Jump to content

  • Current Donation Goals

    • Monthly Donations
      Raised $390 of $700 target

Hey Lascar... It's not fixed... Ask a PTL fan

Diesel

By Diesel
in Homecourt

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member
Diesel Grand Master

Diesel

Posted
  • Author
  • Premium Member
Posted

Oh, so now, I don't know what I want... Is that what it is.

I asked for the exact probability of the scenerio that happened and you keep spouting off predraft probabilities based on averages and not the real scenerio.....

Please, stop being so dumb about this Lascar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

DJlaysitup Newbie

DJlaysitup

Posted
Posted

Oh forget the supposed mathematical odds. If they wanted to be a real "lottery" they would have brought out the machinery and shown it. Why would you have a top nba executive reading off of cards if the fix wasn't in.

Toronto gets first pick because Colangelo is well liked and can do some things for the league. He's got the juice.

Chicago gets # 2 to assist them in further rebuilding an important market.

Charlotte gets # 3 - probably just because they deserved it more than the Hawks/Portland.

Portalnds # 4 cause they couldn't drop any further.

Atlanta # 5 because the Hawks/BK/ownership are not well liked in the nba hierarchy - plus we looked to be tanking games by holding out players towards the end of the year.

Anybody who thinks this wasn't a pre-determined order is just being gullible (IMHO). grin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Premium Member
Diesel Grand Master

Diesel

Posted
  • Author
  • Premium Member
Posted

Quote:

ou're not looking at an average, you're looking at exact numbers:

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #1 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 25%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #2 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 21.5%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #3 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 17.7%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #4 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 35.8%

Notice how they add up to 100%?
Those were the exact odds that they would end up at the 4 positions, with everything taken into account. No averages involved. They are the precise odds that portland would get each spot. #4 was the most likely for them. Which is why I told you we were technically lucky to get #2 last year.

If you want to look at the partial odds, they are much less meaningful but they would be:

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #1 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY
25%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #2 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO GOT THE #1 WERE EXACTLY
27.4%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #3 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO-CHICAGO GOT THE #1-#2 WERE EXACTLY
35%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY. THEY THEREFORE AUTOMATICALLY GOT THE #4.

The number I got 12.6% is based on everything that Lascar gave me.

I was never interested in the predraft average approximation that Lascar has been quoting from wikipedia as "EXACT"..

I was looking for the "REAL" probabiliy of that scenerio playing out the EXACT way that it did and according to Lascar's numbers and math.. There was only a 12.6% chance of that happening...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CBAreject Newbie

CBAreject

Posted
Posted

"Innumeracy" is a term I first heard as a 17-year-old. It so perfectly explained my frustration with people who cannot understand numbers. They aren't bad people....don't get me wrong. The trouble is that they don't realize they have deficits. People who can't read are outcasts in our society, but people who can't multiply or understand probabilities make jokes of their shortcomings. We've all heard an acquaintance joke, "I can't even balance my checkbook." Those comments are usually met with sympathetic laughter. Not so for admissions of illiteracy. I have always been frustrated with this arrangement. You could argue that, in today's world, being able to understand numbers is as critical as being able to read. At the very least, quantitative ineptitude indicates likely deficits in abstract and analytical reasoning. People who cannot understand statistics will often make illogical, circular, or circumstantial arguments, and they will miss the important points in the arguments of others.

From Bandolier:

Quote:

Innumeracy:
The inability to think with numbers. Statistical innumeracy is the inability to think with numbers that represent uncertainties. Ignorance of risk, miscommunication of risk, and clouded thinking are forms of innumeracy. Like illiteracy, innumeracy is curable. Innumeracy is not simply a mental defect inside an unfortunate mind, but is in part produced by inadequate outside representations of numbers. Innumeracy can be cured from the outside.

*note that I find the contention that innumeracy is "curable" in all cases highly tenuous

Importance of numeracy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
AHF Grand Master

AHF

Posted
  • Moderators
Posted

Quote:

Quote:

ou're not looking at an average, you're looking at exact numbers:

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #1 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 25%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #2 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 21.5%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #3 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 17.7%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #4 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 35.8%

Notice how they add up to 100%?
Those were the exact odds that they would end up at the 4 positions, with everything taken into account. No averages involved. They are the precise odds that portland would get each spot. #4 was the most likely for them. Which is why I told you we were technically lucky to get #2 last year.

If you want to look at the partial odds, they are much less meaningful but they would be:

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #1 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY
25%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #2 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO GOT THE #1 WERE EXACTLY
27.4%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #3 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO-CHICAGO GOT THE #1-#2 WERE EXACTLY
35%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY. THEY THEREFORE AUTOMATICALLY GOT THE #4.

The number I got 12.6% is based on everything that Lascar gave me.

I was never interested in the predraft average approximation that Lascar has been quoting from wikipedia as "EXACT"..

I was looking for the "REAL" probabiliy of that scenerio playing out the EXACT way that it did and according to Lascar's numbers and math.. There was only a 12.6% chance of that happening...

The REAL/EXACT odds you are trying to calculate are a lot higher than 12.6%. They are 35.4%.

75% x 72.6% x 65% = 35.4% chance of getting the 4th pick (or a 35.4% chance that Portland does not land the first overall; does not land the second overall given that Toronto got the first; and does not get the third overall given that Toronto got the first and Chicago got the second).

