I HATE the Hawks !!!

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Officially label me a hater of the Hawks and everything they're trying to do for the future . . .

Because I LOVED the effort they put out in the 2nd half of that game. Salim dropping 3's all over the place. Shelden controlling the defensive boards and grabbing offensive boards. And Smoove . . what can you say about that guy? As a Hawk fan, how dare I root for the team and the effort of those guys, even though the season is almost officially over. ( One more Magic win or one Hawks loss officially eliminates us from the playoffs . . lol )

But . . OH NO!! The Hawks winning means that our odds of NOT getting Oden with the #1 pick stay at 88.1% . . instead of reducing those odds to 84.4%. God forbid that we go to #5. That'll give us a 91.2% chance of not getting Oden. It is imperative that we stay at that 5 out of 6 chance of NOT getting Oden at #1.

OMG . . we can't increase our odds of not getting Oden by having the Hawks win. So we MUST root against the team. Root against your favorite team at all costs, so that our odds can be reduced to 84.4%. Root for us to lose, and root for them to win. (( crying )) It's our only hope!!

(( drying tears ))

But it's OK . . if we don't get #1, we have a good shot to get #2 and take Durant. But if we don't get #1, we have to hope that the worst team gets that #1 spot. That way, our odds of not getting that #2 spot will be reduced to 79.2%

(( sigh ))

So if we don't get the #1 or #2 picks . . we have to hope that the "odds" stay true to form ( something that has NEVER happened in the lottery since they changed the format in 1995 ). With the worst and 2nd worst teams out of the way, our odds of not getting that #3 pick will be reduced to 71.7%.

That'll be GREAT !! The the future of the Hawks will be SAVED!! We can build a statue in front of Philips arena of the ping-poing lottery machine that gave us our Savior. Hallejua . . thank ya Jesus !!

But alas, a famous Hawksquawk poster once said this about obtaining one of the top 3 picks . .

"There are essentially 3 drafts for 3 positions. In total with the 3rd worst record we have roughly a 50% chance at a top 3 pick.

So let's celebrate!! A 50% chance of getting one of the top 3 picks . . because we can add the probability percentages for each round, and come up with a number that will reflect what chance we have of landing a top 3 pick.

Intersting.

Well if you add 15.6% ( best odds for a #1 ) + 20.8% ( best odds for a #2 ) + 28.3% ( best odds for a #3 ) . . that equals at best a 64.7% chance of landing a top 3 pick!!

YES . . I think!!

Uh oh . . but I thought there are essentially 3 separate drafts for 3 positions? And with those 3 separate drafts, doesn't the variable change according to the number of eligible ping-pong combinations left on the board? And if that's true, how can you just add your percentage chances across the board, to come up with an accurate probability? Oh . . that must be the "new math". I get it now.

YES !!

So if the worst record gets the #1 pick, we'll still have 49.1% chance at best of landing the #2 or #3 pick, right? That would be the best case scenario for a team at the #3 spot, if the worst team got the #1 pick.

(( dancing like Snoopy ))

But if picks 1 and 2 don't fall our way, is our chance of landing that #3 pick still around 40 - 50% . . because we can add the probability numbers in totality that we used to justify us having a 45 - 50% chance of obtaining a top 3?

Kind of confusing to follow, when you're looking at numbers separately and then try to look at them cumulatively at the same time.

So let's review:

Pick 1 - 156 combinatins divided by 1000 ping-pong combinations = 15.6% chance for that particular pick.

Pick 2 - 156 combinaitons divided by X-number of ping-pong combinations left on the board = a variable percentage chance not higher than 20.8% for that particular pick.

Pick 3 - 156 combinations divided by X-number of ping-pong combinations left on the board = a variable percentage chance not higher than 28.3% for that particular pick.

Three different drafts for three different positions.

Also, three different variables for three different drafts to select those 3 different positions.

People looking at the probability chance of the draft in its totality, without looking at the acutal chance of a combination falling during each selection, says there is a around a 50% chance of landing a top 3 pick. This keeps "hope" alive . . as Jesse Jackson would say.

People like Josh Smith look at the draft as 3 separate drafts, in which your chances in each "draft" put you at a success rate under 30%, in even the best case scenario. That type of thinking keeps him, and others, from sticking their heads in the clouds and dream about something that is unlikely to happen.

