healthy Damian Lillard wouldn't lose enough games to get a high enough lottery position, the whole plan for the future would be based on what? Getting up to the 6th worst record which would give us a 9% chance to get Zion?

Do you see how that irritates me when someone just says, lets tank for Zion?!

 

[Boob-No-More]

But just doing that doesn't guarantee us anything.

Yep, it just puts us in the position MIA is in now, with the 8th worst record, and most likely, the 8th (34.5% chance) or 9th (32.1% chance) pick.

BNM

 

[kjironman1]

Say for the sake of argument that I ignored that a team with a healthy Damian Lillard wouldn't lose enough games to get a high enough lottery position, the whole plan for the future would be based on what? Getting up to the 6th worst record which would give us a 9% chance to get Zion?

Do you see how that irritates me when someone just says, lets tank for Zion?!

I agree it ain't gonna happen but lets say Lillard did get injured and the team also endured another couple injuries that held them back. Lets just say for the sake of argument. Because i never in any way condone tanking.
What's the chance a team with say the 6th worst record could score a top 3 pick?

 

[kjironman1]

Is the graph on page 6 correct?
A 6th spot has .1% chance of the 1st pick?

 

[hoopsjock]

I agree it ain't gonna happen but lets say Lillard did get injured and the team also endured another couple injuries that held them back. Lets just say for the sake of argument. Because i never in any way condone tanking.
What's the chance a team with say the 6th worst record could score a top 3 pick?

The 6th worst team would have a 9% chance for #1, a 9.2% chance at #2, and a 9.4% chance at #3.

 

[LayneStaley]

Classic loser we have here in @LayneStaley

1) He tries to take shot at @BonesJones basketball knowledge.

2) Gets called out that the player he is referencing isn't playing.

3) Tries to play it off as a joke.

4) Knowing that he's full of shit, he resorts to attacking the person who is calling him out on his bullshit.

5) Then claims to not care about any of it.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Dude what are you talking about? I’m starting to think there are some serious underlying anger issues. I’m not going over this again. Anyone who saw yesterday’s post and today’s would know I’m giving bones shit, I don’t care if Bookers playing or not. The fact you have to call people stupid and losers the second you get a tiny heated speaks volumes. Have a great night on the post board.

 

[hoopsjock]

I agree it ain't gonna happen but lets say Lillard did get injured and the team also endured another couple injuries that held them back. Lets just say for the sake of argument. Because i never in any way condone tanking.
What's the chance a team with say the 6th worst record could score a top 3 pick?

By the way KJ, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you are completely missing my point about tanking. When people just say we should tank, that isn't a possible situation without an injury to Lillard. You can't just decide to tank and stop winning games. There has to be something that allows you to tank.

 

[kjironman1]

The 6th worst team would have a 9% chance for #1, a 9.2% chance at #2, and a 9.4% chance at #3.

I guess i'm not really understanding that graph.
I better study up a bit. I know the rules changed but i have not even really thought about it until recently. I don't want this team to tank ever. It creates a losing attitude and a losers mentality but i could see them missing the playoffs if there were a couple of lengthy injuries. This team doesn't have the depth to withstand a couple injuries to starters.

 

[kjironman1]

By the way KJ, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt but you are completely missing my point about tanking. When people just say we should tank, that isn't a possible situation without an injury to Lillard. You can't just decide to tank and stop winning games. There has to be something that allows you to tank.

Thanks for giving me the benefit.
I was just asking because i have not looked into the new rules.
The team has won too many games already to tank and i would never want them to any way.

 

[hoopsjock]

I guess i'm not really understanding that graph.
I better study up a bit. I know the rules changed but i have not even really thought about it until recently. I don't want this team to tank ever. It creates a losing attitude and a losers mentality but i could see them missing the playoffs if there were a couple of lengthy injuries. This team doesn't have the depth to withstand a couple injuries to starters.

Do not look at the graph, that is basketball reference projected order of finish percentage wise. It has nothing to do with percentages of getting each pick.

Try this one:
http://www.tankathon.com/pick_odds

 

[dviss1]

We have some bitter little men here.

Understand the personal insult rule Rook...

 

[kjironman1]

Do not look at the graph, that is basketball reference projected order of finish percentage wise. It has nothing to do with percentages of getting each pick.

Try this one:
http://www.tankathon.com/pick_odds

Well that doesn't seem to different. But maybe the odds got better for the teams 4-9? Also the drawing of numbers seems better?

 

[Boob-No-More]

Thanks for giving me the benefit.
I was just asking because i have not looked into the new rules.
The team has won too many games already to tank and i would never want them to any way.

To get to 6th worse, we'd have to "pass" 12 teams that are currently behind us. 10 of those teams are within reach, but that assumes we suddenly become "better" at tanking than all 10 of them, plus 2 more, that are currently between us and the 6th worst record in the league.

BNM

 

[Chris Craig]

Who do we think will start at SG? Curry?

Stauskas

 

[Chris Craig]

Who do we think will start at SG? Curry?

Fuck

 

[kjironman1]

View attachment 23677

To get to 6th worse, we'd have to "pass" 12 teams that are currently behind us. 10 of those teams are within reach, but that assumes we suddenly become "better" at tanking than all 10 of them, plus 2 more, that are currently between us and the 6th worst record in the league.

BNM

Honestly i was just asking. I understand what it takes to tank. I'n many cases it's tougher than just playing to win all the time.

 

[Chris Craig]

I'd rather we start Turner at the 2.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Honestly i was just asking. I understand what it takes to tank. I'n many cases it's tougher than just playing to win all the time.

Just clarifying where we are and what would need to happen to get the sixth worst record. I agree with you, it's not very practical, even if you're willing to go all in and throw an entire season away after just 24 games (with a winning record).

It's not like the teams behind us, the ones that realize they don't have a realistic shot at the playoffs, won't be "resting" their best players over the last month of the season in an effort to get the best pick possible. They already have a head start on us, less talent to begin with and an even greater incentive (and ability) to tank.

BNM

 

[hoopsjock]

Honestly i was just asking. I understand what it takes to tank. I'n many cases it's tougher than just playing to win all the time.

One of the major differences is that they draw for 4 spots now. So in our hypothetical 6th place finish we could get anywhere from the 1st pick to the 10th pick (except we couldn't get 5th). In fact the most likely outcomes of the 6th slot would be getting the 7th or 8th pick.

 

[Chris Craig]

Technically, I don't think Olshey can fire Stotts. I believe only the owner can. Oshey can recommend it, but I'm not sure he wants to go to Jody Allen (or whoever is advising her), tell her the team is underperforming and recommend she start firing people. He could be setting himself up to be next out the door. Probably in his best interest to not draw any attention to the fact the roster he has assembled is underperforming.

BNM

Vulcan CEO Chris McGowan is the one who would fire both Olshey and Stotts.

 

[hoopsjock]

Just clarifying where we are and what would need to happen to get the sixth worst record. I agree with you, it's not very practical, even if you're willing to go all in and throw an entire season away after just 24 games (with a winning record).

It's not like the teams behind us, the ones that realize they don't have a realistic shot at the playoffs, won't be "resting" their best players over the last month of the season in an effort to get the best pick possible. They already have a head start on us, less talent to begin with and an even greater incentive (and ability) to tank.

BNM

Yup, that is one of my main points right now. You don't decide to tank after starting the season 10-3. Some people act like we can just choose to tank and everything just falls into place.

 

[kjironman1]

Vulcan CEO Chris McGowan is the one who would fire both Olshey and Stotts.

Has anyone seen him lately? What's he up to?