GT #70 Grizzlies @ Wizards 7:00 PM

[doclinkin]

Picks 1-3, historically, do show a statistically meaningful correlation to results in the league. But, even that doesn't give you any certainty that they will be the 3 best players out of their draft.

...

I don't doubt, Illmatic, that you've "dug deep into this draft class." We all try to do that as best we can. But it is absolutely not the case that the Wizards "need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting..." (unless you mean they should use that pick position to trade down -- which is the opposite of what you mean).

So quick to make your point you don't bother to understand. Illmatic/nate are pointing out the lotto probability of picking in that top 4 makes a significant drop off the better our record. You yourself point out the top 3 picks tend to correspond with NBA success. This year that may be particularly true at the top spot, unless you want to argue you doubt Zion will have NBA success. And landing in that top four of necessity gives us a larger pool of teams behind us who might want to trade up for a particular player. Now say you're sorry for being a one note trombone and lets all move on.

[Dat2U]

...The part that bugs me is the difference between a 37.2% chance at a top 4 pick, and a 13.9% chance at a top 4 pick.

It's exactly this Nate. Right now we have a 20% chance at a top 3 pick.
...The Wizards need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting on this draft. I've dug deep into this draft class and if Culver, Clarke, Deandre Hunter are off the board by our pick it will not be good.

Wow. It really is amazing: mere facts -- repeated facts demonstrated year after year after year -- do not suffice for people to get it. GMs don't know -- & neither do you, Illmatic -- who will be better between the guy picked 6th & the guy picked 10th in any draft. They haven't known in the past; they don't know now; they never will be able to know.

By definition, the 6th best player is better than the 10th best player. Duh. It's just not possible to list players in the draft in order of how good they will be.

Picks 1-3, historically, do show a statistically meaningful correlation to results in the league. But, even that doesn't give you any certainty that they will be the 3 best players out of their draft.

The only way having the 6th pick is at least likely to be better than having the 10th pick is that you can trade the 6th pick for the 10th pick & another pick. In a game that approaches randomness, having 2 shots helps. The reason is obvious.

I don't doubt, Illmatic, that you've "dug deep into this draft class." We all try to do that as best we can. But it is absolutely not the case that the Wizards "need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting..." (unless you mean they should use that pick position to trade down -- which is the opposite of what you mean).

Your "facts" is mere analysis of the bad decisions teams make over a period time. And yes, alot of bad decisions are made. Without analyzing the specific players involved in this draft and determining where they may go, any real analysis is incomplete. I also think it's clear that it's always preferable to have a higher pick, thus if a trade down is desirable, you'll be in a stronger negotiating position with the higher pick and can acquire more in return.

[Illmatic12]

...The part that bugs me is the difference between a 37.2% chance at a top 4 pick, and a 13.9% chance at a top 4 pick.

It's exactly this Nate. Right now we have a 20% chance at a top 3 pick.
...The Wizards need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting on this draft. I've dug deep into this draft class and if Culver, Clarke, Deandre Hunter are off the board by our pick it will not be good.

Wow. It really is amazing: mere facts -- repeated facts demonstrated year after year after year -- do not suffice for people to get it. GMs don't know -- & neither do you, Illmatic -- who will be better between the guy picked 6th & the guy picked 10th in any draft. They haven't known in the past; they don't know now; they never will be able to know.

By definition, the 6th best player is better than the 10th best player. Duh. It's just not possible to list players in the draft in order of how good they will be.

Picks 1-3, historically, do show a statistically meaningful correlation to results in the league. But, even that doesn't give you any certainty that they will be the 3 best players out of their draft.

The only way having the 6th pick is at least likely to be better than having the 10th pick is that you can trade the 6th pick for the 10th pick & another pick. In a game that approaches randomness, having 2 shots helps. The reason is obvious.

I don't doubt, Illmatic, that you've "dug deep into this draft class." We all try to do that as best we can. But it is absolutely not the case that the Wizards "need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting..." (unless you mean they should use that pick position to trade down -- which is the opposite of what you mean).

