Should the Suns keep Ryan McDonough as GM

[JCSunsfan]

Sorry if some of my replies sound harsh I’m just sometimes astonished the lengths that some of you go to support your argument when the facts are very simple and plain for us to see. There’s a lot of misinformation and conjecture thrown out there by the anti-team gang. A lot of it is posted even after the correct information is provided. I am not attacking any one person, these comments are meant broadly.

Here is a synopsis of Hinkie's entire body of work from Wikipedia.

Hinkie's first major move took place during the 2013 NBA Draft, when Hinkie traded All-Star point guard Jrue Holiday to the New Orleans Pelicans for the Pelicans' top-5 protected 2014 pick and Nerlens Noel. Hinkie also selected future Rookie of the Year Michael Carter-Williams and Arsalan Kazemi in the draft.[13] In August 2013, Hinkie hired former Spurs assistant Brett Brown as the new Sixers coach, replacing Doug Collins, who had stepped down before Hinkie's hiring.[14] Hinkie's first year was marked with accusations that Philadelphia was "tanking" in order to get a high pick in the 2014 NBA Draft, and the Sixers tied the NBA record for longest losing streak around the time.[15][16] In two trades at the 2014 NBA trade deadline, Hinkie traded veteran Sixers Evan Turner, Spencer Hawes, and Lavoy Allen, acquiring five second round picks and Henry Sims.[17] After the season, Hinkie traded long-time Sixer Thaddeus Young to the Minnesota Timberwolvesfor the Miami Heat's top-10 protected 2015 first round pick, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, and Alexey Shved.[18]

During the 2014 NBA Draft, Hinkie selected Joel Embiid (who nicknamed himself "the Process"),[12] Dario Šarić (after a trade that sent Elfrid Payton to the Magic), K.J. McDaniels, Jerami Grant, Vasilije Micic, and Jordan McRae; Hinkie also traded the 47th pick in the draft for NBA Development League veteran Pierre Jackson.[19] During the 2014-2015 season, Hinkie signed D-League veteran Robert Covington to a four-year contract; alongside Noel and Carter-Williams, Covington was selected to participate in the 2015 Rising Stars Challenge.[20] In three separate deals at the 2015 trade deadline, Hinkie traded Carter-Williams and McDaniels for Javale McGee, Isaiah Canaan, protected 2015 first round picks originally owned by the Lakers and the Thunder, and a second round pick.[21][22] In the 2015 NBA draft, Hinkie selected Jahlil Okafor with the third overall pick, along with Richaun Holmes and J. P. Tokoto in the second round.[23] During the 2015 off-season, Hinkie traded two second round picks for Nik Stauskas, Jason Thompson, Carl Landry, a 2019 first round pick, and the right to swap first round picks with Sacramento in 2016 and 2017.[24] Because of that 2015 trade, Philadelphia would swap picks with Sacramento in the 2017 NBA Draft, moving from the 5th overall pick to the 3rd overall pick;[25] the team would later acquire the first overall pick of the 2017 draft (Markelle Fultz) using assets acquired during Hinkie's tenure.[26]

 

[Mainstreet]

The lottery odds will change after the 2018 draft thanks largely to Sam Hinkie.

IMO, they should have lessened the odds of getting the top picks even more for the worst teams.

I never liked the idea of rewarding losing but that's another discussion.

 

[hcsilla]

You wouldn't?

The #2 lottery seed has a .561 chance of getting a top three pick.
The #3 lottery seed has a .472 chance of getting a top three pick.
The #1 lottery seed has a .250 chance of getting the top pick.

For the three years 2014-16, given their lottery position, they had only a .066 chance of picking as high as they did. That's 1/15.

Their entire plan required getting very lucky in the lottery. They did, so good for them, but it's not nearly as systematic as hindsight makes it look.

No, I wouldn't and you wouldn't either.

