This. Had we gotten the number one pick in 2023, and were fielding a roster of Wenbanyama, Sengun, Bari, KD, and likely Castle over Reed because shooting wouldn't have been as big of a concern, we would be in a very different position. Hell, we'd have likely traded Sengun for guard depth. He might have even been the piece who went out for DeAaron Fox. In which case, we'd basically be the Houston Spurs right now playing in the Conference Finals. Hell, let's take Castle out of the picture and just imagine what the team would look like with only Wenbanyama as the difference. C: Wenbanyama. PF: Bari SF: Durant SG: Tari PG: Fred 6th man: Sengun That's pretty ridiculous. I think that would probably be the longest front court in NBA . I think it should be longer than Sampson/Olajuwon/McCray. It would also be fun to see what moves they'd have made to solidify that roster. Would they have signed NAW instead of DFS to solidify the guard roster? Who knows. There was also a chance we could have had the #1 pick in 2025. C: Sengun PF: Durant SF: Flagg SG: Amen PG: Fred 6th man: Bari Would also put us in a wildly different position. *edit: might have been Bari in place of Durant as I just realized our 2025 pick went out in the Durant trade. And I don't think they'd have moved that pick had it been #1 overall. So perhaps Durant wouldn't be a Rocket. Or perhaps he still would be and they'd have sent back future Phoenix picks.
On Wemby, if the Rockets had won that draft, the Rockets team is stacked. If Nico Harrison calls Stone and takes the same amount of value as the Lakers gave Dallas, the Rockets are stacked. If the Rockets got Cade, stacked. Luck into Flagg...not stacked yet, but that is a great long term stacked team waiting to happen. If the Rockets had lucked into Chet instead of JSJ, the Rockets are a much more dangerous team. A lot of these scenarios, Sengun would have to be traded. Stone may have bet too hard on Amen and Sengun. They have not been good enough to win now despite being win now pieces. Not sure they will be good enough with a slow draft pick drip even though they are also win later pieces. I'm kind of expecting the Rockets to have a dip in quality 27-28 and maybe 28-29 as vets no longer here and the draft picks aren't ready. Really hoping Amen or Sengun have a breakout season. Really not looking forward to this board in 27-28 if Amen or Sengun don't improve a lot.
If you compare odds for the #1 pick under the old system and the new system, you will see that the teams with the six worst records in the league will have their odds reduced (the bottom 3 will be reduced significantly). The Nets are likely to be near the bottom because many other bottom feeders will be getting better from this draft. It's not certain that they will be in the bottom three though; I have read that BKN is interested in Austin Reeves, so maybe they will be in the 4-10 range.
That was my initial hesitance, the assumption BKN would for sure be bottom 3. I understand they were this year but penciling them in there before the draft I think is a leap. Not a huge one, just saying it for sure diminishes the 2027 pick I didn't think was right. Now, I'll fully admit I forgot to take into account that if they were top 6 (or bottom 6, rather) they'd have a higher draft % than this upcoming drafts 3-10 slot or whatever the level 8.1% chance is. 6-8 (old lotto settings) they'd have a higher chance than worse 3 this upcoming year.
What is that showing? I'm curious because maybe I'm not understanding the chart, and because I'm under the assumption that the 3 worst teams should have identical probabilities across all picks since they have the identical number of balls.
I can't stand Durant, and would be fine with him not being included in this alternate universe Rockets team, or the actual Rockets team.
The numerator is the same for each pick but the denominator is reduced as a ball is removed for the prior pick.
It is the odds that a team ends up with a given pick. The 3 worst teams are guaranteed a Top 12 finish. I operated under the assumption that if all three of them didn't land in the Top 9, that 1 would get 10, 2 would get 11, and 3 would get 12 as tiebreakers. If 2 of them ended up not in Top 10, I assumed worst team gets 11. If they hold a separate lottery for the remaining teams to ensure bottom 3 end up in Top 12, you could average the odds of the bottom 3 teams for 10, 11, and 12. I tried to give chatgpt the most precise instructions I could. I instructed it not take into account Washington having Top pick this year or Utah finishing Top 5 consecutively. Numbers look about what I expected except the Top 12 requirement caused the bottom 3 picks to have higher odds than I would expected for the 10-12 picks. Been a while since I took stats class and these are not the type of stats I deal with often so went with chatgpt instead of doing the math myself.
These numbers appear similar, but not exactly what chatgpt came up with. Thanks to @BimaThug as I saw this based on his reply.
I hope we don’t trade these picks. Even if they are not a top 3 picks it would be nice to come out of next years draft with any 2 guards like Branch, Joksimovic, Mullins, Mingo, Arenas, or Center like Arefan Diane. I’m sure 5 more random guys will pop up with lottery potential next year as well. Could start building through the draft with our own 28’ and the Dallas / Suns 29’s to follow
Only way I’m ok with trading 1 of them is if it is with KD to get a top 10 this year (Bucks?) or Sengun with both for top 3 in 26. Both are unlikely, especially with “no-balls” Stone.
The bottom 3 teams' pick odds for 10-12 was exactly what I was talking about. I thought I saw something from the NBA where it showed them being a bit different. Also saw something on Reddit a couple of weeks ago where someone did the calcs/chart with the same end result as what the NBA showed. The other stuff looks pretty similar from what I recall - it's just the distribution of probability across picsk 10-12 or so for the worst 3 teams picks that looked wonky to me.
Ok, nevermind. I found the graphic from the NBA. What seems to be happening is that you're assigning specific probabilities to the 10-12 picks, but it seems like the NBA is showing the average probability of any of each of those teams landing in a specific position (?). For example, the 25% they get for the 12th pick seems to just be the average (?) of the 3 distinct picks you've assigned. See NBA tweet below. I really need to check how they conduct this (if they have even gone into the details) when I get time. Thanks for the chart, though!
These numbers are the same outside the picks 10-12 for the bottom 3 teams. The NBA has not clarified how it plans to handle the situation if multiple bootm 3 teams end up 10- 12, as far as I can tell. I hope they do it my way, as I expect this method will fix hardcore season-long tanking so that the bottom 3 teams are really in the worst position going forward. I do think there may be some tanking to get into the 3 pong pong bracket late in the season.
Honestly I think they should move to a Strength of Schedule. I mean 14 wins against all playoff teams should have better odds than 20 wins against all scrubs Incentivise the "BAD Teams" to beat the "Good Teams" esp late in the year Rocket River
That's probably where the Adam Silver "I can punish you whatever way I choose if I think you're tanking" clause in the new rules come into effect. It's like a catch-all for the NBA to do "whatever" from the sounds of it. lol.