You clearly didn’t understand what was written in my post, and you don’t seem to understand the NBA lottery very well either.

The biggest adjustment to the draft lottery this year is that a significant chunk of lottery balls are taken away from the 3 worst teams and re-distributed amongst the teams in the 5-8 range. Instead of being incentivized to tank from 2nd-3rd worst record to #1, the greatest incentive is now for teams to “tank” from the 9-12 range into the 5-8 range.

This not only maximizes your chances at jumping into the top 4 or even the #1 pick, it minimizes the chances of having another team jump over you and falling backwards from your lottery slot.

This isn’t rocket science yet you seem to think you have some wealth of knowledge that dwarfs the rest of us mere mortals on this messageboard.

[CobraCommander]

Terrible win. Beal was amazing again though. He is becoming fearless, and that is helping him become clutch. We're seeing the next evolution of Beal.

Also wouldnt mind getting another look at Jabari next year. Hopefully if we use the team option on him he'll be willing to come back on a 1+1 for ~6m to 7m a year.

I love the wiz and I’m still watching every game. But its so hard to engage in the conversations here because the board is dead/sad after all the missteps we have had over the last few years. Injuries happen_ (no JW and dare I say no DHoward hurt) but the problem is - we are not tanking (players shouldn’t tank - front offices should) and we are putting useless miles on beal when we need him healthy next year more than ever. This feels more and more like the skins or NYGs...no plan. There may be some good players in the draft beyond Zion...but no one polished enough to help beal beyond his current contact...and he is out after this deal or he will get a super max by us...and he isn’t a supermax player (which isn’t an insult to beal). Making the playoffs would be another tragic end to a tragic season.

On the game...beal is must see tv.... selfishly I love watching him go off even if I know it’s just the basketball equivalent of watching something you shouldn’t enjoy watching -(all examples which shall remain unnamed as this is a family board). Beal is so fun! But its not gonna add up to anything because while he is good, no single player in the NBA is good enough to make a poorly run franchise relevant. The wiz are irrelevant and it shines more brightly when you see the clippers and Indiana out perform the wiz with “vastly inferior talent”. Love beal- love the wiz...but we are the below average/waste prime beal years treadmill now unless....

Spoiler:

ernie goes and takes Scott with him

[CobraCommander]

It's exactly this Nate. Right now we have a 20% chance at a top 3 pick.
...The Wizards need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting on this draft. I've dug deep into this draft class and if Culver, Clarke, Deandre Hunter are off the board by our pick it will not be good.

Wow. It really is amazing: mere facts -- repeated facts demonstrated year after year after year -- do not suffice for people to get it. GMs don't know -- & neither do you, Illmatic -- who will be better between the guy picked 6th & the guy picked 10th in any draft. They haven't known in the past; they don't know now; they never will be able to know.

By definition, the 6th best player is better than the 10th best player. Duh. It's just not possible to list players in the draft in order of how good they will be.

Picks 1-3, historically, do show a statistically meaningful correlation to results in the league. But, even that doesn't give you any certainty that they will be the 3 best players out of their draft.

The only way having the 6th pick is at least likely to be better than having the 10th pick is that you can trade the 6th pick for the 10th pick & another pick. In a game that approaches randomness, having 2 shots helps. The reason is obvious.

I don't doubt, Illmatic, that you've "dug deep into this draft class." We all try to do that as best we can. But it is absolutely not the case that the Wizards "need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting..." (unless you mean they should use that pick position to trade down -- which is the opposite of what you mean).

You clearly didn’t understand what was written in my post, and you don’t seem to understand the NBA lottery very well either.

The biggest adjustment to the draft lottery this year is that a significant chunk of lottery balls are taken away from the 3 worst teams and re-distributed amongst the teams in the 5-8 range. Instead of being incentivized to tank from 2nd-3rd worst record to #1, the greatest incentive is now for teams to “tank” from the 9-12 range into the 5-8 range.

This not only maximizes your chances at jumping into the top 4 or even the #1 pick, it minimizes the chances of having another team jump over you and falling backwards from your lottery slot.