That's a nice try and play with numbers but the cold fact is if you put events with probability above 0.5 plus another event with probability of 0.25 then you get a low number as their combined probability. You can call that lucky, it just doesn't make any sense.

When the Sixers had #1 lottery seed in all 3 years then they had only a .643 x .643 x 0.25 = 0,1 chance of picking as high as they did. That's 1/10.

You would call them very lucky also in that case, right?

So, all in all, no, they did not require very lucky.

In 2016 they had the highest probability of getting #1 and they did. In 2014 and 2015 they had a fifty-fifty chance of getting those picks.


Your whole try reminded me of Winston Churchill's saying: "I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself."

 

[hcsilla]

Here is a synopsis of Hinkie's entire body of work from Wikipedia.

Yes, that's an excellent job. I can't wait to see McD doing the same or at least something similar.

 

[pokerface]

I never liked the idea of rewarding losing but that's another discussion.

Yeah but would we have as much of an interest in watching lousy teams play if they didn't?

 

[elindholm]

That's a nice try and play with numbers but the cold fact is if you put events with probability above 0.5 plus another event with probability of 0.25 then you get a low number as their combined probability. You can call that lucky, it just doesn't make any sense.

If you were to make a substantial bet on winning four coin flips in a row, you'd have to win a 50-50 chance each of four straight times. The probability of success is 1/16. That's very lucky. It isn't relevant that each individual coin flip is an even chance. What's hard is winning several in a row.

Maybe the hang-up is on the word "lucky." We can put it a different way. If another team should have happened to be the #2, #3, and #1 lottery seeds in those years, they would have been 14 times as likely to get worse picks than to do as well as the Sixers did. Call it good luck or bad luck, but it's a mathematical fact.

 

[Cheesebeef]

If you were to make a substantial bet on winning four coin flips in a row, you'd have to win a 50-50 chance each of four straight times. The probability of success is 1/16. That's very lucky. It isn't relevant that each individual coin flip is an even chance. What's hard is winning several in a row.

Maybe the hang-up is on the word "lucky." We can put it a different way. If another team should have happened to be the #2, #3, and #1 lottery seeds in those years, they would have been 14 times as likely to get worse picks than to do as well as the Sixers did. Call it good luck or bad luck, but it's a mathematical fact.

good gravy it sucks that we've all been having the same discussion for ALMOST A DECADE because we have nothing else to really talk about with this team.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Yeah but would we have as much of an interest in watching lousy teams play if they didn't?

The reality is there’s no perfect system. Free market would just exponentially increase the chasm between haves and have nots. A Yankees or dodgers in the nba would be disastrous.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

If you were to make a substantial bet on winning four coin flips in a row, you'd have to win a 50-50 chance each of four straight times. The probability of success is 1/16. That's very lucky. It isn't relevant that each individual coin flip is an even chance. What's hard is winning several in a row.

Maybe the hang-up is on the word "lucky." We can put it a different way. If another team should have happened to be the #2, #3, and #1 lottery seeds in those years, they would have been 14 times as likely to get worse picks than to do as well as the Sixers did. Call it good luck or bad luck, but it's a mathematical fact.

I don’t think that’s mathematically accurate. Each coin flip is independent of the other. Once you’ve flipped heads three times in a row you still have a 50% chance of flipping heads on the last flip.

 

[Chaplin]

Yeah but would we have as much of an interest in watching lousy teams play if they didn't?

Maybe that’s the problem.

 

[Mainstreet]

Yeah but would we have as much of an interest in watching lousy teams play if they didn't?

I do not watch the Suns to see them lose. When I watch the Suns I'm interested in watching the younger players.

If the Suns traded Chandler, Dudley or Monroe and brought G-League players all the better.

I'm all into the Suns future, not the now especially at this point.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I don’t think that’s mathematically accurate. Each coin flip is independent of the other. Once you’ve flipped heads three times in a row you still have a 50% chance of flipping heads on the last flip.

I don’t think that’s mathematically accurate. Each coin flip is independent of the other. Once you’ve flipped heads three times in a row you still have a 50% chance of flipping heads on the last flip.

