This is what tanking is about...

[TheNorthCydeRises]

LOL . . you better check your history then.

History shows that the top team gets in that top 3 almost 75% of the time.

History also shows that the 5th team has had more top 3 picks, than both the 2nd and 3rd place teams.

LOL . . hell, history has shown that finishing #3 is acutally better than finishing #1, seeing that the 3rd team has gotten the top pick twice as many times as the worst team.

More importantly, the history shows that a team outside of the top 4, will enter that top 3 almost 70% of the time . . which means that someone in the top 3 is going to drop completely out of the mix.

Translation = the lottery is a total crap shoot if you're not the #1 team. There are too many varibles in this system that work against you, to secure the position that you really want.

And that poker scenario is bogus. There is NEVER a situation in this draft, where your odds = having a K-K. Never.

It's more like having a pair of 5's or a J-8. No one team has a significant advantage in the lottery, compared to the field. And that's who you're competing against . . the entire field . . not team by team.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What if we get lucky and get #1 pick in the draft from 4th worst record?? Than you will be wrong right? You never know!

---

This is incredibly poor logic. If we get the #1 pick with the 4th worst record, we will have gotten lucky. If we got the #1 pick with the worst record, we would have gotten lucky. In hindsight, in either case, we would look back and say we wouldn't have done it any other way. However, looking forward, we can say for certain that to get the #1 pick as the worst team requires far less luck than to get it as the #4 team.

BTW, I know you're already thinking about replying with "but we couldn't have been the worst team". Before you do that, please consider that I was using the #1 and #4 worst records for the purposes of an illustration.

---

I am just saying that there is no point in arguing over 3rd or 4th worst record. You can still get #1 pick with both spots and you can drop also. I know we have couple of percents more if we get 3rd worst but it's eithier you lucky or not.

It's lottery for god sake.

---

(( clapping ))

Exactly. It's a lottery.

[CBAreject]

Quote:

---

Even you acknowlege that the #1 team has to get "lucky" to get that #1 pick. And you're exactly right with that statement. The system is nothing but a luck system that relies solely on the fall of the ping pong balls.

---

Yes, BUT...the #1 team DOES NOT have to get lucky to get a top 3 pick. They are LIKELY to get a top 3 pick. Ditto for the #2 team. The #3 team is roughly 50/50.

AND, when you consider that we lose our pick if it is not top 3, it is MUCH more important that we MAXIMIZE our probability in THIS SEASON.

You do not understand probability. You think that if a thing is not certain, it is not worth trying for. You think a 90% chance and a 10% chance are equivalent, since "well, neither one is guaranteed".

Why do we let JJ take the final shot of a game when he is not certain to make it? We may as well let Royal Ivey shoot it, since neither is a sure thing. Either way, it's a just a matter of luck. I mean, what's the difference between 45% and 35%? That's only one shot made every 10 tries. Whoop-tee-doo!

[AHF]

Quote:

---

And that poker scenario is bogus. There is NEVER a situation in this draft, where your odds = having a K-K. Never.

---

It isn't as outrageous as it sounds.

In a ten person game, having KK will hold up 26.1% of the time - roughly equivalent to having the first slot in the lottery process. The odds would be lower with a 14 person game, for obvious reasons.

Having suited 67 will hold up 12.3% of the time in a 10 person game.

http://www.oddscalc.com/

The difference between those numbers is big but is in the realm of the numbers being tossed around in the draft lottery.

[jerrywest]

If AJ wasn't here, life would have a different combination in the hawks world, and the events would have been totally different. Chillz and JJ may not have become injured and we could have been the 11th worst team. A couple of wins against Indiana and they would have been the 10th worst team. At mid season Hawks were playing some games like they could beat anybody in the east. Why would you want to tank from that point? How would you have known that JJ+gang would all be injured at the end of the season? Like Ex said, we managed to avoid the log jam at around 32 wins. Thats not so bad. I can't imagine what Isiah is feeling now.

[ncthompson11]

pretty foolish to tank 3 months ago when your team still has a chance for the playoffs.

[CBAreject]

Quote:

---

LOL . . you better check your history then.

---

History is completely meaningless regarding the lottery.

Quote:

---

History shows that the top team gets in that top 3 almost 75% of the time.

---

So, you'd still rather have the #6 record? What gives?

Quote:

---

History also shows that the 5th team has had more top 3 picks, than both the 2nd and 3rd place teams.

---

A statistical anomaly. This doesn't mean 5th is better than 1st. With a small sample size, we're likely to see something unusual.

Quote:

---

More importantly, the history shows that a team outside of the top 4, will enter that top 3 almost 70% of the time . . which means that someone in the top 3 is going to drop completely out of the mix.

---

Actually, all of these things are equally unimportant, since history is completely meaningless. Regardless, the fact that someone in the top 3 will probably get unlucky doesn't mean anything. What's important is the top 3 teams do not have to GET LUCKY to pick top 3. They have to get unlucky to not pick top 3 (save #3, who is just a hair more likely to pick outside the top 3).