It's funny though. The same people who "kept" hope alive about a playoff berth for the Hawks, are now the "realists" about the lottery and the actual chances of landing a top 3 pick, even if we're the 3rd worst team at the end of the season.

And the people who were the "realists" about the Hawks chances about making the playoffs, are now the people "hoping" that the draft falls our way, by obtaining as many ping-pong ball combinatins as we can, and hoping that the team that they love, lose every game to get those ping-pong balls.

Interesting.

I guess the difference is that the people who were hoping the Hawks could make the playoffs, did so because the actual players could control their destiny. In the case of the lottery, an uncontrollable variable like the fall of ping-pong balls control the destiny.

[thescout5]

http://www.hawksquawk.net/forums/showflat....=&fpart=#205270

Go to the link above and you'll find drafting third isn't so bad plus I have looked at drafting 4th and the chance of getting the no1 or 2 pick is still good so it isn't has bad as some make it out to be. The problem is people see the chances of winning the looto based on this year makes it look like you don't have a chance.Still more ping pong balls are better than less.

[BusBoyIsBack]

You're right northcyde in short, our odds suck.

But why not try to make those slim odds better?

I mean what really do we gain from winning 2 or 3 more games right now.

I kept saying it's something to build off of next year, but if you really think about it, is 2 or 3 games really going to help all that much?

On the other hand they may mean as much as a 10% increase in our draft odds and who knows whether or not if those still slim odds helps us. But at least there is a chance.

There is nothing we can do right now to make the post-season and 2 or 3 wins right now really doesn't do anything besides maybe keeping Woodson's job alive.

It's not going to make JSmoove or any other player not play as hard next year if we drop a couple games.

[mrhonline]

I find it endlessly amusing that this thread has been ignored.

Endlessly.

[DrReality]

Time you started watching baseball. Give the Hawks a rest.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

People like Josh Smith look at the draft as 3 separate drafts, in which your chances in each "draft" put you at a success rate under 30%, in even the best case scenario. That type of thinking keeps him, and others, from sticking their heads in the clouds and dream about something that is unlikely to happen.

---

Your whole post was simply ridiculous, but let me just focue upon one point.

Reasonable people generally exercise occam's razor which essentially states:

Quote:

---

All things being equal, the simplest solution is the best one.

---

When you simply divide the odds of one draft into 3 seperate drafts, you aren't changing the odds, you are simply trying to make complex what is simple. At the least it is an error of judgement and at the most it is a means to obfuscate. I would vote both, especially the later since your appeal to authority is "People like Josh Smith".

In short, quit being an idiot about this. Don't make complex what is simple, don't try change the facts and obfuscate truth, and lastly, don't appeal to "people like Josh Smith" when you choose to do such little person things.

The odds are clear. We don't need someone with a diversionary smoke machine, selling mocking hate towards fans, appealing to the word of "those like Josh Smith" to "clear it all up for us". Thank you.

W

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

I find it endlessly amusing that this thread has been ignored.

Endlessly.

---

It's hysterical to me. These cats around here are stressing out over whether we have an 84% chance of not getting Oden, as opposed to an 88% or 91% chance.

They'll say . . "well . . I'd rather be at 84% than at 91%."

LOL . . when the odds are stacked against you like that, does it really matter?

What bugs me isn't the fact that they want us to lose. What bugs me is that they seemed to get mad at the very players that they cheered for all year, because all they're doing . . is their jobs. If this was December, they'd be all over a player for playing 1/2 speed. But now, that is totally acceptable in their minds, just so that we can stay at an 84% chance of not getting Oden. It's hilarious to me.

Now that Smoove is suspended, we'll see how much we fall off . . if we fall off any.

But you know what I think will happen? A guy like Shelden Williams is going to start playing pretty good basketball, along with Marvin, and keep the Hawks competitive, if not win a few of these games.

Then these clowns will start bytching at Marvin, Shelden, and any other player that goes out and acts like a PROFESSIONAL

[AHF]

Quote:

---

They'll say . . "well . . I'd rather be at 84% than at 91%."

LOL . . when the odds are stacked against you like that, does it really matter?

