[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Lottery Odds--here they are
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
4/2/2009  9:36 AM
Seed Chances 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th
1 250 .250 .215 .178 .357
2 199 .199 .188 .171 .319 .123
3 156 .156 .157 .156 .226 .265 .040
4 119 .119 .126 .133 .099 .351 .160 .012
5 88 .088 .097 .107 .261 .360 .084 .004
6 63 .063 .071 .081 .439 .305 .040 .001
7 43 .043 .049 .058 .599 .232 .018 .000
8 28 .028 .033 .039 .724 .168 .008 .000
9 17 .017 .020 .024 .813 .122 .004 .000
10 11 .011 .013 .016 .870 .089 .002 .000
11 8 .008 .009 .012 .907 .063 .001 .000
12 7 .007 .008 .010 .935 .039 .000
13 6 .006 .007 .009 .960 .018
14 5 .005 .006 .007 .982


If we keep position[currently 8th--we have a 27.6% chance of landing a top 3 pick. If somehow we caught GS[meaning three games and moved down to 7th--it would be a 40% chance at a top 3 pick.
We have roughly a 3% chance from pick 8 to win the lottery outright[pick 1] and that only moves up to roughly 4.5% at pick 7


Past winners

2008 slot 9
2007 slot 6
2006 slot 5
2005 slot 6
2004 slot 1
2003 slot 1
2002 slot 5
2001 slot 3
2000 slot 7
1999 slot 3
1998 slot 3
1997 slot 3
1996 slot 2
1995 slot 5
1994 slot 4
1993 slot 13
1992 slot 2
1991 slot 5
1990 slot 1

Here is some mojo for pick 8. NO winner has ever come from pick 8 for the first pick--in fact only 1 time in 18 years of this format has the 8th seed--with a 28% chance to move up to slots 1-2-3 ever done so. I don't know the cumulative odds of that mot occurring but I would say pick 8 is due.
RIP Crushalot😞
AUTOADVERT
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
4/2/2009  10:27 AM
#8 28 .028 .033 .039

Briggs, am I crazy, or does this read 2.8%, 3.3%, 3.9%?

That adds up to 10% even for the Knickerbockers landing in the top 3 right?

Let me know if that's wrong, but the 8th seed having a 28% chance of moving up doesn't seem to make sense.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
4/2/2009  10:53 AM
I love Briggs and his math... all the prospects he like gain 2 inches and 20 pounds of muscle with each new thread. I guess the same goes for lottery odds.

This is a two player draft and one might not declare. After those two guys its either long shots or players whose ceiling is 'good'

I agree... lets win the lottery :)
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
LivingLegend
Posts: 26558
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 8/13/2007
Member: #1645
4/2/2009  10:55 AM
Posted by JohnWallace44:
#8 28 .028 .033 .039

Briggs, am I crazy, or does this read 2.8%, 3.3%, 3.9%?

That adds up to 10% even for the Knickerbockers landing in the top 3 right?

Let me know if that's wrong, but the 8th seed having a 28% chance of moving up doesn't seem to make sense.

I was trying to do the same math and came to the same conclusion as you. 28% chance at the top 3 sure sounds pretty good from the #8 spot but I suck at math.
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34071
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
4/2/2009  11:10 AM
You can't add up the probabilities. Each drawing after the first is considered a conditional probability, meaning drawing the second pick is contingent on losing out on the first, and whoever wins the first affects the pin pong ball population rather drastically. If you want to know how it works search for "conditional probability."

I'll work out the numbers at some point because I am bored, but it is not as simple as addition
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
4/2/2009  11:35 AM
Posted by LivingLegend:
Posted by JohnWallace44:
#8 28 .028 .033 .039

Briggs, am I crazy, or does this read 2.8%, 3.3%, 3.9%?

That adds up to 10% even for the Knickerbockers landing in the top 3 right?

Let me know if that's wrong, but the 8th seed having a 28% chance of moving up doesn't seem to make sense.

I was trying to do the same math and came to the same conclusion as you. 28% chance at the top 3 sure sounds pretty good from the #8 spot but I suck at math.

Like I said it's a 27.6% chance. Put the best mathematician on the board and he will figure out the same thing.
RIP Crushalot😞
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
4/2/2009  11:45 AM
paging Bonn to the Lottery Odds thread... paging Bonn to the Lottery Odds thread... thank you.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
4/2/2009  11:46 AM
Posted by fishmike:

This is a two player draft and one might not declare. After those two guys its either long shots or players whose ceiling is 'good'

who's the other player you're talking about?
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
4/2/2009  12:03 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by fishmike:

This is a two player draft and one might not declare. After those two guys its either long shots or players whose ceiling is 'good'

who's the other player you're talking about?

