The Atlanta Pick is starting to look really scary for us

[elindholm]

I'm not at all convinced these statistics are correct but since I haven't read the rules I'm not sure how to actually work out the math.

What would it take to convince you? Numerous authoritative sources have been quoted, as well as independent work from at least one resident mathematician on the board.

Considering all, the odds of #4 getting into the top three looks closer to 10% than 30%.

I can't begin to fathom what that is supposed to mean. The probability is what it is, regardless of how you elect to "consider" it.

 

[pokerface]

All I know is when you're in a high slot draft range a certain amount of luck is required regardless. Look how the Rockets scored Ming from the 6th slot to the 1st pick a few years ago. Sometimes either you're just lucky or not thats why I prefer the 4th slot and go for broke. Maybe if we're lucky we'll be REAL lucky and end up with the 4th pick overall.

 

[elindholm]

Sometimes either you're just lucky or not thats why I prefer the 4th slot and go for broke. Maybe if we're lucky we'll be REAL lucky and end up with the 4th pick overall.

The point many posters have tried to make -- evidently without success -- is that the Suns are more likely to wind up at #4 or #5 if they start at #3 in the lottery than if they start at #4. If maximizing the opportunity for a very high pick is the overriding priority, it's better to be at #3.

This isn't open to debate. It's a mathematical fact.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Thanks Reccless, I'm gonna come back and re-read this tomorrow when i'm not stoned.

Every once in a while you read a post that seems to explain everything.

 

[JCSunsfan]

All I know is when you're in a high slot draft range a certain amount of luck is required regardless. Look how the Rockets scored Ming from the 6th slot to the 1st pick a few years ago. Sometimes either you're just lucky or not thats why I prefer the 4th slot and go for broke. Maybe if we're lucky we'll be REAL lucky and end up with the 4th pick overall.

I do it the sophisticated way. I go to Realgm or espn's lottery simulator and run it 10 times. Right, ATL ends up with a top 3 pick 4-5 out of every 10 runs.

 

[Muggum]

I'd still prefer to be at #5. I like the safety of a 70 percent chance of actually landing the pick over a 60 percent chance.

It would be different if I felt that there were 4 strong players and a big dropoff after that. But I don't. There are 2 most likely awesome players, followed by about 8 who are 'indistinguishably' good. I say 'indistinguishably' because the people on this board cannot distinguish between the ones who will succeed and the ones who will fail. Even the best scouts don't know for sure.

I direct you to the draft in which we picked Amare. If you were to look at the Suns fan forums before that draft, hardly anyone was coveting him. Rather, we were singing the praises of Drew Gooden, and hoping Chris Wilcox fell, and talking about DeJuan Wagner's amazing Suns-like ability to fill up the basket, and discussing Skita as the 'next Nowitzki,' etc.

Those of you who are so certain Horford is the guy just don't know for sure. Would you bet any hard-earned money that Horford will have a more productive career than Brandan Wright? Or Roy Hibbert? Or Corey Brewer? Or Jeff Green? Or Mike Conley Jr.? Or Yi Jianlian?

Has one person on this board *ever* seen Yi Jianlian with a basketball in his hands?

Given that 3-8 kinda look like a toss-up, I'm just saying, I'd rather be assured of the high pick and hope D'Antoni knows talent well enough to pick the right guy.

And let's not forget where Miami got Dwyane Wade... #5.

 

[elindholm]

There are 2 most likely awesome players, followed by about 8 who are 'indistinguishably' good. I say 'indistinguishably' because the people on this board cannot distinguish between the ones who will succeed and the ones who will fail. Even the best scouts don't know for sure.

I direct you to the draft in which we picked Amare.

Although it's true that most fans hadn't identified Stoudemire as The One, Suns brass certainly had. (That said, Stoudemire was the choice of this board's mock draft.) It's well documented that they were scrambling to move up in order to get him, because some other team (Portland?) had their eye on him at #6.

Those of you who are so certain Horford is the guy just don't know for sure. Would you bet any hard-earned money that Horford will have a more productive career than Brandan Wright? Or Roy Hibbert? Or Corey Brewer? Or Jeff Green? Or Mike Conley Jr.? Or Yi Jianlian?

No, I certainly wouldn't. But, come draft time, I think the Suns will know exactly who they want. Remember, that's actually been their problem in the last two drafts: getting tunnel vision for one or two players and then not having a backup plan.

Given that 3-8 kinda look like a toss-up, I'm just saying, I'd rather be assured of the high pick and hope D'Antoni knows talent well enough to pick the right guy.

I agree that the Suns may wind up fixated on a player who will be there at #7 or #8. But it would make everyone's life easier if they could take him at #4 and be done with it.

 

[pokerface]

I'd still prefer to be at #5. I like the safety of a 70 percent chance of actually landing the pick over a 60 percent chance.

You feel so much safer with a 70% chance of collecting versus a 62% chance? I'm sorry but that hardly seems like a safety net to me....I'd rather take the 62% and at least have a shot at 4th pick.

 

[pokerface]

I do it the sophisticated way. I go to Realgm or espn's lottery simulator and run it 10 times. Right, ATL ends up with a top 3 pick 4-5 out of every 10 runs.

If I flip a coin 10 times and 8 times it's heads does that mean its not a 50/50 shot anymore?

