Who can do the math?

[Diesel]

And it's expected that they would get higher... The whole time, PTL still had the most combinations...

They had 250 combinations through three drawings... Why wouldn't the numbers get higher?

[Diesel]

[tmac13]

I must have missed something..What exactly is the question D?

This is a really sad state of affairs for Hawks fans..We don't talk about games, we don't talk about the playoffs, but we will sure as hell debate lottery odds and percentages.

[exodus]

[exodus]

[Diesel]

It surely did not.

It showed how the probabilities are what they are.. and guess what.. Based on averages.. not real scenerios...These numbers will be the same next year and the year after... because it's not based on a real scenerio...

However, look at when the authors start talking about a possible scenerio of moving the 5th team first and the 4th team second..

There's no simple math there!

Where's my insecure Lascar?

[Diesel]

He said.. that the percentages 1 - 4 = 100%. I agree for the very same reason you said because they couldn't pick fifth.

So why is it when using the real % from the real Scenerio.. and I get 12.6% as being the ONLY number that could make the other three = 100% do I get so much flack?

INSECURE!

[Diesel]

If it was as simple as a 8th grader could understand it wouldn't be in a referered Journal.

[Lascar78]

oh it's coming. Explaining 12th grade stuff to a retard takes time to write

[Diesel]

The probabilities for 1-4 has to equal 100%.

[Diesel]

Being that it's true...

True or false...

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

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #2 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO GOT THE #1 WERE EXACTLY 27.4%.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #3 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO-CHICAGO GOT THE #1-#2 WERE EXACTLY 35%.

[exodus]

You are really going to feel stupid.

[Diesel]

If these numbers provided by Lascar are true:

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

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #2 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO GOT THE #1 WERE EXACTLY 27.4%.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #3 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO-CHICAGO GOT THE #1-#2 WERE EXACTLY 35%.

AND

The probability that PTL picks 1-4 must be 100%...

Then shouldn't the odds for PTL getting the fourth pick be simple math:

100-25-27.4-35 = 12.6?

WHO CAN DO THE MATH?

[Diesel]

You know it.

I just proved it.

[exodus]

[Diesel]

Whatsamatta Lascar?

You can't admit to being wrong?

Your insecurities got you down?

[exodus]

[Diesel]

If these numbers provided by Lascar are true:

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

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #2 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO GOT THE #1 WERE EXACTLY 27.4%.

-THE ODDS THAT PORTLAND WOULD GET THE #3 PICK GIVEN THAT TORONTO-CHICAGO GOT THE #1-#2 WERE EXACTLY 35%.

AND

The probability that PTL picks 1-4 must be 100%...

Then shouldn't the odds for PTL getting the fourth pick be simple math:

100-25-27.4-35 = 12.6?

WHO CAN DO THE MATH?

[Diesel]

Are you saying that it's impossible to calculate the odds of them getting number 2 if Toronto got number 1?

There are 1000% combinations.

The odds change every time combinations are removed (i.e. somebody moves up).

[exodus]