Quote:

---

Translation = the lottery is a total crap shoot if you're not the #1 team.

---

A total crap shoot would imply that the probability of each team (who is not the #1 team) is equal. Since the probability for the #2 team is far greater than that for the #10 team, for example, it is clear to almost everyone that it is NOT a total crap shoot. Please continue to insist it is, though. Someone will surely believe you eventually.

Quote:

---

There are too many varibles in this system that work against you, to secure the position that you really want.

---

What variables? You know your probabilities precisely before the draft. Thsoe are "constants". I guess you must mean the lottery balls themselves are variables. How exactly is that "too many"? How do they work against you? They don't know whose number they are drawing...

Quote:

---

And that poker scenario is bogus. There is NEVER a situation in this draft, where your odds = having a K-K. Never.

---

OK. All in with KK vs. AK suited is almost precisely the probability that the #1 team gets a top 3 pick. You are wrong. Besides, I didn't say that KK vs 67 was "like the lottery". I was using that example to show how the fellow didn't understand probability. You are wrong again. Notice that I instructed him not to take my illustration literally and say "but we couldn't have been the worst team!" I did that because I knew that you concrete thinkers cannot think abstractly. Notice that you were not smart enough to avoid this error.

Quote:

---

No one team has a significant advantage in the lottery, compared to the field. And that's who you're competing against . . the entire field . . not team by team.

---

This is still not entirely true. The #1 and #2 teams are LIKELY to get a top 3 pick. The #3 team is roughly 50/50.

Talking about having "a significant advantage compared to the field" is BS, too. Even if the #3 team is not more likely to get a top 3 pick than ALL OF TEAMS 4-14 combined, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT ANYBODY (EXCEPT YOU) WOULD BE STUPID ENOUGH TO PREFER BEING TEAM 14 (since team 14 is in the group 4-14, which is a favorite to get a pick over team 3).

Let's turn around your silly logic. Let's use baseball, which is more of a numbers game. No one team in baseball is a favorite to win the world series. Even the best team is likely to not win the world series, due to the chance aspect of the game. Does that mean that you would prefer to not be the best team? Answer that question. It's not rhetorical.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

pretty foolish to tank 3 months ago when your team still has a chance for the playoffs.

---

As you can see from my post above, it is actually 4 months per the original post in this thread. I agree that is too to tank.

[CBAreject]

I think it was 3+ months ago. Either way, that's probably too early. Fine. That doesn't mean that you should just not consider tanking until the last 2 weeks of the season.

It's like waking up at 6 AM and saying "Oh, it's too early to get up." That doesn't mean you should just sleep until 7 PM.

OK, so ~4 mo. ago was too early. What about 3 mo. ago? What about 2 mo. ago (when we made the AJ trade)?

Even if I get you guys to do nothing more than admit that we shouldn't have traded for AJ, it would make me feel ever so slightly better. Notice that I'm not expecting any admissions, especially from the more prideful members of the board (Lascar, e.g.). That's OK.

[BusBoyIsBack]

It's funny because 2 months ago I thought this game vs Indy could be really meaningful but for completely different reasons.

I foolishly thought it could have been for a playoff spot.

Like I've said, you tankers were right all along. That streak of wins was more harmful than helpful in the end.

But it's still pretty cool it comes down to the wire like this.

Go Indy!

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I think it was 3+ months ago. Either way, that's probably too early. Fine. That doesn't mean that you should just not consider tanking until the last 2 weeks of the season.

It's like waking up at 6 AM and saying "Oh, it's too early to get up." That doesn't mean you should just sleep until 7 PM.

OK, so ~4 mo. ago was too early. What about 3 mo. ago? What about 2 mo. ago (when we made the AJ trade)?

Even if I get you guys to do nothing more than admit that we shouldn't have traded for AJ, it would make me feel ever so slightly better. Notice that I'm not expecting any admissions, especially from the more prideful members of the board (Lascar, e.g.). That's OK.

---

The earlist time to consider tanking, IMO, is when you don't have a realistic shot at the playoffs anymore. Of course, that involves some judgment since it inevitably will be before the team is mathematically eliminated.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

The earlist time to consider tanking, IMO, is when you don't have a realistic shot at the playoffs anymore. Of course, that involves some judgment since it inevitably will be before the team is mathematically eliminated.

---

That's the approach I took. That's why I was saying we shouldn't have given up hope when we were closer to the playoffs than the top 3 seed.

Then we had a friggin collapse and in hindsight I wish we had one earlier.

But really despite all those games we could have lost, if Eddy Curry doesn't screw us over it's a completely different coversation.

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

Yep if only more of us on this internet message board had agreed to tank earlier it really would have made a difference.

---

[jerrywest]

Quote:

---

I think it was 3+ months ago. Either way, that's probably too early. Fine. That doesn't mean that you should just not consider tanking until the last 2 weeks of the season.