 

[azirish]

If I flip a coin 10 times and 8 times it's heads does that mean its not a 50/50 shot anymore?

I have been searching the web for a history of the actual NBA lotteries to see how often the #4 pick has been in the top 3, but apparently I'm not asking the question correctly. Does anyone have a source?

 

[elindholm]

I have been searching the web for a history of the actual NBA lotteries to see how often the #4 pick has been in the top 3, but apparently I'm not asking the question correctly. Does anyone have a source?

I suppose you could look at the standings for each year, then see where each team ended up drafting, but that would be tedious. I agree that it would be nice to see a nice summary of each team's movement in the last several lotteries, just as a curiosity. Maybe on nba.com somewhere? I know they have lottery pages, but I find that site almost impossible to use and try to avoid it.

In any case, though, what happened in the past is no indicator of what will happen in the future. Each new random event is an independent trial.

 

[azirish]

I suppose you could look at the standings for each year, then see where each team ended up drafting, but that would be tedious. I agree that it would be nice to see a nice summary of each team's movement in the last several lotteries, just as a curiosity. Maybe on nba.com somewhere? I know they have lottery pages, but I find that site almost impossible to use and try to avoid it.

In any case, though, what happened in the past is no indicator of what will happen in the future. Each new random event is an independent trial.

That is certainly true for the initial lotteries with only 7 teams included.

 

[F-Dog]

In any case, though, what happened in the past is no indicator of what will happen in the future. Each new random event is an independent trial.

That is certainly true for the initial lotteries with only 7 teams included.

This doesn't bother me too much--not today, at least--but I can see why Eric gets annoyed from time to time.

 

[elindholm]

Heavens above, I'd post a link to a basic probability primer, if I thought anyone would read it. What a sad commentary on our nation's mathematical literacy.

 

[pokerface]

Heavens above, I'd post a link to a basic probability primer, if I thought anyone would read it. What a sad commentary on our nation's mathematical literacy.

Yeah but thats what built Vegas baby!

 

[Errntknght]

Azirish,

As far as I can tell, the total amount of balls is not altered after someone wins. If the top seed gets 15 balls and wins the first pick, I don't think they remove that team's balls from the hopper. If that is the way it works (and honestly I don't know), then the odds on the second round are altered strictly by the removed ball. Also, I don't think they redraw if #1 gets a second ball.

Since the team that is wins the first slot can't also win the second or third their balls must somehow be removed once they've won!

 

[ozzfloyd]

Azirish,

Since the team that is wins the first slot can't also win the second or third their balls must somehow be removed once they've won!

I wouldn't want to win the lottery if it means balls are removed. Yikes!

Anyway yes, I believe the balls are removed after they first come up.

 

[elindholm]

They aren't physically removed. As posted earlier in this thread, if a combination comes up for a team that has already been awarded the first or second pick, the combination is ignored and the balls are reselected.

It doesn't work like the lotto drawings you see on television. Each team is represented by combinations of balls, not individual balls.

 

[Errntknght]

I know Eric, but saying their combinations are ignored doesn't have the same impact as saying their balls are removed...

 

[pokerface]

I know Eric, but saying their combinations are ignored doesn't have the same impact as saying their balls are removed...

Well it is what it is....the balls arnt removed

 

[CaptainInsano]

---
(chorus)
oh, I've got big balls
I've got big balls
and they're such big balls
dirty big balls
and he's got big balls
and she's got big balls
but we've got the biggest balls of them all
---

Anyone else thinking of this while reading this topic? Anyone? Anyone...

 

[Treesquid PhD]

---
(chorus)
oh, I've got big balls
I've got big balls
and they're such big balls
dirty big balls
and he's got big balls
and she's got big balls
but we've got the biggest balls of them all
---

Anyone else thinking of this while reading this topic? Anyone? Anyone...

I myself was thinking about dirty deeds done dirt cheap, but i'm a sicko.

 

[Errntknght]

Pokerface,

Well it is what it is....the balls arnt removed

Although we talk about the ping-pong balls and give the numbers of them, this is just a manner of speaking. They're really combinations of 4 numbers chosen from the integers 1 through 14. The groups of 4 numbers are chosen by selecting 4 balls at random from among 14 balls numbered 1 through 14. There are 1001 such combinations and one of them is ignored when it comes up so there are 1000 used combinations which are allocated to teams which don't make the playoffs. Once a team has won the first slot with the first drawing its combinations are ignored for subsequent drawings and similarly for the team winning the second draft slot when the third slot is being chosen. Combinations are ignored by redoing the drawing of combinations until an non-ignored combination is selected.

Incidentally combinations of 4 numbers from among 14 were used when there were 13 teams in the lottery and I think the coincidence of there now being 14 teams and 14 numbered balls gives rise to some confusion.

In case anyone is wondering, there is no statistical difference between ignoring some cases when they occur and arranging things so precisely those cases cannot occur. (At least, thats true when you use objects that are distinguishable. Strange things happen when one gets down to the quantum level...)

 

[pokerface]

The balls arnt removed...the combinations arnt removed (just ignored)...we know we know.

 

[elindholm]

Incidentally combinations of 4 numbers from among 14 were used when there were 13 teams in the lottery and I think the coincidence of there now being 14 teams and 14 numbered balls gives rise to some confusion.

I hadn't thought of that, but it's a good point, especially with people who may not have thought carefully about the lottery before.