Author Topic: We shouldn't use a 2016 first round pick in a trade for Demarcus Cousins  (Read 13570 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
So the quick math on the chances of any first round pick the C's have in 2016 of becoming the top pick so the Celtics can draft whoever they want is:

1/4 chance of wining the lottery with the worst record in the league X 1/14 chance of being in the lottery and ending up with the worst record X 14/30 chance of ending up in the lottery = 0.7% chance of getting that pick.

So you don't trade  a 2016 pick for DMC so you can have a less than 1% chance of drafting some teenager that might not even develop enough in college to be good enough to draft number one?

The notion is ridiculous

I agree generally but that math isn't very accurate as you can win the lottery from any lottery spot, or with other teams' picks (like Brooklyn).  It should be a major red flag when the best odds you can come up with are less than 1% in a league with a lot less than 100 teams. 

The average chance of a team winning the lotto each year is exactly 1/30.  With two unprotected 1sts, ours is at least 2/30 right now.  You'd have to adjust for the likelihood of making  the lotto/having more Ping-Pong balls, which is a huge pain to do with any kind of accuracy, but that'd be the starting point.
Actually your math is too simple and doesn't take into effect the chances of attaining the first pick after having to through the  1/30 chance there is of ending up last. Due to the separate events both chances have to be taken into consideration and the chance is less than one percent

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58470
  • Tommy Points: -25640
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
I don't know what the math is, but the chances that Brooklyn pick will be top-3 are small.  The chances of any individual prospect from that draft becoming better than Cousins are even smaller, and the chances of us picking that individual prospect are lower still.

That said, I'm way over the top for DMC.  He's probably top-5 for me in terms of guys I'd want on the Celtics.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11192
  • Tommy Points: 858
Trying to pick the odds of landing the #1 or a top 3 pick in a draft more than a year away is pretty hard to do but in 2016, it is possible (although highly unlikely) that we will have 4 lottery picks (Our own, Brooklyn, Dallas, Cleveland).  LeBron and Love might opt out and Irving might get hurt but let's say that is not likely.  Boston, Brooklyn, and Dallas all could realistically be in the lottery though.

So we can be conservative and say that we get picks 12, 13 and 14.  If that were the case, we would have a 1.8% chance of the #1 pick and a 2.6% chance at a top 3.  Not great odds and certainly not good enough odds to start planning your future around.

A more optimistic scenario is that Brooklyn craters, Boston is mediocre, and Dallas just misses the playoffs and we end up in position of #6, #10, and #14.  Our odds balloon up to 6.9% for #1 and 9.25% for top 3.  I know these odds are diminished because Dallas has protections but not by all that much if you assume they are in the 14th position.  I think my point is that <1% prediction is possible but pretty pessimistic.

Do what you will with these odds but I think it is Danny's plan that having more picks will lead to more chances and then something good will finally happen to one of them.  That something good could be a ping pong ball result or a trade.

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
It's less than 1% chance for any pick to land #1 pick before the season starts and that number is neither optimist nor pessimistic. It's just reality.

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8110
  • Tommy Points: 549
Trying to pick the odds of landing the #1 or a top 3 pick in a draft more than a year away is pretty hard to do but in 2016, it is possible (although highly unlikely) that we will have 4 lottery picks (Our own, Brooklyn, Dallas, Cleveland).  LeBron and Love might opt out and Irving might get hurt but let's say that is not likely.  Boston, Brooklyn, and Dallas all could realistically be in the lottery though.

So we can be conservative and say that we get picks 12, 13 and 14.  If that were the case, we would have a 1.8% chance of the #1 pick and a 2.6% chance at a top 3.  Not great odds and certainly not good enough odds to start planning your future around.

A more optimistic scenario is that Brooklyn craters, Boston is mediocre, and Dallas just misses the playoffs and we end up in position of #6, #10, and #14.  Our odds balloon up to 6.9% for #1 and 9.25% for top 3.  I know these odds are diminished because Dallas has protections but not by all that much if you assume they are in the 14th position.  I think my point is that <1% prediction is possible but pretty pessimistic.

Do what you will with these odds but I think it is Danny's plan that having more picks will lead to more chances and then something good will finally happen to one of them.  That something good could be a ping pong ball result or a trade.
I believe the Cleveland 1st went to the Suns in the IT trade.   