---

Who cares if a player shoots 38% from the field or 45%? It is only 7%. How can such a small difference really matter?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

"There are essentially 3 drafts for 3 positions. In total with the 3rd worst record we have roughly a 50% chance at a top 3 pick."

By the way tankers . . that quote came from your tank "leader" Mr. W. He said that about 2 weeks ago in another thread.

I feel sorry for you guys though. You're stressing out over a mere 3.4% increase of a chance, per pick. Instead of just watching the games, and letting the chips fall where they may, you're as stressed as ever. It's "Hawk Hell" at its worst.

LOL @ worrying about what the Bucks and Bobcats do. I'm sure they aren't worrying about us.

When there's an 84% chance that we won't get the 1st pick . . a 79% - 84% chance that we won't get the #2 pick . . and a 72% - 84% chance that we won't get the #3 pick . . even if we finish with the 3rd worst record . . I don't see why people are even stressing over a few wins or losses.

This should be a stress-free time for Hawks fans. A time to just let the season play out and prepare for the off-season. You can't control the fall of the ping-pong balls . . and you can't control how the other teams play. So just let the season play itself out.

And I especially love this response from Walter:

Quote:

---

In short, quit being an idiot about this. Don't make complex what is simple, don't try change the facts and obfuscate truth, and lastly, don't appeal to "people like Josh Smith" when you choose to do such little person things.

The odds are clear.

We don't need someone with a diversionary smoke machine, selling mocking hate towards fans, appealing to the word of "those like Josh Smith" to "clear it all up for us". Thank you.

---

LOL @ Mr. Realism now resorting to "hopes and dreams". Like you said in the other thread, you had it set in your mind that we weren't going to make the playoffs by early January, and was calling for "giving up" on the season then. Forget that we were 4 - 5 games from the #8 spot, and were starting to get people back healthy, you were all for the tank from the jump . . lol. The rest of us still had "HOPE" that these guys could finish strong to end the season. At least our hope weren't based on the fall of ping-pong balls, and teams openly trying to lose. Now, you're the poster child for HAWK HOPE when the odds are so heavily stacked against us. It's absolutely hilarious to me.

LOL @ me being an idiot and changing the facts. I laid out the numbers so that they CAN'T be disputed. That's why they HAVEN'T been disputed. And the odds are indeed clear. Heavily stacked against us in every way, shape, and form. The numbers are undeniable.

There is a better chance that one of the teams that finish 6 - 10 get the top pick in the draft, than the #3 pick in the draft getting the top pick. And the odds of the #2 or #3 team getting the top pick, is 10% more than the odds of the #1 team getting the top pick.

It's a reason why the worst team in the draft hardly ever gets the #1 pick in this system. Either the 75% chance of them NOT landing the top pick is too much to overcome, or the system is fixed altogether, hence, why the process isn't shown live. The common sense answer, is that having a 25% shot of landing the top pick is better than anyone else . . but the odds still SUCK, seeing that 3 out of 4 times, you'll be a loser.

And it's funny how you guys keep talking about a top 3 pick, like this is a 3 - 5 player draft . . when there is NO CONSENSUS on who we should take at #3, if we get that pick. Who do we take?

I hope this isn't the fate of the tank crowd, when we don't land a top 3 pick. It'll be a shame to lose such passionate Hawk fans over the fall of some ping-pong balls.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

They'll say . . "well . . I'd rather be at 84% than at 91%."

LOL . . when the odds are stacked against you like that, does it really matter?

---

Who cares if a player shoots 38% from the field or 45%? It is only 7%. How can such a small difference really matter?

---

The problem with that, is that shooting 45% is actually good . . seeing that maybe 10% of the players in the NBA shoot over 50% in the NBA. Two totally different situations.

Now turn that around. What if we're talking about Free Throws? Who do you foul . . Antoine Walker or Shaq? 75% is good . . 85% is great. But they both shoot under 50% FT and routinely go through stretches when they can only make 30% or so of their foul shots. It's not like it's a big difference in choosing who to foul in that situation. That's what the lottery is like.

The exact opposite goes when you're talking about the difference between fouling Dirk Nowitzki and Jerry Stackhouse. Both are very good free throw shooters, 84% and over. If you foul either one of those guys, the percentages say that both will more than likely make their foul shots, even if one of them are a 6% or so better shooter from the line.

