Question for those of you so upset that we might have dropped 2 spots in the lottery

LOL please show me a post where you claim I fail to grasp anything.

Umm nice analogy... am I suppose to glean something from that? Are you saying I argued that 100$ is not 100$? please show me, I like to know wtf your talking about lol? Since you seem to know what I've posted to make this thread run so long... what are you saying the points in those posts were? What erroneous points are you debating? Show me plz. Lol its like me saying to you... Yao Ming is NOT a worst player than Rick Smit and you are an idiot to say so EASY! Why do you and others keep insisting Yao Ming isnt better than Dampier? Lets go through this again Yao avgs 22+ a game Dampier avgs under 8points... got it!?

Also You claim my quote isnt relevant to the debate? What debate? Are you sure you know how to read?? Do you know what my quote is in respond to?
Canoner2002 claimed that no matter what you ALWAYS ALWAYS do better with the higher pick. Just show I'm not making this up... here is the evidence

I disagree and say his statement is WRONG. I argue that its false and write.

Show me how my quote and its response is not relevant to the debate I'm having with Cannoner? Better yet show me how my statement is wrong as it is a statement of fact. A quick peruse throught the history pages will easily prove its "correctness."
If you still think thats not relevant you'll need alot more than reading classes.

 

But... but..... John and Mary used their $20 bill and won the lottery in 1927 and 1982, respectivly. So $100 bill DOES NOT always do better than $20 bill. I have decided to swap my $100 bill for a $20 bill FREE. It's not that bad. We just need some luck to hit the lottery. Remember John and Mary? They used $20 bill instead of $100. You know what I mean?

 

But But... Andrew and Meg used their 1 dollar bill and won the super super lottery the POWER BALL in 2006... So $100 bill does Not always do better than $1 dollar! (can a dollar actually do something? nm lets just pretend) I have HOWEVER still decided NOT to swap my $100 for a $1 bill! However I'm glad you dragon167 would like to swap.. goodluck on that!

 

No Easy, your the one who doesn't grasp it. This man's hands are already full so he has no room for a 100 dollar bill. Hense a $100 dollar bill has no value to him. But give him some time and eventually he'll have to pull his hands out of his pockets and then he will realize all he has to show for his efforts are some glazed knuckles and lonely memories of what could have been. So give the guy a break and let him enjoy the moment!

 

ewwww gross cant you leave your hands, pockets, glazed knuckes, and your visions of Rudy out of this!

 

Is BlahBlehBlah the sound you make when you pop a lotto ball? Don't answer that!

 

Lets tank a game for an inknown commodity. Not Smart!

 

The odds of finding a player who doesn't suck increase the better pick you have. Scouts are often wrong-but that doesn't eliminate marginal advantage.

Your complaint is pointless-sometimes the #20 pick is better than the #1 - but every spot still counts, because every spot you drop is one more player you don't have the option of picking.

 

I just wanted to correct some exaggerations you made while criticizing the Rockets' draft history. If you want to criticize, fine, but lets try to be fair and accurate.

 

I think the whole point is really because of that meaningless winning that JVG conduct. Before we put up WHY on the draft, we should put a WHY on this move. If he is willing to Rox, he can eventually help out Rox next season, isn't it?

 

the fact that you need an explanantion as to why the 6th pick is better than the 10th pick tells me all i need to know.

 

Clutch, that conversation post was classic and hilarious.


I haven't read all of these, because it's all been said before... but...

I agree with the spirit of the question in the original post, which seems to be, "When potential of a draft pick is so suspect and in question, especially this year, why would fans want us to try to lose games to move up one or two spots."

This is going to be another "Why did we tank"/ " What qualifies as tanking" argument. Has been done to death here.

I disagree with the whole notion of trying to lose to gain more lotto balls, and anyone that loses a game on purpose for this purpose (that is the real question here, isn't it, whether that happened either by coach or by player, or if it didn't and should have, or whatever) has sold their integrity and professionalism out.... which I think is a bad thing... and for what? The difference between 7 and 9 in a crappy draft?

Winning isn't everything. Play your games, do what you need to (Maybe that involves making tough decisions on when NOT to play certain players, as I think it should) but these guys should never be trying to lose, players, coaches, whoever. The fans deserve better, the team deserves better, the league deserves better. And that's ignoring the pure principle of the whole thing, which in my opinion is the most important thing.

I have been flamed countless times for this opinion, and probably will be again, but I still think that the attitude that it's alright or somehow commendable to lose games on purpose to increase your chances in the lotto stinks. Of course, the debate regarding this in other threads has become, what does "losing games on purpose mean?" That's debatable, but I don't think that, as Clutch has pointed out many times, benching players to preserve them or to give younger or other guys more time for experience or evaluation is losing on purpose. It's doing what you think is best for the organization. That I can accept. Losing a game on purpose is different, and I can't accept that notion... not for more lotto balls, not for any reason.

Winning isn't everything, kharma exists, the fans deserve better... and in the end... even the number one pick doesn't guarantee you anything.

Be careful of that for which you wish, you might get it.