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8110
  • Tommy Points: 549
So the quick math on the chances of any first round pick the C's have in 2016 of becoming the top pick so the Celtics can draft whoever they want is:

1/4 chance of wining the lottery with the worst record in the league X 1/14 chance of being in the lottery and ending up with the worst record X 14/30 chance of ending up in the lottery = 0.7% chance of getting that pick.

So you don't trade  a 2016 pick for DMC so you can have a less than 1% chance of drafting some teenager that might not even develop enough in college to be good enough to draft number one?

The notion is ridiculous

I agree generally but that math isn't very accurate as you can win the lottery from any lottery spot, or with other teams' picks (like Brooklyn).  It should be a major red flag when the best odds you can come up with are less than 1% in a league with a lot less than 100 teams. 

The average chance of a team winning the lotto each year is exactly 1/30.  With two unprotected 1sts, ours is at least 2/30 right now.  You'd have to adjust for the likelihood of making  the lotto/having more Ping-Pong balls, which is a huge pain to do with any kind of accuracy, but that'd be the starting point.
Actually your math is too simple and doesn't take into effect the chances of attaining the first pick after having to through the  1/30 chance there is of ending up last. Due to the separate events both chances have to be taken into consideration and the chance is less than one percent
I'm not following your math.  There are only 30 1st round picks.  If we got all 30 picks, we should have a 100% chance of having the #1 pick.  By your math, it is just 21%. 

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
So the quick math on the chances of any first round pick the C's have in 2016 of becoming the top pick so the Celtics can draft whoever they want is:

1/4 chance of wining the lottery with the worst record in the league X 1/14 chance of being in the lottery and ending up with the worst record X 14/30 chance of ending up in the lottery = 0.7% chance of getting that pick.

So you don't trade  a 2016 pick for DMC so you can have a less than 1% chance of drafting some teenager that might not even develop enough in college to be good enough to draft number one?

The notion is ridiculous

I agree generally but that math isn't very accurate as you can win the lottery from any lottery spot, or with other teams' picks (like Brooklyn).  It should be a major red flag when the best odds you can come up with are less than 1% in a league with a lot less than 100 teams. 

The average chance of a team winning the lotto each year is exactly 1/30.  With two unprotected 1sts, ours is at least 2/30 right now.  You'd have to adjust for the likelihood of making  the lotto/having more Ping-Pong balls, which is a huge pain to do with any kind of accuracy, but that'd be the starting point.
Actually your math is too simple and doesn't take into effect the chances of attaining the first pick after having to through the  1/30 chance there is of ending up last. Due to the separate events both chances have to be taken into consideration and the chance is less than one percent
I'm not following your math.  There are only 30 1st round picks.  If we got all 30 picks, we should have a 100% chance of having the #1 pick.  By your math, it is just 21%.
Its statistics. Any team has a 1 in 30 chance of ending up with the worst record in the league prior to the season starting. Now you have to take into consideration another event, the lottery where a team with the worst record has only a 1 in 4 chance of getting the first pick. In order to calculate the odds of landing the #1 pick before the season starts both events have to be considered(ending up as the worst team AND winning the lottery)and therefore the odds of both events occurring need to be multiplied together to end up with the odds of any one team attaining the first pick. 0.03333 X 0.25= .0008 or a 0.8% chance of getting that #1 pick.

Again these are just the odds before the season starts for one team with one pick. If a team has more than one pick the odds rise as you add the chances together. So a team with 3 first rounders has a total chance of 2.4% of ending up with the #1 pick before any games have been played.

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8110
  • Tommy Points: 549
So the quick math on the chances of any first round pick the C's have in 2016 of becoming the top pick so the Celtics can draft whoever they want is:

1/4 chance of wining the lottery with the worst record in the league X 1/14 chance of being in the lottery and ending up with the worst record X 14/30 chance of ending up in the lottery = 0.7% chance of getting that pick.

So you don't trade  a 2016 pick for DMC so you can have a less than 1% chance of drafting some teenager that might not even develop enough in college to be good enough to draft number one?

The notion is ridiculous

I agree generally but that math isn't very accurate as you can win the lottery from any lottery spot, or with other teams' picks (like Brooklyn).  It should be a major red flag when the best odds you can come up with are less than 1% in a league with a lot less than 100 teams. 