35.4% is very close to 37%.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Premium Member
Diesel Grand Master

Diesel

Posted
  • Author
  • Premium Member
Posted

Moreover, if we used your math to determine the odds of getting the 4th pick baSED on the predraft %s........

75% * 88.5% * 82.3% = 52.47%.

That would mean that there was a 52.47% chance that PTL would end up 4th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
AHF Grand Master

AHF

Posted
  • Moderators
Posted

Quote:

Moreover, if we used your math to determine the odds of getting the 4th pick baSED on the predraft %s........

75% * 88.5% * 82.3% = 52.47%.

That would mean that there was a 52.47% chance that PTL would end up 4th.

What are you talking about?

Those numbers are completely messed up.

How did you come up with the 88.5% and 82.3% numbers? There is no way that those numbers can do anything but do down from 75%!! When someone lands the #1 spot, that takes balls out of the mix. That means that the odds of landing the #2 pick improve and the odds of not landing the #2 pick decrease. Your numbers are impossible, and I cannot figure out where they came from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
AHF Grand Master

AHF

Posted
  • Moderators
Posted

Quote:

Moreover, if we used your math to determine the odds of getting the 4th pick baSED on the predraft %s........

The way you do your odds based on predraft numbers is fundamentally the same way I did it. The only difference is you do that for every possible combination of picks, add up the results, and you have cumulative odds for the entire range of possibilities which was 37%.

The reason the actual cumulative odds were lower is because Toronto got the top pick. They remove fewer combinations from the pool than predicted and the odds of Portland getting the second pick decrease from where they would have been expected to be.

The lowest potential probability of Portland ending up #4 (which would be with Chicago at #1 and Charlotte at #2) is still way higher than 12%.

I don't want to jump on you like some people are here, but you seem to be fundamentally missing the basic concept underlying these statistics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CBAreject Newbie

CBAreject

Posted
Posted

First of all, all of this is ridiculous.

Second of all, when calculating the probability that Portland would pick 4th, you must consider each case for teams picking 1-3. Each of these must be weighted for the probability of the case occuring, and these must be summed. Some people will not understand what I just said, but I will assume Lascar, Nicholas, and AHF will.

This tremendously facile concept is the difference in conditional probability and joint probability. The probability Portland will pick 4th given that Tor, Chi, Char pick 1-3 is 100%. That is a conditional probability. However, the probability the first 4 picks go Tor, Chi, Char, Por is very, very low. That is a joint probability.

Here's a simpler example than the complex NBA lottery.

1) Let's take a box of 3 white marbles and 3 red marbles.

2) Let's draw them a pair at a time.

3) Let's figure out the probability that the second pair is white, red.

draw 1) WW (1/5), WR (3/5), RR (1/5)

that step was simple enough, but now, the probabilities we draw a particular pair are CONDITIONAL. They are conditioned upon what we drew on the first pair.

SO

condition 1> given 1) WW (prob. 1/5)

draw 2) WW (0), WR (1/2), RR (1/2)

PROB WR with condition 1: 1/2 * 1/5 = 1/10

condition 2> given 1) WR (prob. 3/5)

draw 2) WW (1/6), WR (2/3), RR (1/6)

PROB WR with condition 2: 2/3 * 3/5 = 2/5

condition 3> given 1) RR (prob. 1/5)

draw 2) WW (1/2), WR (1/2), RR (0)

PROB WR with condition 3: 1/2 * 1/5 = 1/10

The overall probability of drawing WR on the second pair can be found by summing the probability of WR occuring in each condition. That probability is 60%. It is possible to calculate the probability for an event without knowing what precedes it, even if those precedings affect the event. You just have to weight each scenario appropriately.

It seems like some people are having trouble understanding how we can know Portlands prob. of picking 4th without knowing who picks 1-3. It's like asking how we can know the prob. of drawing WR on draw 2 without knowing what we drew for the first pair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lascar78 Newbie

Lascar78

Posted
Posted

Quote:

Quote:

ou're not looking at an average, you're looking at exact numbers:

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #1 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 25%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #2 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 21.5%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #3 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 17.7%

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #4 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY 35.8%

Notice how they add up to 100%?
Those were the exact odds that they would end up at the 4 positions, with everything taken into account. No averages involved. They are the precise odds that portland would get each spot. #4 was the most likely for them. Which is why I told you we were technically lucky to get #2 last year.

If you want to look at the partial odds, they are much less meaningful but they would be:

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD FINISH AT #1 IN THE 2006 NBA DRAFT WERE EXACTLY
25%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #2 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO GOT THE #1 WERE EXACTLY
27.4%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #3 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO-CHICAGO GOT THE #1-#2 WERE EXACTLY
35%
. THEY DID NOT GET THAT LUCKY. THEY THEREFORE AUTOMATICALLY GOT THE #4.

The number I got 12.6% is based on everything that Lascar gave me.

I was never interested in the predraft average approximation that Lascar has been quoting from wikipedia as "EXACT"..

I was looking for the "REAL" probabiliy of that scenerio playing out the EXACT way that it did and according to Lascar's numbers and math.. There was only a 12.6% chance of that happening...

AHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

So you did 100-25-27.4-35=12.6%

Too funny! That number has no meaning whatsoever.

Please keep the laughs coming, I'll show this to my kids to get them to stay in school...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
drzachary Newbie

drzachary

Posted
Posted

I'm certainly enjoying it. I really admire Diesel's tenacity in this one. The man just does not back down! He's kind of the BK of Hawksquawk in that sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...