It's like waking up at 6 AM and saying "Oh, it's too early to get up." That doesn't mean you should just sleep until 7 PM.

OK, so ~4 mo. ago was too early. What about 3 mo. ago? What about 2 mo. ago (when we made the AJ trade)?

---

If Suns get our pick this year, would you start tanking today for the next 2 seasons? You called it too early, as if you knew that JJ and gang would get injured and we would have been eliminated. At times we played like we could beat any team in the East. On those days you just stayed low and didn't visit Hawksquawk.

[CBAreject]

It was essential for us to tank this year because we got unlucky with injuries. We have a lot of talent on this team, and that is why we are in this position. If we had no talent, tanking wouldn't be required.

Next year, we won't be in a position to tank (if we don't get our pick this year). We are just barely good enough to challenge for the 8th spot. If we get Acie Law or Hibbert, we might be good enough to win 40 games.

We have talent, and that is why "we look like we can play with anybody"....sometimes. We don't have enough to do that nightly. That's what 30 win teams do. That's how you win 30 games. Occasionally, you play pretty well, and actually beat a pretty good team. Other nights, you get blown out...sometimes by mediocre or pooor teams.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

The earlist time to consider tanking, IMO, is when you don't have a realistic shot at the playoffs anymore. Of course, that involves some judgment since it inevitably will be before the team is mathematically eliminated.

---

100% agreed, I've said the same thing all along. Tanking with 52 games to go is absolute lunacy, JJ and Smith would have never agreed to it.

Once there were about 20 games left and JJ went down, I was all on the tanking bandwagon.

The AJ trade might be the worst trade of this whole year, I still can't believe how many people backed it.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

4 months remaining in a season is way too early to consider tanking, IMO.

The 1-2 game swing you are talking about could have been accomplished by simply waiting until after the team had missed out on its run at the playoffs and then tanking the last weeks of the season rather than the last 4 months of the season.

---

True, AHF. This is why I was never for tanking. That stops tonight. I'm going to the game. I hope we lose by 50. I want Woody gone in the worst way. Unlike CBA, I wanted us to win every game. I just knew 4 months ago that this team, with or without injuries, could not compete with Mike Woodson as Head Coach.It's a testament to the players that we've won at all this year. I just wanted change. I wanted to talk about the unimaginable coaching blunders that have cost us the last 2 seasons. Much like Walter and CBA, I was bombarded with insult after insult. Some people didn't want to hear it. The truth hurts. It's really laughable. Unfortunately, the team I love is horrible and doesn't have to be. That's not at all funny. So, lol all you want guys. The fact is the players are good enough to make the playoffs.(not that that should be the ultimate goal) The coach isn't. I was in the "faith" column going into the year. After watching a few games you could tell it was the same old sh from Woody. He is totally inept at controlling a situation. This team would be better off with an old school player/coach situation. Which is pretty pathetic.

Here's to the hope that this is Mike Woodson's last game ever as the Head Coach of the Atlanta Hawks.

If not, it's Groundhog Day all over again.

[bfwolf]

CBA, I have to give you credit for responding to each and every one of these people who simply don't understand statistics. I wouldn't have the patience.

The funny thing is that these people DO understand stats in certain contexts. Like you said, they know they'd rather have JJ take the last second shot than Ivey, even though both JJ and Ivey MIGHT make it and both JJ and Ivey MIGHT miss it. So they inherently get the concept that you want to go with the higher odds even if it's not a sure thing. But somehow, when it comes to the NBA lottery, they refuse to follow that same path of logic and just throw their hands up in the air and say "it's a lottery!"

[bfwolf]

Quote:

---

The earlist time to consider tanking, IMO, is when you don't have a realistic shot at the playoffs anymore. Of course, that involves some judgment since it inevitably will be before the team is mathematically eliminated.

---

AHF, this is a great point. I've mentioned it on another thread before, but I think it bears repeating: I believe that there is a poor level of understand of just what our odds of making the playoffs were back in January. People view being 5 games out as very surmountable, but with half a season left and 4 or 5 teams in between you and the team in the #8 spot, I don't think this is NEARLY as surmountable as it looks. I wish I had the time: I'd do an analysis on just how likely a team is to climb out of that kind of hole.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

AHF, this is a great point. I've mentioned it on another thread before, but I think it bears repeating: I believe that there is a poor level of understand of just what our odds of making the playoffs were back in January. People view being 5 games out as very surmountable, but with half a season left and 4 or 5 teams in between you and the team in the #8 spot, I don't think this is NEARLY as surmountable as it looks. I wish I had the time: I'd do an analysis on just how likely a team is to climb out of that kind of hole.

---

But it looked VERY surmountable. We were red hot, only about 4 games out and more importantly ALL THE TEAMS AHEAD OF US WERE COLLAPSING.

Miami without Wade, ORlando and Indy on a freefall.

Playoffs looked very promising.