The average chance of a team winning the lotto each year is exactly 1/30.  With two unprotected 1sts, ours is at least 2/30 right now.  You'd have to adjust for the likelihood of making  the lotto/having more Ping-Pong balls, which is a huge pain to do with any kind of accuracy, but that'd be the starting point.
Actually your math is too simple and doesn't take into effect the chances of attaining the first pick after having to through the  1/30 chance there is of ending up last. Due to the separate events both chances have to be taken into consideration and the chance is less than one percent
I'm not following your math.  There are only 30 1st round picks.  If we got all 30 picks, we should have a 100% chance of having the #1 pick.  By your math, it is just 21%.
Its statistics. Any team has a 1 in 30 chance of ending up with the worst record in the league prior to the season starting. Now you have to take into consideration another event, the lottery where a team with the worst record has only a 1 in 4 chance of getting the first pick. In order to calculate the odds of landing the #1 pick before the season starts both events have to be considered(ending up as the worst team AND winning the lottery)and therefore the odds of both events occurring need to be multiplied together to end up with the odds of any one team attaining the first pick. 0.03333 X 0.25= .0008 or a 0.8% chance of getting that #1 pick.

Again these are just the odds before the season starts for one team with one pick. If a team has more than one pick the odds rise as you add the chances together. So a team with 3 first rounders has a total chance of 2.4% of ending up with the #1 pick before any games have been played.
I understand statistics.  If you add up the chance of each possible option occurring, you should total 100% but your math doesn't.  I think what you are failing to take into account is that each lottery pick has a percentage chance of being the #1 pick.  In addition to having a 1 in 30 chance of having the worst record which has a 25% chance of being the #1 pick.  Each team also has a 1 in 30 chance of having the 2nd worst record which has a 19.9% chance of being the #1 pick, and also a 1 in 3 chance of having the 3rd worst record which has a 15.6% chance of being the #1 pick, ... down through the 14th worst record which has a 0.5% chance of being the #1 pick.   

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
So the quick math on the chances of any first round pick the C's have in 2016 of becoming the top pick so the Celtics can draft whoever they want is:

1/4 chance of wining the lottery with the worst record in the league X 1/14 chance of being in the lottery and ending up with the worst record X 14/30 chance of ending up in the lottery = 0.7% chance of getting that pick.

So you don't trade  a 2016 pick for DMC so you can have a less than 1% chance of drafting some teenager that might not even develop enough in college to be good enough to draft number one?

The notion is ridiculous

I agree generally but that math isn't very accurate as you can win the lottery from any lottery spot, or with other teams' picks (like Brooklyn).  It should be a major red flag when the best odds you can come up with are less than 1% in a league with a lot less than 100 teams. 

The average chance of a team winning the lotto each year is exactly 1/30.  With two unprotected 1sts, ours is at least 2/30 right now.  You'd have to adjust for the likelihood of making  the lotto/having more Ping-Pong balls, which is a huge pain to do with any kind of accuracy, but that'd be the starting point.
Actually your math is too simple and doesn't take into effect the chances of attaining the first pick after having to through the  1/30 chance there is of ending up last. Due to the separate events both chances have to be taken into consideration and the chance is less than one percent
I'm not following your math.  There are only 30 1st round picks.  If we got all 30 picks, we should have a 100% chance of having the #1 pick.  By your math, it is just 21%.
Its statistics. Any team has a 1 in 30 chance of ending up with the worst record in the league prior to the season starting. Now you have to take into consideration another event, the lottery where a team with the worst record has only a 1 in 4 chance of getting the first pick. In order to calculate the odds of landing the #1 pick before the season starts both events have to be considered(ending up as the worst team AND winning the lottery)and therefore the odds of both events occurring need to be multiplied together to end up with the odds of any one team attaining the first pick. 0.03333 X 0.25= .0008 or a 0.8% chance of getting that #1 pick.

Again these are just the odds before the season starts for one team with one pick. If a team has more than one pick the odds rise as you add the chances together. So a team with 3 first rounders has a total chance of 2.4% of ending up with the #1 pick before any games have been played.
I understand statistics.  If you add up the chance of each possible option occurring, you should total 100% but your math doesn't.  I think what you are failing to take into account is that each lottery pick has a percentage chance of being the #1 pick.  In addition to having a 1 in 30 chance of having the worst record which has a 25% chance of being the #1 pick.  Each team also has a 1 in 30 chance of having the 2nd worst record which has a 19.9% chance of being the #1 pick, and also a 1 in 3 chance of having the 3rd worst record which has a 15.6% chance of being the #1 pick, ... down through the 14th worst record which has a 0.5% chance of being the #1 pick.   
Shoot you are right. For some reason. I got fixated on only getting the worst record and going from there but I forgot all the other chances if landing between 2 and 14.