People can skew numbers anyway they want, to try to fit their argument. But in the end, common sense has to take over.

A 15% chance is better than an 11% chance. LOL . . but there's still an 85% - 90% chance that you will be unsuccessful.

No need to stress over the final 2 weeks of the season, no matter what happens.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

They'll say . . "well . . I'd rather be at 84% than at 91%."

LOL . . when the odds are stacked against you like that, does it really matter?

---

Who cares if a player shoots 38% from the field or 45%? It is only 7%. How can such a small difference really matter?

---

The problem with that, is that shooting 45% is actually good . . seeing that maybe 10% of the players in the NBA shoot over 50% in the NBA. Two totally different situations.

Now turn that around. What if we're talking about Free Throws? Who do you foul . . Antoine Walker or Shaq? 75% is good . . 85% is great. But they both shoot under 50% FT and routinely go through stretches when they can only make 30% or so of their foul shots. It's not like it's a big difference in choosing who to foul in that situation. That's what the lottery is like.

The exact opposite goes when you're talking about the difference between fouling Dirk Nowitzki and Jerry Stackhouse. Both are very good free throw shooters, 84% and over. If you foul either one of those guys, the percentages say that both will more than likely make their foul shots, even if one of them are a 6% or so better shooter from the line.

People can skew numbers anyway they want, to try to fit their argument. But in the end, common sense has to take over.

A 15% chance is better than an 11% chance. LOL . . but there's still an 85% - 90% chance that you will be unsuccessful.

No need to stress over the final 2 weeks of the season, no matter what happens.

---

The odds of missing a contensted 3 pointer are over 70%.

However, if you could improve your odds of hitting that shot by 7% you would do it everytime.

The odds of getting a top 3 pick in the draft for a team in the 1-4 range are pretty decent - roughly 64%, 56%, 47% and 38%.

Each one of those scenarios represents a significant competitive advantage over the next best outcome.

Walter is not "my leader" by any stretch of the imagination, but I agree with him that we should be maximizing our lottery odds at this point of the season.

Even disinterested Sports Illustrated just wrote about how things are getting better for the Hawks with their last losing streak because it significantly improved their odds of keeping a top 3 pick in this year's draft.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

"There are essentially 3 drafts for 3 positions. In total with the 3rd worst record we have roughly a 50% chance at a top 3 pick."

By the way tankers . . that quote came from your tank "leader"

Mr. W.

He said that about 2 weeks ago in another thread.

---

Thank you for making my point as I did not break down the single odds of the 3rd worst team getting the 2nd highest pick when naked on tuesday in a snowstorm and go "Whalla! Proof the odds aren't in our favor" (for getting a top 3 pick).

If you don't like the "roughly 50%" odds then tell us how you come up with another plan, one we can't exercise if we tank, one with better odds for acquiring a similar quality player.

In a vacuum 50% odds aren't good or bad. They are neutral. However, in the context of no other credible option 50% odds are extremely good.

Quote:

---

I feel sorry for you guys though. You're stressing out over a mere 3.4% increase of a chance, per pick.

---

PER PICK?!? What does that mean? Is that another one of your attempts to obfuscate the real increase in probability by dividing it up by 3! Yes, I do "stress over" a (3.4% x 3) 10% chance at a top 3 pick". Apparently you do to or else you wouldn't have to divide it up by 3 to try and make it appear smaller than it is.

Where things are explained more complex than they should be or are, there generally is an attempt to mislead or obfuscate.

The rest of your post in "LOL-world" is just pathetic. Who cares if there is a better chance of the 6th-10th team winning a top 3 pick than the 3rd worst winning the top overall pick (as you say)? I'm doubtful that is the case around the 10th, but even if it is OUR ODDS DO NOT CHANGE! OUR ODDS DO NOT CHANGE because someone else has better odds of winning SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT.

Tanking is ABOUT US. It's about how WE can best improve ourselves significantly. We all KNOW the odds, only you have to post all the odds THAT DON'T MATTER or the odds that do matter in 3 way divided means in an attempt to apparently reduce the number. THIS IS A POORLY VEILED ATTEMPT TO MISLEAD PEOPLE! It's clear you know our odds of winning a top 3 pick as you post them very clearly. However, you can't argue against them so you have to divide those odds by THREE and attempt to diminish them by comparing our odds of winning one thing to the odds of a better placed team winning something entirely different.

