Hard Tankers Thread: Eat your Crow Here
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:13 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
I know how it works dude but it ain't called a lottery for nothing.

What happened just recently speaks for itself.


What happened is a very basic exercise in chance.

If your point is you don't like tanking regardless of the outcome, that's fine, I understand that position.

But one's feelings on tanking is completely irrelevant relative to the outcome.


It's not an exact science. I'm not against it but I have my limits.


That's fine. I have no issue with you being against it. I get it. But you're using an event that only occurs 9.4% of the time, to justify doing an event that occurs 9.4% or less of the time.

That's nonsensical.


I know the power of the tank and I'm not against it but this year was really a different story if you put everything in context.

I refuse an all out tank, not this year.


The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:15 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?


Would I ask is irrelevant here.

Would you rather finish with the Knicks record or the Pelicans record next year if those were your only two choices?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 12732

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:19 am    Post subject:

PLEASE DON'T LOCK THIS THREAD!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:24 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?


Would I ask is irrelevant here.

Would you rather finish with the Knicks record or the Pelicans record next year if those were your only two choices?


You have a one track mind and you refuse to see the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is this, in reality the Pelicans won the lottery with them being the underdog.

In reality odds get beaten.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:30 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?


Would I ask is irrelevant here.

Would you rather finish with the Knicks record or the Pelicans record next year if those were your only two choices?


You have a one track mind and you refuse to see the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is this, in reality the Pelicans won the lottery with them being the underdog.

In reality odds get beaten.


They sure do. So what's the point of doing anything in terms of improving your team then?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:35 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?


Would I ask is irrelevant here.

Would you rather finish with the Knicks record or the Pelicans record next year if those were your only two choices?


You have a one track mind and you refuse to see the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is this, in reality the Pelicans won the lottery with them being the underdog.

In reality odds get beaten.


They sure do. So what's the point of doing anything in terms of improving your team then?



You stick to your development goals.

If you get beaten so be it. If you win, take the win.

One can only tank so hard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:38 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?


Would I ask is irrelevant here.

Would you rather finish with the Knicks record or the Pelicans record next year if those were your only two choices?


You have a one track mind and you refuse to see the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is this, in reality the Pelicans won the lottery with them being the underdog.

In reality odds get beaten.


They sure do. So what's the point of doing anything in terms of improving your team then?



You stick to your development goals.

If you get beaten so be it. If you win, take the win.

One can only tank so hard.


What is the point of development? How many teams have developed players only to have them flame out of the league.

Sure, it increases their odds of contributing as players, but in reality, odds get beaten.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
trablos
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 2896

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:43 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?


Would I ask is irrelevant here.

Would you rather finish with the Knicks record or the Pelicans record next year if those were your only two choices?


You have a one track mind and you refuse to see the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is this, in reality the Pelicans won the lottery with them being the underdog.

In reality odds get beaten.


They sure do. So what's the point of doing anything in terms of improving your team then?



You stick to your development goals.

If you get beaten so be it. If you win, take the win.

One can only tank so hard.


What is the point of development? How many teams have developed players only to have them flame out of the league.

Sure, it increases their odds of contributing as players, but in reality, odds get beaten.

Yes, as we just witnessed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:44 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
The chances of winning the #1 pick next year, remain the same as they were this year.

So once again, my question to you, if you understand chance, is regardless of how you feel about tanking, would it better to finish with the worst record next year or the 7th worst record without knowing the outcome of next year's draft lottery?


So would you ask the Lakers to match the Knicks record, is that it?


Would I ask is irrelevant here.

Would you rather finish with the Knicks record or the Pelicans record next year if those were your only two choices?


You have a one track mind and you refuse to see the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is this, in reality the Pelicans won the lottery with them being the underdog.

In reality odds get beaten.


They sure do. So what's the point of doing anything in terms of improving your team then?



You stick to your development goals.

If you get beaten so be it. If you win, take the win.

One can only tank so hard.


What is the point of development? How many teams have developed players only to have them flame out of the league.

Sure, it increases their odds of contributing as players, but in reality, odds get beaten.


I heard Kawhi and Giannis got drafted 15th overall.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
#StayInYoLane
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Apr 2005
Posts: 1157

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:54 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
#StayInYoLane wrote:
pointless thread


StayInYoLane


Never
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 10:12 am    Post subject:

trablos wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
What is the point of development? How many teams have developed players only to have them flame out of the league.

Sure, it increases their odds of contributing as players, but in reality, odds get beaten.

Yes, as we just witnessed


Right. So what is your point? Avoid doing anything to give yourself a better chance of winning anything unless that chance is 100%?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 11276

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 10:14 am    Post subject:

this is so dumb.
1)a decent tank would have got us to #7-8 which would have got us the #2 pick... I have always said #8 was the sweet spot
2)lets say we tank hard to like 6-8 but didnt move up... there's not a huge difference between #4 and #6
_________________
(bleep) Kawhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 10:19 am    Post subject:

audioaxes wrote:
this is so dumb.
1)a decent tank would have got us to #7-8 which would have got us the #2 pick... I have always said #8 was the sweet spot
2)lets say we tank hard to like 6-8 but didnt move up... there's not a huge difference between #4 and #6



A mere 4 wins in March was a decent tank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 10:23 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
I heard Kawhi and Giannis got drafted 15th overall.