My bad.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2015, 08:47:10 PM by nickagneta »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Still a 3% chance overall of getting that pick is still a ridiculous reason to not trade a pick for Cousins. Especially given this kid the OP wants might just not end up being as good a prospect after he plays college.

Avery Bradley was the 2nd best player coming out of high school his year and ended up being selected 19th the following year.

Myles. Turner was considered the 2nd or 3rd best high school player coming out of high school. He might not be a top 10 pick this year.

Guarantee of having Cousins versus a tiny chance of landing the #1 pick to pick some kid that might not be all that great? Easy decision to me.

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
EDIT:  Looks like it's been covered, sorry for the redundancy.  Cheers!


So the quick math on the chances of any first round pick the C's have in 2016 of becoming the top pick so the Celtics can draft whoever they want is:

1/4 chance of wining the lottery with the worst record in the league X 1/14 chance of being in the lottery and ending up with the worst record X 14/30 chance of ending up in the lottery = 0.7% chance of getting that pick.

So you don't trade  a 2016 pick for DMC so you can have a less than 1% chance of drafting some teenager that might not even develop enough in college to be good enough to draft number one?

The notion is ridiculous

I agree generally but that math isn't very accurate as you can win the lottery from any lottery spot, or with other teams' picks (like Brooklyn).  It should be a major red flag when the best odds you can come up with are less than 1% in a league with a lot less than 100 teams. 

The average chance of a team winning the lotto each year is exactly 1/30.  With two unprotected 1sts, ours is at least 2/30 right now.  You'd have to adjust for the likelihood of making  the lotto/having more Ping-Pong balls, which is a huge pain to do with any kind of accuracy, but that'd be the starting point.
Actually your math is too simple and doesn't take into effect the chances of attaining the first pick after having to through the  1/30 chance there is of ending up last. Due to the separate events both chances have to be taken into consideration and the chance is less than one percent
I'm not following your math.  There are only 30 1st round picks.  If we got all 30 picks, we should have a 100% chance of having the #1 pick.  By your math, it is just 21%.
Its statistics. Any team has a 1 in 30 chance of ending up with the worst record in the league prior to the season starting. Now you have to take into consideration another event, the lottery where a team with the worst record has only a 1 in 4 chance of getting the first pick. In order to calculate the odds of landing the #1 pick before the season starts both events have to be considered(ending up as the worst team AND winning the lottery)and therefore the odds of both events occurring need to be multiplied together to end up with the odds of any one team attaining the first pick. 0.03333 X 0.25= .0008 or a 0.8% chance of getting that #1 pick.

Again these are just the odds before the season starts for one team with one pick. If a team has more than one pick the odds rise as you add the chances together. So a team with 3 first rounders has a total chance of 2.4% of ending up with the #1 pick before any games have been played.

No, tazz is also right.  A team with 10% of the first round picks should never have a baseline chance of less than 1 in 40; it doesn't make sense on its face.  If you followed this logic for every team you would find the combined odds for all teams would be far less than 100%, which wouldn't make sense.

The flaw in your logic is that you're only looking at the 25% chance that the team with the worst record gets the 1st pick.  You're not accounting for the 75% chance a lotto team without the worst pick wins. 

The odds you're trying to calculate are "what's the probability a team wins the first pick", but what you're actually calculating is "what's the probability a team gets the worst record AND wins the first pick", which is obviously a lot less likely.   Take your .8% and quadruple it to account for the 75% chance the other lotto teams win, and you will end up with approximately a 1/30 probability (less rounding error).  And we've got double those odds as we have 2 picks.

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
My bad fwf. I was wrong. Just got fixated on the the worst record and winning. TP to you guys for showing me my dumb error.

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
My bad fwf. I was wrong. Just got fixated on the the worst record and winning. TP to you guys for showing me my dumb error.