Eric Maynor of course
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
4/2/2009  12:07 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Draft_Lottery

odds of a top 3 pick:
5 29%
6 21.5%
7 15%
8 10%
9 6.1%
10 4%

Thats factorial
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34071
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
4/2/2009  12:14 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by LivingLegend:
Posted by JohnWallace44:
#8 28 .028 .033 .039

Briggs, am I crazy, or does this read 2.8%, 3.3%, 3.9%?

That adds up to 10% even for the Knickerbockers landing in the top 3 right?

Let me know if that's wrong, but the 8th seed having a 28% chance of moving up doesn't seem to make sense.

I was trying to do the same math and came to the same conclusion as you. 28% chance at the top 3 sure sounds pretty good from the #8 spot but I suck at math.

Like I said it's a 27.6% chance. Put the best mathematician on the board and he will figure out the same thing.

This has to be incorrect. Let's assume for a second that EACH team which precedes the Knicks has a 27.6 percent chance at a top 3 pick, then teams 9-13 have a 1 percent chance.

pick 1 27.6
pick 2 27.6
pick 3 27.6
pick 4 27.6
pick 5 27.6
pick 6 27.6
pick 7 27.6
pick 8 27.6
pick 9 1
pick 10 1
pick 11 1
pick 12 1
pick 13 1
----
228.8%

Any percentage based measurement should equal 100 percent. And when you consider there are 13 teams in the lotto, and the Knicks have a better than 1 in 4 chance to win the lotto, it doesn't make any sense


To further complicate this issue, let's simply add the three probabilities (which is incorrect) and say the Knicks have equal odds as any other team for a top 3 pick. This means their odds are:

using incorrect math:
1/13 + 1/12 + 1/11 =
7.7% + 8.3% + 9% = 25%

Yet, giving the Knicks a 27.6% chance of a top 3 pick IN SPITE of a weighting handicap? That makes no sense.
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
4/2/2009  12:19 PM
Posted by SupremeCommander:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by LivingLegend:
Posted by JohnWallace44:
#8 28 .028 .033 .039

Briggs, am I crazy, or does this read 2.8%, 3.3%, 3.9%?

That adds up to 10% even for the Knickerbockers landing in the top 3 right?

Let me know if that's wrong, but the 8th seed having a 28% chance of moving up doesn't seem to make sense.

I was trying to do the same math and came to the same conclusion as you. 28% chance at the top 3 sure sounds pretty good from the #8 spot but I suck at math.

Like I said it's a 27.6% chance. Put the best mathematician on the board and he will figure out the same thing.

This has to be incorrect. Let's assume for a second that EACH team which precedes the Knicks has a 27.6 percent chance at a top 3 pick, then teams 9-13 have a 1 percent chance.

pick 1 27.6
pick 2 27.6
pick 3 27.6
pick 4 27.6
pick 5 27.6
pick 6 27.6
pick 7 27.6
pick 8 27.6
pick 9 1
pick 10 1
pick 11 1
pick 12 1
pick 13 1
----
228.8%

Any percentage based measurement should equal 100 percent. And when you consider there are 13 teams in the lotto, and the Knicks have a better than 1 in 4 chance to win the lotto, it doesn't make any sense


To further complicate this issue, let's simply add the three probabilities (which is incorrect) and say the Knicks have equal odds as any other team for a top 3 pick. This means their odds are:

using incorrect math:
1/13 + 1/12 + 1/11 =
7.7% + 8.3% + 9% = 25%

Yet, giving the Knicks a 27.6% chance of a top 3 pick IN SPITE of a weighting handicap? That makes no sense.

The Knicks having a 27% chance of a Top 3 pick proves my theory that the NBA is fixed
I just hope that people will like me
fishmike
Posts: 53902
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
4/2/2009  12:23 PM
Posted by TMS:
Posted by fishmike:

This is a two player draft and one might not declare. After those two guys its either long shots or players whose ceiling is 'good'

who's the other player you're talking about?
who are the other players? Who knows? Look at previous drafts and this will be about the same. This draft is Griffin and Rubio if he declares. After that there are 15 or so guys who are crap shoots. The Arizona kid (Hill) will be good, but like your David West, KMart (pre injury), Nene type. Good players but certainly not a guy you build a team around. The rest have tons of question marks. Some might be good... a couple probably will be, like 2 or 3. Many more will fizzle out. Derozen is more likely to be Gerald Green or Martell Webster than Paul Pierce. Thats just odds man.

