Why the Rockets Can't Lose: The McGrady Trade and the Myth of Team Building

Wow, you just might be the must ignorant person I know. You learn a simple identity and you think you got it all figured out. Notice that you are calculating the probability of landing at least one franchise player not one franchise player. Those are completely different things. Just look at your own math, the chances of landing at least one scrub would also be 3/4. I think you just contridicted your own "you can't exceed 100% claim".

 

Um, the probably of just landing ONE franchise player, with two draft picks, if the percentage is 50% for both, is 50% then. See the possibilities. And no, it will never exceed 100% no matter what situation you come up with. Just read my post over and over. You'll eventually get it, champ.

 

For sure and Zo was a franchise player also. Go look how he turned around the heat into contenders the minute he signed. Gary Payton is probably the 2nd best pg in the last 20 yrs and maybe even the best. He's a franchise playe no doubt.

 

So, it is 50%. I am glad I finally got some sense into you. Then you can add it up, because 50%+50%=100. The only reason I added up the percentages was to show that the guy had the percentages way too high(I am talking about the first post of this thread). Since there are pretty only 1 franchise a year, it would be impossible to have such high percentages. (with one franchise player a year, the percentage should add up to 100%) It would take at least 3 franchise players a year to make what the guy said true.

 

When OP says, 36% a top three pick lands a franchise player, he is not saying EACH PICK HAS A 36 PERCENT CHANCE.

He is saying there is a 36% chance ONE! FRANCHISE PLAYER WILL RESULT FROM ONE OF THOSE THREE PICKS.

IT IS NOT 36% + 36% + 36%, IT IS JUST 36% IN TOTAL FOR ALL THREE PICKS.

Please tell me you get it!

 

Wow, you don't even have the decency to admite that you were wrong.

 

OMFG!!! You are both incorrect. Are you guys really math majors with really high grades? Damn I really have to go to US then, I'd probably own despite being below average at math. Kidding lol

Mr Awe has the right methodology but has the wrong percentages. LCII sees the flaw in Mr. Awe's percentages but doesn't see the flaw in his own method. Let me clear it up for you guys:

Probability calculation = list down every probability, then divide by number of existing probabilities.

1) Mr Awe had the correct methodology, but made the mistake of identifying the probability of drafting a number 1 pick. Let me explain:

A. Possible outcomes of drafting francise player (FP) on 1 pick: 50% Franchise(F), 50% Scrub (S)

B. Possible outcomes of drafting FP on 2 picks: 25%FF, 25%FS, 25%SS, 25%SF.

Therefore, the probability of drafting AT LEAST 1 franchise player on 2 picks is 75%, not 100%. If you think about it logically you can't have 100% chance of getting a franchise player on 2 picks, because what happens f you pick 2 scrubs in a row? Obviously you don't end up with a franchise player, so how can you have 100% success rate?


2) LCII knew that Mr Awe is wrong, but logically speaking, you should also know that the chances of getting a franchise player increases with every pick you make. If you get more chances to pick a franchise player, then obviously the chances of getting a franchise player will increase.



Elementary, my dear LCII and Mr Awe. Well...maybe high school

 

OP's percentages are also weird, which I just noticed. But I was only disputing Mr Awe's reasoning, not the OPs. But....yes. You are the 'most correct' in the context of this topic. However... I really cannot believe a 3.8 GPA math honor minors student would seriously molest the concept of percentages like that.

 

Thanks for clearing that up, but I think you also miss understood me. In your demo, you 25%FF, 25%FS, 25%SS, 25%SF, the FF would mean there are two different Franchise players being drafted rather than one drafted twice. Which was my whole point! There are way too many Franchise players, making the percentages unrealistic(the ones from the thread).

 

wow... That's what I've been saying all along. I was simply doing a simple demostration to show that the percentages were unrealistic. Just re-read my posts. Maybe you were too stuck in your head the whole time.

 

To be quite honest, although its true that the OP put a lot of effort into his post, his entire argument suffers from two serious flaws:

1) Franchise players are subjective:
Based on his own definition: "I mean not only someone who is the best player on his team, but a player who can carry a team to the finals and give them a legitimate chance to win"
->This is a wrong way of identifying franchise players because basketball is a team sport, and as it connotes a lot of the outcome depends on your teammates, and even your opponent. As an example, why don't we take Kobe. When Kobe had Shaq, they won the championship 3 straight times. However when Shaq left the Lakers became a middle of the road team and didn't reach the finals again until the Gasol trade. Does this mean that Kobe was a franchise player during the Shaq years, left himself go when Shaq left and rededicated himself to the game when Pau arrived? NO! Kobe was the same as he always is, its just that the Lakers as a whole stunk so bad that even Kobe in all his awesomeness couldn't make them finals contenders. Another way of looking at it is that the LBJ's cavs finals team would never make it to the even 2nd round had he been playing in Hakeem's championship years. In that case he wouldn't be considered a franchise player, however everyone here knows that LBJ's performance is at franchise player level.