Don't worry a bit, I teach stats so this is all tax deductible  :P

TP right back because I agree with you anyway - I'm not a huge Cousins fan but he's worth both those picks.  The only way it'd be a question is if we had already won the lottery and Sacramento wanted the #1 pick we were assured of.  That'd be a tough choice with rookie scale working as it is.

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8110
  • Tommy Points: 549
EDIT:  Looks like it's been covered, sorry for the redundancy.  Cheers!


So the quick math on the chances of any first round pick the C's have in 2016 of becoming the top pick so the Celtics can draft whoever they want is:

1/4 chance of wining the lottery with the worst record in the league X 1/14 chance of being in the lottery and ending up with the worst record X 14/30 chance of ending up in the lottery = 0.7% chance of getting that pick.

So you don't trade  a 2016 pick for DMC so you can have a less than 1% chance of drafting some teenager that might not even develop enough in college to be good enough to draft number one?

The notion is ridiculous

I agree generally but that math isn't very accurate as you can win the lottery from any lottery spot, or with other teams' picks (like Brooklyn).  It should be a major red flag when the best odds you can come up with are less than 1% in a league with a lot less than 100 teams. 

The average chance of a team winning the lotto each year is exactly 1/30.  With two unprotected 1sts, ours is at least 2/30 right now.  You'd have to adjust for the likelihood of making  the lotto/having more Ping-Pong balls, which is a huge pain to do with any kind of accuracy, but that'd be the starting point.
Actually your math is too simple and doesn't take into effect the chances of attaining the first pick after having to through the  1/30 chance there is of ending up last. Due to the separate events both chances have to be taken into consideration and the chance is less than one percent
I'm not following your math.  There are only 30 1st round picks.  If we got all 30 picks, we should have a 100% chance of having the #1 pick.  By your math, it is just 21%.
Its statistics. Any team has a 1 in 30 chance of ending up with the worst record in the league prior to the season starting. Now you have to take into consideration another event, the lottery where a team with the worst record has only a 1 in 4 chance of getting the first pick. In order to calculate the odds of landing the #1 pick before the season starts both events have to be considered(ending up as the worst team AND winning the lottery)and therefore the odds of both events occurring need to be multiplied together to end up with the odds of any one team attaining the first pick. 0.03333 X 0.25= .0008 or a 0.8% chance of getting that #1 pick.

Again these are just the odds before the season starts for one team with one pick. If a team has more than one pick the odds rise as you add the chances together. So a team with 3 first rounders has a total chance of 2.4% of ending up with the #1 pick before any games have been played.

No, tazz is also right.  A team with 10% of the first round picks should never have a baseline chance of less than 1 in 40; it doesn't make sense on its face.  If you followed this logic for every team you would find the combined odds for all teams would be far less than 100%, which wouldn't make sense.

The flaw in your logic is that you're only looking at the 25% chance that the team with the worst record gets the 1st pick.  You're not accounting for the 75% chance a lotto team without the worst pick wins. 

The odds you're trying to calculate are "what's the probability a team wins the first pick", but what you're actually calculating is "what's the probability a team gets the worst record AND wins the first pick", which is obviously a lot less likely.   Take your .8% and quadruple it to account for the 75% chance the other lotto teams win, and you will end up with approximately a 1/30 probability (less rounding error).  And we've got double those odds as we have 2 picks.
TP for clearly articulating the difference in the calculations. 

Offline tazzmaniac

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8110
  • Tommy Points: 549
Still a 3% chance overall of getting that pick is still a ridiculous reason to not trade a pick for Cousins. Especially given this kid the OP wants might just not end up being as good a prospect after he plays college.

Avery Bradley was the 2nd best player coming out of high school his year and ended up being selected 19th the following year.

Myles. Turner was considered the 2nd or 3rd best high school player coming out of high school. He might not be a top 10 pick this year.

Guarantee of having Cousins versus a tiny chance of landing the #1 pick to pick some kid that might not be all that great? Easy decision to me.
I was just arguing the math.  Trading a single 1st rounder, even a #1 pick, for Cousins is a no brainer to me.  I'd have no problem trading two or three 1sts for Cousins as long as only one was completely unprotected and dependent on what players we had to give up.  My concerns would be how good a fit Stevens and Cousins would be and how we'd build around Cousins.  Getting Cousins by himself should easily put us in the playoffs but we'd need someone else to make us a championship contender.