He just explained it. He is right. Its not about the individual selections, it is the set as a whole.

 

[elindholm]

I don’t think that’s mathematically accurate. Each coin flip is independent of the other. Once you’ve flipped heads three times in a row you still have a 50% chance of flipping heads on the last flip.

We aren't disagreeing.

Let's try this one more way. You are trapped in a maze. To get out, you will encounter four blind choice points, one after the other. At each choice point, one path leads to safety, and the other leads you to an assassin who will murder you instantly. What is your probability of getting out of the maze?

 

[Cheesebeef]

We aren't disagreeing.

Let's try this one more way. You are trapped in a maze. To get out, you will encounter four blind choice points, one after the other. At each choice point, one path leads to safety, and the other leads you to an assassin who will murder you instantly. What is your probability of getting out of the maze?

Is there cheese in this maze?

 

[pokerface]

Maybe that’s the problem.

Or maybe there wasn't such a problem. Fans of bad teams need hope and something to root for and be entertained. The draft provides that.

Plus if the league is dead set against lousy teams benefiting and want some mythical purity they should make the draft completly random or have teams take turns with picks.

But I wont hijack the thread with this dead horse so im done.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

He just explained it. He is right. Its not about the individual selections, it is the set as a whole.

I’m running this by our CIO tomorrow. He’s a math wiz. The aggregate doesn’t change the odds for each individually coming true.

 

[BC867]

Cheese, they don’t even realize that the suns have only purposefully tanked for part of a single season. These are the same folks who keepntrotting out the argument “I suppose you want to tank forever” thereby evidencing their lack of understanding.

Ouchie and Cheese, I think it is more a case of, having been out of the post-season for seven years going on eight, fans find it difficult to embrace a plan based on losing.

Tanking is hoping. We're hoping that, miraculously, the Suns ownership and Front Office can show us skills in building a winner instead of hoping. Sadly, I wouldn't bet the ranch on it.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Ouchie and Cheese, I think it is more a case of, having been out of the post-season for seven years going on eight, fans find it difficult to embrace a plan based on losing.

Tanking is hoping. We're hoping that, miraculously, the Suns ownership and Front Office can show us skills in building a winner instead of hoping. Sadly, I wouldn't bet the ranch on it.

Yeah I understand that. But just missing the playoffs isn’t tanking. And folks keep saying we’ve been tanking for a long time. The basic truth is that tanking has only occurred for only a part of a single season. The other seasons we’ve just stunk.

 

[Chaplin]

Or maybe there wasn't such a problem. Fans of bad teams need hope and something to root for and be entertained. The draft provides that.

Plus if the league is dead set against lousy teams benefiting and want some mythical purity they should make the draft completly random or have teams take turns with picks.

But I wont hijack the thread with this dead horse so im done.

But if bad teams are actually punished for being bad, maybe they wouldn’t be content with remaining bad.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

But if bad teams are actually punished for being bad, maybe they wouldn’t be content with remaining bad.

I don’t think any team is “content with remaining bad.” I think they may tolerate being bad for a short period to acquire talent, but not “content with remaining bad.”

 

[elindholm]

I’m running this by our CIO tomorrow. He’s a math wiz. The aggregate doesn’t change the odds for each individually coming true.

I'm not saying that they do. What part do you have a problem with?

 

[JCSunsfan]

I’m running this by our CIO tomorrow. He’s a math wiz. The aggregate doesn’t change the odds for each individually coming true.

But that is not what he is saying. The aggregate doesn't change the individual outcome, but he is talking about the aggregate outcome.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I'm not saying that they do. What part do you have a problem with?

I still want to know about if there’s cheese in the maze...

 

[SirStefan32]

I still want to know about if there’s cheese in the maze...

Somebody moved it, I think. I don't know who.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Somebody moved it, I think. I don't know who.

*********! Beef need it’s cheese!