mulamutti wrote:billy_hoyle wrote:mulamutti wrote:
We have heard a million times that any given year is a strong year or weak year, but even those analyses are often wrong. Its only after the fact that you know whether this year was a strong year or weak year. If this years 4th pick is worth more, all the more reason to strongly consider a trade for a known commodity, if available.
You are wrong. The odds is suggesting the success rate of the picks at 4, suggesting the level of inaccuracy of the picks. of course we can pick from a lot more players (not picked 1-3), but the probability of success is only about 25-30%. Based on your rebuttal, why did we pick caboclo at 1st round - pick 20, instead of jokic at 2nd round pick 40? or Valancuinas at 5 instead of kawhi (who was drafted 15). It is not obvious to the best of scouts, and so it is a 25-30% crapshoot.
What? too simple to look at results? What would you rather look at? The stats do not lie. Draft picking is a very low probability success rate. EVEN in 2003, Darko was picked over carmelo, Bosh and Carmelo over Wade. Even Jordan was only picked 3. Not trying to be mean, but you're entire rebuttal is wrong.
Your entire point is wrong. Its too simplistic. Different front offices are better at SCOUTING! They will make different CHOICES under the same circumstances. The results are what other people would have done. Why are you comparing Masai to Kahn? That's actually what you are doing here. Jesus man it's not even hard to understand.
Not to be mean man, but your point is absolute garbage.
That's all.
Jeez. Those examples I gave were of the raptors scouting staff. Your conjecture is that raptors scouting staff is that much better than everyone else?
Masai drafted Jonas?
Come on man. You know he didn't.
It's more complicated than what you are proposing.
I don't have the answer on how to do this. I think you are kinda on the right track when you point out Masai picked Bruno before Jokic and Capela... Now do that for each pick he's made. Compare the number of all stars available in those historical drafts (or all star caliber players - this is subjective, but all star selections isn't a perfect barometer of impact or pickings high level players).
See how many times he's selected the best player available at his picks (also track if he picked the 2nd or 3rd best player).
Now consider at four the likelihood an all star (or all star caliber player) is available and their abundance within that draft range.
I bet you end up with higher odds than 33% that we get a star. (All star caliber would be someone like SGA).
Additionally, you could weight the available players based on projections, although if you did this you will just find out that Masai has a really high chance of drafting a star, because there are at least 4 high probability stars in this draft.
#tradethepick