If you cannot argue against the simple odds of our winning a top 3 pick as a bottome 3 team. If you can't do so relative to however otherwise you believe we can similarly significantly improve the team. Then just shut the hell up. All this obfuscation and disengenuous argumentation just makes you look stupid.

W

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

"There are essentially 3 drafts for 3 positions. In total with the 3rd worst record we have roughly a 50% chance at a top 3 pick."

By the way tankers . . that quote came from your tank "leader"

Mr. W.

He said that about 2 weeks ago in another thread.

I feel sorry for you guys though. You're stressing out over a mere 3.4% increase of a chance, per pick. Instead of just watching the games, and letting the chips fall where they may, you're as stressed as ever. It's "Hawk Hell" at its worst.

LOL @ worrying about what the Bucks and Bobcats do. I'm sure they aren't worrying about us.

When there's an

84% chance

that we won't get the 1st pick . . a

79% - 84% chance

that we won't get the #2 pick . . and a

72% - 84%

chance that we won't get the #3 pick . . even if we finish with the 3rd worst record . . I don't see why people are even stressing over a few wins or losses.

This should be a stress-free time for Hawks fans. A time to just let the season play out and prepare for the off-season. You can't control the fall of the ping-pong balls . . and you can't control how the other teams play. So just let the season play itself out.

And I especially love this response from Walter:

Quote:

---

In short, quit being an idiot about this. Don't make complex what is simple, don't try change the facts and obfuscate truth, and lastly, don't appeal to "people like Josh Smith" when you choose to do such little person things.

The odds are clear.

We don't need someone with a diversionary smoke machine, selling mocking hate towards fans, appealing to the word of "those like Josh Smith" to "clear it all up for us". Thank you.

---

LOL @ Mr. Realism now resorting to "hopes and dreams". Like you said in the other thread, you had it set in your mind that we weren't going to make the playoffs by early January, and was calling for "giving up" on the season then. Forget that we were 4 - 5 games from the #8 spot, and were starting to get people back healthy, you were all for the tank from the jump . . lol. The rest of us still had "HOPE" that these guys could finish strong to end the season. At least our hope weren't based on the fall of ping-pong balls, and teams openly trying to lose. Now, you're the poster child for HAWK HOPE when the odds are so heavily stacked against us. It's absolutely hilarious to me.

LOL @ me being an idiot and changing the facts. I laid out the numbers so that they CAN'T be disputed. That's why they HAVEN'T been disputed. And the odds are indeed clear. Heavily stacked against us in every way, shape, and form. The numbers are undeniable.

There is a better chance that one of the teams that finish 6 - 10 get the top pick in the draft, than the #3 pick in the draft getting the top pick. And the odds of the #2 or #3 team getting the top pick, is 10% more than the odds of the #1 team getting the top pick.

It's a reason why the worst team in the draft hardly ever gets the #1 pick in this system. Either the 75% chance of them NOT landing the top pick is too much to overcome, or the system is fixed altogether, hence, why the process isn't shown live. The common sense answer, is that having a 25% shot of landing the top pick is better than anyone else . . but the odds still SUCK, seeing that 3 out of 4 times, you'll be a loser.

And it's funny how you guys keep talking about a top 3 pick, like this is a 3 - 5 player draft . . when there is NO CONSENSUS on who we should take at #3, if we get that pick. Who do we take?

I hope this isn't the fate of the tank crowd, when we don't land a top 3 pick. It'll be a shame to lose such passionate Hawk fans over the fall of some ping-pong balls.

---

I feel sorry for people that want the team to win games that don't help nothing. Somebody going to tell me that 2 or 3 extra wins means some for morale? I'm calling BS on that one.

Yes, it would in a playoff race, but it shouldn't make any difference considering the Hawks situation.

[bfwolf]

The thread was better when everybody ignored Northcyde's obvious trolling. While I won't get into all the top 3 hoopla since it's obvious this is a 2 man draft, it should be obvious to everybody that if a few more meaningless losses can increase our odds by 6-7% of getting one of the 2 best prospects to ever come into the NBA, then you hope you lose those games. 6-7% is nothing to sneeze at when Oden and Durant are on the line.