2) Even if you can figure out what a franchise player is, the probability of getting a franchise player in every draft is different because you don't know how many franchise players there are in every draft. I would argue that in MJ's draft class there is at least one franchise player(MJ), while in Yao Ming's draft class there is no franchise player available. So coming out and saying that "there is a 60% probability you will get a franchise player" in any draft is B.S. because there is a possibility the probability for that particular draft is actually 0%.

3) As in stocks, past performance is not an indication of future performance. Just because the Spurs got Duncan when they tanked, and the Blazers got Roy when they sucked doesn't mean we'll get a franchise player when we tank as well. You don't even know if it will help your chances of landing a franchise players and winning a championship, because the Clippers have been tanking for over a decade now and they haven't won anything. The only sure thing about tanking is that you will lose games, and no one wants that.

 

Don't pay attention to OP's percentages, they are wack (see my long ass post above). Even if there are two franchise players, you are not guaranteed that you will get either of them. So in essence, you either treat them as separate:

50% F in draft 1, 50% F in draft 2

Or you combine them:
75% at least 1 F in two drafts
25% 2Fs in two drafts
25% no F in two drafts

You don't simply add them, and in terms of probability you won't have a probability more than 100%. Probability is different from percentages. At 100% you will already get the outcome every time you do an attempt, how the hell can you double or even triple that?

 

That's all I was trying to point out. Glad someone agrees with me. And you are right, you can't exceed 100%, I have no idea why I said you can.

 

He misspoke, but Bird, while never leading the league in scoring, did score 60 points in a regular season game (1985 against the Hawks). Maybe he should have said that those players could score if they needed to, and were damned near impossible to stop (I'm not including Duncan, who's still playing).

 

I guess the summary is you draft franchise players and not trade for them. Of course it doesn't take a genius to realize the best way to build your team is still via draft.

 

Interesting post OP. I think Detroit should be addressed here though. They spanked the Lakers and were strong contenders for several years.

I had a lengthy post about mental will and luck, but the board crapped out on me.

Pretty much it's a matter of hindsight. Those who overcome the pain of lucky shots and the defense will become great. When it comes to the point where two teams with "great" players cross paths, their leadership comes into play. The more they distribute and build their teammates trust and confidence, the more "lucky" Horry/Sean Elliot/Mario Ellie shots come into play. And the more they will bleed for those extra boards and stopped plays.

Had Horry had missed that 3 in Sacto, Webber might never have had to re-answer questions about his toughness by winning it all. He would've been "reborn" or validated.

Mental perception definitely plays a strong role in the league...all sports and wars. We can't let hindsight get in the way, especially when drafts are crapshoots based off of judgement of a players build, playing in a different league, and gathering insights from rare practice sessions. If one were to base the OP's percentage with his small sample size, he would still have to face those odds in a good year. So making decisions based upon that hindsight could be self fulfilling.

 

OP basis that a championship run is gain by having a lottery pick by losing out from the playoffs is just flawed. Too much things have change over the years, so I just take the past 10 years.

01 Lakers
02 Lakers
03 Spurs
04 Pistons
05 Spurs
06 Heat
07 Spurs
08 Celts
09 Lakers

Lets see, 01 and 02 Lakers have an FA signing of Shaq as well as trading for the 14th pick(Kobe).
03 Spurs have Duncan, traded for SJax and a 28th pick Parker
04 Pistons have a undrafted Big Ben, traded for Rasheed, Rip and Billups and a 23rd pick of Prince.
05 and 07 Spurs have Duncan, 28th pick Parker and 57th pick Ginobili
06 Heat have 5th pick Wade, traded for Shaq.
08 Celts traded 5th pick for Allen, trade for KG and have Pierce
09 Lakers have Kobe, traded for Gasol.

Other than Heat who have drafted for Wade in the lottery and Celts who traded a lottery pick for Allen, all others have failed.
Other than Celts, all other teams have winning seasons leading to the championship runs.

 

Some teams make their luck. Just a question, how would jerry west handle the yao and tracy situation?

 

I haven't actually read the OP because its long and drawn out, but these last two pages have been really interesting.

Im just wondering what your definitions are of the difference between probability and percentage?

 

It sucks that this thread became statistics thread, but you are dead on with this post. I still think his post was very well written and entertaining.