Minnesota Sports Forum

I found this pretty interesting on Canishoopus.

http://www.canishoopus.com/2014/1/30/5361738/lottery-picks-early-returnshttp://www.canishoopus.com/2014/1/30/5361738/lottery-picks-early-returns

For those that are interested in seeing how historical facts,while evaluating lottery draft picks, can be used to predict future performance (with varying degrees of success), this should be an interesting article for you.

Most interesting to me is that Ricky did not fall into either of the groups that this guy looked at.

Disclaimer: I am not trying to offend those people that dislike the concept of looking at facts to try to draw conclusions about the probability of future performances. Should you be one of those people, YOU WILL NOT LIKE THIS ARTICLE. Please move on.

Thanks for sharing.

That was a cool read. That guy seems like he does a lot of good work for Canis

kms789 wrote:That was a cool read. That guy seems like he does a lot of good work for Canis

Yes.....that guy the has the best articles on Canis IMHO. The comments on the article are very good to. It is good to read intelligent basketball discussion, from a quantitative perspective.

Canis has always been a fertile ground for analytical types, many of whom are way more into stats than any of us here, including your's truly. One of the areas where they've run laps around our own front office over the years is in projecting the likelihood of success for college prospects based on a combination of age and production (very similar to the model written about in this article). They have pretty much hated every pick over the years with the exception of Love, Pek, and Rubio (they were more neutral on Pek and Rubio because they didn't have a strong model for projecting Euro players into NBA players). But Canis was very much on the Love bandwagon well before he emerged as a star two years ago and even before Rambis begrudgingly recognized it.