We can't control which ping pong ball gets selected, but we can influence how many of those ping pong balls say "Atlanta Hawks" on them.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Well with Milwaukee benching their entire starting 5 we can forget about any of this

[Diesel]

That is that we do land the #3 pick.

We get some guy... Honestly, there are not too many difference makers after Oden, Durant... But we take some guy with "potential" or something like that.

Do you realize that with a guy who is not a difference maker and with this team of ours who the tankers have no faith in, that we have set ourselves up to lose the pick next year period.

That means next year, if the draft is MORE STACKED than this year... then we have NO PICK...

But not to worry. The tankers can always blame the GM for picking somebody who was "not the right pick"... They can always point to the rookie of the year and say " it's ___________'s fault that we didn't get him".. More than likely the GM...

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

The odds of missing a contensted 3 pointer are over 70%.

However, if you could improve your odds of hitting that shot by 7% you would do it everytime.

---

Does this mean if Smoove increased his 3 point shooting from 27% to 34% that I want him taking the shot more?? Do you really think that? and if he increased his 3 point shooting from 27% to 34% do you think I want him working on just his 3 point shooting?

That's what the tankers argument is right now.

The tankers says "Smoove go out there and ONLY work on your 3 point shooting. We have to improve your lowly shooting percentage as much as possible" The problem is that maybe it would be better for Smoove to focus on something else. I can deal with a 27% 3 pt shooting as long as other areas of his game improve and he doesn't shoot the 3 pt shot so much.

To say that Smoove needs to only focus on shooting 3 pters is really saying that we don't have any other player who can hit three pointers. What the antitankers are saying is don't ruin Smoove's game by having him shoot the three pointer only because we believe that we don't have to have Smoove's 3 pt shooting to win games. SO even if Smoove got his 3 pt shooting up to 34%... That's cool, but at what price? The shot is still going to miss more than it hits.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The odds of missing a contensted 3 pointer are over 70%.

However, if you could improve your odds of hitting that shot by 7% you would do it everytime.

---

Does this mean if Smoove increased his 3 point shooting from 27% to 34% that I want him taking the shot more?? Do you really think that? and if he increased his 3 point shooting from 27% to 34% do you think I want him working on just his 3 point shooting?

That's what the tankers argument is right now.

The tankers says "Smoove go out there and ONLY work on your 3 point shooting. We have to improve your lowly shooting percentage as much as possible" The problem is that maybe it would be better for Smoove to focus on something else. I can deal with a 27% 3 pt shooting as long as other areas of his game improve and he doesn't shoot the 3 pt shot so much.

To say that Smoove needs to only focus on shooting 3 pters is really saying that we don't have any other player who can hit three pointers. What the antitankers are saying is don't ruin Smoove's game by having him shoot the three pointer only because we believe that we don't have to have Smoove's 3 pt shooting to win games. SO even if Smoove got his 3 pt shooting up to 34%... That's cool, but at what price? The shot is still going to miss more than it hits.

---

Do you realize that someone shooting 34% from 3pt range is an effective field goal percentage of 51%? Not that bad.

I agree we should be doing more than simply tanking but that is the team's biggest potential payoff (by far) so that would be my top priority at this point in the season.

Developing young guys like Shelden, Solomon, Salim, etc. should also be a focus during this period.

Playing T.Lue 50+ minutes should not happen (unless it is the only way to lose).

[TheNorthCydeRises]

. . to tell somebody to SHUT UP? How about you shut the hell up!

Truth be told, you try to be articulate in all of your arguments and your stances, but the entire board knows that you're one of the biggest idiots on the entire board. The things you speak on prove that on a daily basis. And don't you owe somebody some money, for that ridiculous Sene bet that you made at the beginning of the year? Or did you come to your senses, and not take that bet?

The vast majority of your "plans" consists of pipe dream type scenarios that are either totally "retarted" ( as Tim Duncan would say ), or totally unrealistic because the other team wouldn't go for it. If the board listened to your "wisdom", we'd have Luke Ridnour running the point and Seattle would have our Indy pick. I wonder which PG the board would rather have . . Luke or Mike Conley, Jr?

No other person on this board twists the "truth" around more than you do Mr. W. You have your "followers" believing that the fate of the franchise SOLELY revolves around whether we get a top 3 pick or not. Tell that ish to Dallas and Detroit, or Phoenix for that matter, who have had top 3 picks in the past, and couldn't do a damn thing until they traded for cast-offs, or signed FAs.