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
4/2/2009  12:26 PM
Posted by fishmike:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Draft_Lottery

odds of a top 3 pick:
5 29%
6 21.5%
7 15%
8 10%
9 6.1%
10 4%

Thats factorial

fishnike--you are right I am wrong. It is a 27.6% chance we are not 8--my mistake was factoring that we couldnt fall backwards. 10% chance of being a top 3 pick and 17.6 % chance of being worse than 8---right math--bad sequencing.
RIP Crushalot😞
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34071
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
4/2/2009  12:37 PM
Posted by JohnWallace44:
#8 28 .028 .033 .039

Briggs, am I crazy, or does this read 2.8%, 3.3%, 3.9%?

That adds up to 10% even for the Knickerbockers landing in the top 3 right?

Let me know if that's wrong, but the 8th seed having a 28% chance of moving up doesn't seem to make sense.

I guess I was "wrong" before and this is the number that fishmike posted. Adding the probabilities in this case is considered "marginal probability."

I personally believe Baye's Theorem is the more accurate number here, because it reflects the numbers given certain outcomes. For example, for the Knicks to land a top three pick, one of the three-worst teams must not win the lotto. This, I believe, should be reflected into the statistic over and above historical observation, because this is a one-time outcome independent of historical outcomes.

(edit: I'll work out the equation later, but I've never done a conditional probability with more than one condition)

[Edited by - supremecommander on 04-02-2009 12:40 PM]
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
4/2/2009  12:42 PM
Posted by SupremeCommander:

You can't add up the probabilities. Each drawing after the first is considered a conditional probability, meaning drawing the second pick is contingent on losing out on the first, and whoever wins the first affects the pin pong ball population rather drastically. If you want to know how it works search for "conditional probability."

I'll work out the numbers at some point because I am bored, but it is not as simple as addition

Conditional Probability eh? I'll stick to drawing vague inferences from YouTube clips.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
4/3/2009  1:19 AM
Posted by fishmike:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by fishmike:

This is a two player draft and one might not declare. After those two guys its either long shots or players whose ceiling is 'good'

who's the other player you're talking about?
who are the other players? Who knows? Look at previous drafts and this will be about the same. This draft is Griffin and Rubio if he declares. After that there are 15 or so guys who are crap shoots. The Arizona kid (Hill) will be good, but like your David West, KMart (pre injury), Nene type. Good players but certainly not a guy you build a team around. The rest have tons of question marks. Some might be good... a couple probably will be, like 2 or 3. Many more will fizzle out. Derozen is more likely to be Gerald Green or Martell Webster than Paul Pierce. Thats just odds man.

personally i dunno if Rubio's any more or less of a question mark than Derozan at this point... none of us have probably seen enough of him to give a qualified answer but based on the last Olympics he didn't look lost against NBA level competition, so that's encouraging... Derozan can be a complete bust like Green, ur right, but there's also not a whole lotta guys in this draft w/the type of upside potential that he's got either... & at least we've seen Derozan completely outplay 1 of the top SG prospects like Harden in NCAA tournament play, which is a lot more than u can say for what we had to base our opinions on when it came to someone like Gerald Green... based on that alone i'd say that easily makes him a top 5 pick at the very least... IMO the absolute bottom upside i'd say he's got is somewhere in the Gerald Wallace category, but my gut says he'll be better.

i'll agree w/u on Hill's upside, he's probably not a franchise changer, but he will be very good... a nice second fiddle type player that can add a lot to any team he plays for, but right now for us even getting a player like that would likely be an upgrade over what we currently have... he'll be better than Nene IMO.

based on what u've seen of these prospects, who would u be happy with, assuming we won't have a high enough pick to take Griffin, Rubio, Hill or Thabeet?
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
4/3/2009  2:55 PM
did we get to the bottom of this one? Is it 10% that we land in the top 3, or 27%
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34071
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127
4/3/2009  5:13 PM
Posted by JohnWallace44:

did we get to the bottom of this one? Is it 10% that we land in the top 3, or 27%

10 percent, as the easy answer... use the marginal probability method and add up the .028, .033, .039
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
4/7/2009  3:40 PM
Griffo just declared "News Flash"

Hopefully he's the next Clippers bust.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Lottery Odds--here they are
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy