LMA has a pretty good idea which teams he wants to play for with Houston near the top of his list. The only way to make it work without losing everyone is in a SNT. They need to reduce Portlands leverage by making believe that LMA is perfectly willing to going another team that has capspace. Portland has to play ball if Houston is going to work.
So apparently Doc views the LMA sweepstakes as the lottery...the Spurs have a crap load more balls than everyone else....Rox have a few in there too...but more likely to pull out a Spur Ball...lol:grin:
Attempting to change the fundamental rules of mathematics in order to justify a false prediction seems like the ultimate backtrack. Sorry but that's just laughable and anyone actually buying that is just lying to themselves about how credible this guy is. Cyberx he is not.
And this is the preferred method for LMA as well I would think as he would be paid what Port can pay which is the full max at 5 years. SA can only do max at 4 years. We know SA cant do SnT because they have no pieces. And Llull decided not to come because he was probably told to stay in holding pattern til we figured out what we were going to do. If he would have come, we would have made him part of the deal in some way (if that can even happen) and he had no idea where he would go? He say "Ohhhh...hehhlll nooo....jooo kreh-zee!" :grin:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">IMO, if <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LMA?src=hash">#LMA</a> is TRULY 'deciding' then that means SA is NO lock. If true, I think he pix HOU bc he LIKES HOU! Also, I wish we had <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Stauskas?src=hash">#Stauskas</a>!</p>— Doc Rocket (@Thedocrocket) <a href="https://twitter.com/Thedocrocket/status/616702797283618816">July 2, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Math is easy.... Spoiler WHEN you're an MIT Grad .... Spoiler I am a "KEEP HOPE ALIVE" alumni... ....... ....... .......
99% chance + 75% chance = Mind Blown! The odds comment still doesn't make any sense! If there are only two teams that can sign him and one team has 2:1 odds in favor of signing (i.e. 67% probability) then the other team as has 2:1 odds against (i.e. 33% probability)!
in the sense of a 75% shooter hitting a FT compared to a 90% shooter. the % doesn't have to be split out of 100.
That doesn't make sense either, first FT %'s are out of a 100, second if you want to go with this scenario it's flawed. Imagine if there's only ONE ball, only one of the players make the FT, first to do it wins. What are the odds one player makes it over the other? They have to be divided into some number, with one player being equal or having an advantage over the other.
Based on the way it was used (acquiring the same thing), the split does need to add to 100%. Use 100% as an example instead of 99%. If the Spurs have a 100% chance to get LMA, then the Rockets have a 0% chance, so, why, if the Spurs have a 99% chance, would the Rockets have any more than a 1% chance?