Anybody that knows the HISTORY of the NBA, knows that you need a myriad of things in order to build a championship caliber team. And one of the main things you need are VETERANS THAT KNOW HOW TO PLAY THE GAME. That's why the Mavs have rotinely traded away 1st round picks, to get vets who they didn't have to mold into becoming good NBA players.

You hype up getting a top 3 pick, like there are 3 Hall of Fame caliber players in this draft, when you fully know that the ONLY player in this draft that will help us achieve "greatness", is Greg Oden. We'd take Durant, but we'd have to move a whole host of people just to balance the team out at that point. And we STILL might not get a decent center or a decent PG out of any deal not involving Josh Smith, Durant, or JJ. LOL . . we'd have 4 back-up PGs and 5 forwards 25 years old and under. At that point, we'd definitely have to do what Diesel suggests, and just run and gun.

The underlying fact about this league is that young teams, more often than not, do not WIN until they reach full maturation. And a lot of teams never reach full maturation unless they trade for players who are already fully developed.

And even if we did add Oden to this squad, you're still talking about a possible 5 - 7 years before we get to championship level. Every team in this league has had to go through their growing pains in the playoffs, before they became title contenders.

So you can save all that BS that you talk about, for people who know nothing about the game. I can go toe-to-toe with you about the NBA without even breaking a sweat.

As of right now, 88.1% are the percentages against your Oden pipe dream. If it happens, great. If it doesn't, the odds were against us in the first place. Don't get mad at me for pointing out the FACTS.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

The thread was better when everybody ignored Northcyde's obvious trolling. While I won't get into all the top 3 hoopla since it's obvious this is a 2 man draft, it should be obvious to everybody that if a few more meaningless losses can increase our odds by 6-7% of getting one of the 2 best prospects to ever come into the NBA, then you hope you lose those games. 6-7% is nothing to sneeze at when Oden and Durant are on the line.

We can't control which ping pong ball gets selected, but we can influence how many of those ping pong balls say "Atlanta Hawks" on them.

---

Man please. I've been a loyal and unwavering fan of this franchise for 23 years. And I don't live in Atlanta or in Georgia. If anything, I should be a Laker, Bull or a Sixer fan, seeing that they were some of the popular teams when I was growing up. Instead, I resisted the temptation to be a fan of the "Showtime" Lakers or a mindless follower of Jordan, and latched onto Nique and the Hawks.

People ignored the thread 1) because I'm too long-winded and write too much . . and 2) they want to keep as much hope as possible about our chances in the Draft. And because I correctly point out our chances, some people don't want to come to that realization. And that's cool.

The Hawks could lose every game from here on out, and it still wouldn't help us in the long run if those balls don't fall our way. We're talking percentage points for each position we rise and fall. The field is still heavily stacked against us. So if it happens . . great. If it doesn't . . the odds were heavily against us in the first place, no matter what we do the rest of the season.

The formula is easy BDawg. If you understand how to plug in numbers to an equation, anybody on this board can see our ACTUAL chances to get the 1st, 2nd or 3rd pick, depending on how many combinations are left on the board.

1000 total combinations

worst record) 250 combinations, 25% chance of receiving the #1 pick

2nd worst ) 199 combinations, 19.9% chance

3) 156 combinations, 15.6% chance

4) 119 combinations, 11.9% chance

5) 88 combinations, 8.8% chance

6) 63 combinations, 6.3% chance

7) 43 combinations, 4.3% chance

8) 28 combinations, 2.8% chance

9) 17 combinations, 1.7% chance

10) 11 combinations, 1.1% chance

11) 8 combinations, 0.8% chance

12) 7 combinations, 0.7% chance

13) 6 combinations, 0.6% chance

14) 5 combinations, 0.5% chance

Just plug the numbers in, and you can easily determine our % chances.

X # of team combination / total combinations left = percentage chance per pick.

It's too bad that this process isn't done live. If it was, people would definitely look at it from a per-pick ( position ) basis.

Just don't cuss out Marvin if he drops 29 points and grabs 11 boards against the Celtics, and the Hawks win. If he does that, he's just doing his job.