Minnesota Sports Forum

lipoli390 wrote:I'm afraid the Wolves might win at Sacramento. I'd hate to see us tie or pass the Sixers in the standings.

Have you seen how dominant Cousins has been playing?

Did you see how dominant Vucevic was against Hamilton?

Vucevic is no where near Cousins.

Boogie might hang up Wilt-like numbers on us.

Camden0916 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:I'm afraid the Wolves might win at Sacramento. I'd hate to see us tie or pass the Sixers in the standings.

Have you seen how dominant Cousins has been playing?

Did you see how dominant Vucevic was against Hamilton?

Vucevic is no where near Cousins.

Boogie might hang up Wilt-like numbers on us.

Bigs around the league have to have us circled on the calendar. Cousins will probably kill us.

lipoli390 wrote:I'm afraid the Wolves might win at Sacramento. I'd hate to see us tie or pass the Sixers in the standings.

Right now I can't see us tying the Sixers.. Even if we beat Sac-town (and lose to the Pelicans), we still finish with only 17 wins, and Philly already has 18. We would have to beat NO, Sacramento, and the Lakers in LA, while Philly lost the rest of their games (which include games at NY and Charlotte, and home games against Milwaukee and Washington). It could happen, but it's remote.

I'm more focused on passing the Knicks. I'm confident enough that we will not catch the Sixers, that I will be cheering for the Knicks in their game with Philly.

longstrangetrip wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:I'm afraid the Wolves might win at Sacramento. I'd hate to see us tie or pass the Sixers in the standings.

Right now I can't see us tying the Sixers.. Even if we beat Sac-town (and lose to the Pelicans), we still finish with only 17 wins, and Philly already has 18. We would have to beat NO, Sacramento, and the Lakers in LA, while Philly lost the rest of their games (which include games at NY and Charlotte, and home games against Milwaukee and Washington). It could happen, but it's remote.

I'm more focused on passing the Knicks. I'm confident enough that we will not catch the Sixers, that I will be cheering for the Knicks in their game with Philly.

Why do we need to pass the Knicks? The odds of winning the top pick based on history doesn't favor the top spot anymore than the second spot. Do we really want to go down as the worst team in the league this year for some ping pong balls that historically don't make a difference?

It's simple: if you believe that this is a 4-player draft (Towns, Okafor, Mudiay, Russell), then getting the top spot (worst record) GUARANTEES you one of those players, while having the 2nd worst record only gives you something like an 88% chance at one of those four.

So YES, those extra ping pong balls DO mean something.

That's a good explanation, zig...especially if you think it's a 4-player draft. In addition, I've recently jumped on the Towns bandwagon, and with Jackson indicating he covets him, I think it's important that we finish behind the Knicks.

Khans-I recognize that the 1st seed has ended up with the first pick far less than the odds would predict. But I still believe in statistics in the long run, and the team with the most ping pong balls has a 25% chance of getting the first pick, while the team with the second most only has a 20% chance. I want that 5% edge, and that's why I'm still lamenting that worthless win in NY last month.

longstrangetrip wrote:That's a good explanation, zig...especially if you think it's a 4-player draft. In addition, I've recently jumped on the Towns bandwagon, and with Jackson indicating he covets him, I think it's important that we finish behind the Knicks.

Khans-I recognize that the 1st seed has ended up with the first pick far less than the odds would predict. But I still believe in statistics in the long run, and the team with the most ping pong balls has a 25% chance of getting the first pick, while the team with the second most only has a 20% chance. I want that 5% edge, and that's why I'm still lamenting that worthless win in NY last month.

Historically that 5% doesn't make a difference and we are actually in a better position to win it as a 2 than a 1 based on history. The lottery has been in place far too long (big enough sample size) and the lottery balls haven't been in favor of the #1 spot so that makes me believe that history is a better way to go in my opinion than stats. I also think Winslow makes this a 5 man draft so I'm fine with the worst case scenario of dropping to 5 which is highly unlikely. Every year we end up in the lottery and every year we drop. There's no point in going for ping pong balls. They've literally never made a difference for us for a decade straight.

We all know the Knicks and Lakers will be picking 1 and 2. The league has to take care of the big markets first.

Khans, all you're really saying is that the field has a better chance to win than #1, which is true. But #1 still has the best chance out of all the positions. We are absolutely and undeniably more likely to win the lottery in that spot. History doesn't mean anything in a game of chance.

khans2k5 wrote:

longstrangetrip wrote:That's a good explanation, zig...especially if you think it's a 4-player draft. In addition, I've recently jumped on the Towns bandwagon, and with Jackson indicating he covets him, I think it's important that we finish behind the Knicks.

Khans-I recognize that the 1st seed has ended up with the first pick far less than the odds would predict. But I still believe in statistics in the long run, and the team with the most ping pong balls has a 25% chance of getting the first pick, while the team with the second most only has a 20% chance. I want that 5% edge, and that's why I'm still lamenting that worthless win in NY last month.

Historically that 5% doesn't make a difference and we are actually in a better position to win it as a 2 than a 1 based on history. The lottery has been in place far too long (big enough sample size) and the lottery balls haven't been in favor of the #1 spot so that makes me believe that history is a better way to go in my opinion than stats. I also think Winslow makes this a 5 man draft so I'm fine with the worst case scenario of dropping to 5 which is highly unlikely. Every year we end up in the lottery and every year we drop. There's no point in going for ping pong balls. They've literally never made a difference for us for a decade straight.

Khans, I don't disagree that the first seed hasn't been good in the past. But your logic is faulty. It's kind of like flipping a coin 10 times and having it come up heads 7 times, and declaring there clearly is a better chance of heads coming up in the future. History needs to be thrown out when you talk stats.