So now you think the best chance at acquiring talent in the draft, is to miss the lottery???
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 10:29 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
I heard Kawhi and Giannis got drafted 15th overall.


So now you think the best chance at acquiring talent in the draft, is to miss the lottery???


No.

What I'm saying is if you lose out on the no.1 pick, it ain't the end of the world.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 12732

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 10:36 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
PLEASE DON'T LOCK THIS THREAD!


OK, GETTING BORING NOW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 11:38 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Hero Ball wrote:
I heard Kawhi and Giannis got drafted 15th overall.


So now you think the best chance at acquiring talent in the draft, is to miss the lottery???


No.

What I'm saying is if you lose out on the no.1 pick, it ain't the end of the world.


I don't think anyone actually thinks that tanking guarantees you the #1 pick though. Did someone say that?

All it does is give you the best chance to choose among the largest possible pool of players.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 18508
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 12:00 am    Post subject:

€H£M£$TR¥ wrote:
Mathematically speaking, you lose games in front of crowds that spend money selling out Staples - on purpose. It’s bad business and gambling for a prospect that hasn’t proven jack in a league of grown professional ball players.


Absolutely. Common sense does have value here.

Tanking for draft picks doesn't happen in a vacuum. The losing that it takes to tank has ramifications; the loss in free agents who no longer desire to join, long term erosion of market share that comes from consistently fielding a shoddy product, difficulty in attracting front office and coaching talent to an organization perceived as poorly run, and lack of playoff experience. Add to this the odds the brilliant draft pick you tanked for becomes an NBA bust, or the years of development time it takes for said draft pick to develop a solid NBA game.

Anyone claiming superior use of mathematics by spouting statistical odds of draft positioning while failing to quantify costs or probabilities to each of these detrimental side effects is basically spouting bull (bleep), overestimating the value of high school-level statistics performed in a vacuum, and has no place preaching about the "big picture" or "understanding the math." Also, just because it's nearly impossible to assign reliable probabilities or costs to these side effects doesn't make them any less real. In the real world, a competent front office needs to factor all of this in.

It's foolish to think that building an NBA championship roster is so simple that you can just crunch numbers on draft odds and use that as a basis to go out and lose a bunch of games.

Reality is; we placed a heavy bet on LeBron James. In the Lakers' current situation, tanking sucks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
M2K
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 20 Feb 2011
Posts: 2087

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 3:09 am    Post subject:

TooMuchMajicBuss wrote:
€H£M£$TR¥ wrote:
Mathematically speaking, you lose games in front of crowds that spend money selling out Staples - on purpose. It’s bad business and gambling for a prospect that hasn’t proven jack in a league of grown professional ball players.


Absolutely. Common sense does have value here.

Anyone claiming superior use of mathematics by spouting statistical odds of draft positioning while failing to quantify costs or probabilities to each of these detrimental side effects is basically spouting bull (bleep), overestimating the value of high school-level statistics performed in a vacuum, and has no place preaching about the "big picture" or "understanding the math." Also, just because it's nearly impossible to assign reliable probabilities or costs to these side effects doesn't make them any less real. In the real world, a competent front office needs to factor all of this in.

It's foolish to think that building an NBA championship roster is so simple that you can just crunch numbers on draft odds and use that as a basis to go out and lose a bunch of games.


Yawn....

No one said there weren't other costs involved with tanking... all that is being said is... asking people to eat crow when they view tanking as raising the team's odds of winning a higher draft pick... is pointless... because it does raise the odds.

And then, criticizing fans for wanting to improve the team's draft position by increasing their odds of getting a higher draft pick... is laughable and self serving.

I can see desperate fans seeking attention maybe dropping "eat crow" in one of their replies...but to start a whole thread? Wreaks of needing attention.

Bottom line... this thread has nothing to do with the Lakers and everything to do with going after posters. A tactic that people have been suspended for before.... but for some reason... the mods don't want to apply the same standards to this thread.

I would have as much standing going after the personal issues someone must have to create a thread like this... as he or she would have starting a thread like this. But I don't come here to talk people into jumping off a building... lol... I come here to talk about the Lakers.
_________________
A three headed monster is forming before our eyes in LA...Lebron, AD and....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:08 am    Post subject:

TooMuchMajicBuss wrote:
€H£M£$TR¥ wrote:
Mathematically speaking, you lose games in front of crowds that spend money selling out Staples - on purpose. It’s bad business and gambling for a prospect that hasn’t proven jack in a league of grown professional ball players.


Absolutely. Common sense does have value here.

Tanking for draft picks doesn't happen in a vacuum. The losing that it takes to tank has ramifications; the loss in free agents who no longer desire to join, long term erosion of market share that comes from consistently fielding a shoddy product, difficulty in attracting front office and coaching talent to an organization perceived as poorly run, and lack of playoff experience. Add to this the odds the brilliant draft pick you tanked for becomes an NBA bust, or the years of development time it takes for said draft pick to develop a solid NBA game.