This isn’t rocket science yet you seem to think you have some wealth of knowledge that dwarfs the rest of us mere mortals on this messageboard.

First - Rocket science is easier than you think - at least the propulsion parts of the science is- Second you are so right about the draft now...mid level tanking is now rewarded...which allows the league to pretend like all the teams are “trying” but if you fail to tank just enough to improve high draft pick probability—-you are just a “big dummy”

[Illmatic12]

Wow. It really is amazing: mere facts -- repeated facts demonstrated year after year after year -- do not suffice for people to get it. GMs don't know -- & neither do you, Illmatic -- who will be better between the guy picked 6th & the guy picked 10th in any draft. They haven't known in the past; they don't know now; they never will be able to know.

By definition, the 6th best player is better than the 10th best player. Duh. It's just not possible to list players in the draft in order of how good they will be.

Picks 1-3, historically, do show a statistically meaningful correlation to results in the league. But, even that doesn't give you any certainty that they will be the 3 best players out of their draft.

The only way having the 6th pick is at least likely to be better than having the 10th pick is that you can trade the 6th pick for the 10th pick & another pick. In a game that approaches randomness, having 2 shots helps. The reason is obvious.

I don't doubt, Illmatic, that you've "dug deep into this draft class." We all try to do that as best we can. But it is absolutely not the case that the Wizards "need the 6th-8th worst record to maximize their chances of hitting..." (unless you mean they should use that pick position to trade down -- which is the opposite of what you mean).

You clearly didn’t understand what was written in my post, and you don’t seem to understand the NBA lottery very well either.

The biggest adjustment to the draft lottery this year is that a significant chunk of lottery balls are taken away from the 3 worst teams and re-distributed amongst the teams in the 5-8 range. Instead of being incentivized to tank from 2nd-3rd worst record to #1, the greatest incentive is now for teams to “tank” from the 9-12 range into the 5-8 range.

This not only maximizes your chances at jumping into the top 4 or even the #1 pick, it minimizes the chances of having another team jump over you and falling backwards from your lottery slot.

This isn’t rocket science yet you seem to think you have some wealth of knowledge that dwarfs the rest of us mere mortals on this messageboard.

First - Rocket science is easier than you think - at least the propulsion parts of the science is- Second you are so right about the draft now...mid level tanking is now rewarded...which allows the league to pretend like all the teams are “trying” but if you fail to tank just enough to improve high draft pick probability—-you are just a “big dummy”

The thing is , if you are a mid-level lotto team (like say the Lakers) that means you were at least trying to win for a better portion of the season. For the NBA it’s a better product overall because you no longer have specific teams that spend the *entire* season trying to lose. Cavs for instance brought Kevin Love back even though they should’ve just held him out all year.

Even a team like the Suns, they’ve been a disaster most of the year but as of late they are making an earnest effort to put a good product on the floor for their fans.

And teams like Charlotte and Washington are close enough in the playoff race that they will probably try to win the entire year.

[payitforward]

Your "facts" is mere analysis of the bad decisions teams make over a period time. And yes, a lot of bad decisions are made. Without analyzing the specific players involved in this draft and determining where they may go, any real analysis is incomplete. I also think it's clear that it's always preferable to have a higher pick, thus if a trade down is desirable, you'll be in a stronger negotiating position with the higher pick and can acquire more in return.

I agree with you 100%, Dat. In fact, you make my points for me!

All I've done is point out that GMs make non-optimal decisions; they are unable to rank the guys in the draft accurately according to how good they'll be in the league -- at least not past the #3 pick.

That's why, as you say, what matters is "analyzing the specific players" -- if you do that well, you help yourself a whole lot more than the ping pong balls can help you!

If you do that, you may wind up picking #15 & #28 & still get the best player in the draft & one of the next 5 best players in the draft. If you don't or can't do that you can pick way higher & get nothing.

You are also 100% right that a higher pick helps you get more in a trade. Having the #6 pick is better than having the #10 pick, but you are not likely to get a better player using that pick than you would get at #10 -- &, obviously, those "facts" you mention show that clearly.