Anyone claiming superior use of mathematics by spouting statistical odds of draft positioning while failing to quantify costs or probabilities to each of these detrimental side effects is basically spouting bull (bleep), overestimating the value of high school-level statistics performed in a vacuum, and has no place preaching about the "big picture" or "understanding the math." Also, just because it's nearly impossible to assign reliable probabilities or costs to these side effects doesn't make them any less real. In the real world, a competent front office needs to factor all of this in.

It's foolish to think that building an NBA championship roster is so simple that you can just crunch numbers on draft odds and use that as a basis to go out and lose a bunch of games.

Reality is; we placed a heavy bet on LeBron James. In the Lakers' current situation, tanking sucks.


This isn't a thread intended to discuss the merits of tanking as a general strategy. It is a thread intended to make the point that because we moved up in the draft, therefore, the pro-tankers were wrong and should eat crow.

That's a faulty premise. Whether you move up or down once the ping pong balls fall doesn't change whether tanking is good or bad.

I think a much better argument, if you want to highlight the downside of tanking (to which there are many), is using this year's lottery to show that the draft lottery outcome is more variable and less predictable than it was in years past due to the rule changes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:09 am    Post subject:

M2K wrote:
TooMuchMajicBuss wrote:
€H£M£$TR¥ wrote:
Mathematically speaking, you lose games in front of crowds that spend money selling out Staples - on purpose. It’s bad business and gambling for a prospect that hasn’t proven jack in a league of grown professional ball players.


Absolutely. Common sense does have value here.

Anyone claiming superior use of mathematics by spouting statistical odds of draft positioning while failing to quantify costs or probabilities to each of these detrimental side effects is basically spouting bull (bleep), overestimating the value of high school-level statistics performed in a vacuum, and has no place preaching about the "big picture" or "understanding the math." Also, just because it's nearly impossible to assign reliable probabilities or costs to these side effects doesn't make them any less real. In the real world, a competent front office needs to factor all of this in.

It's foolish to think that building an NBA championship roster is so simple that you can just crunch numbers on draft odds and use that as a basis to go out and lose a bunch of games.


Yawn....

No one said there weren't other costs involved with tanking... all that is being said is... asking people to eat crow when they view tanking as raising the team's odds of winning a higher draft pick... is pointless... because it does raise the odds.

And then, criticizing fans for wanting to improve the team's draft position by increasing their odds of getting a higher draft pick... is laughable and self serving.

I can see desperate fans seeking attention maybe dropping "eat crow" in one of their replies...but to start a whole thread? Wreaks of needing attention.

Bottom line... this thread has nothing to do with the Lakers and everything to do with going after posters. A tactic that people have been suspended for before.... but for some reason... the mods don't want to apply the same standards to this thread.

I would have as much standing going after the personal issues someone must have to create a thread like this... as he or she would have starting a thread like this. But I don't come here to talk people into jumping off a building... lol... I come here to talk about the Lakers.



Calling the Lakers stupid for not tanking hard is an opinion.

Saying Lakers don't need to tank and keep on winning the most games it can is another opinion.

Knicks tanked hardest didn't get Zion and there's a lesson there.

Don't preach about tanking since the rule changed. Eat your crow and accept that you are wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:13 am    Post subject:

^ Hero Ball -- you either don't understand how chance works, or you don't know what "eat crow" means.

I'm not sure if you realize you haven't proven anything to be untrue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hero Ball
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2015
Posts: 3426

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:18 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
^ Hero Ball -- you either don't understand how chance works, or you don't know what "eat crow" means.

I'm not sure if you realize you haven't proven anything to be untrue.


yawn

you keep saying the same thing, verbatim and when one does that it implies lying.

Better change your wording, you won't sound that boring.

I've had enough of your condescending. STFU
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 26205

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:33 am    Post subject:

Hero Ball wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
^ Hero Ball -- you either don't understand how chance works, or you don't know what "eat crow" means.

I'm not sure if you realize you haven't proven anything to be untrue.


yawn

you keep saying the same thing, verbatim and when one does that it implies lying.

Better change your wording, you won't sound that boring.

I've had enough of your condescending. STFU


Well of course people are just going to say the same thing. There's nothing to discuss here given the faulty original premise.

I think a discussion on the merits of tanking as a strategy is a good, worthwhile one.

I only take issue with your premise. A more sensible argument would have been to show the variability in the draft with the new rules. That, it is now more unpredictable than ever.

Unfortunately, you tied your argument to the actual outcome which makes the argument faulty. In the same thread, you've said that tanking is bad because Pelicans/Lakers moved up, and tanking is bad because New York moved down while also saying...

Quote:
wtf do you mean

it's all about the outcome

smh


Apparently ... it's all about the outcome and the outcome is irrelevant at the same time. Amazing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 5315

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:38 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
governator wrote:
PLEASE DON'T LOCK THIS THREAD!


OK, GETTING BORING NOW


What's the debate? I missed it. Are we happy w/ the 4th pick?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB