Author Topic: Lottery retrospective perspective  (Read 2857 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Lottery retrospective perspective
« on: May 17, 2016, 01:25:12 AM »

Offline slightly biased bias fan

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1457
  • Tommy Points: 324
Last year was the first time in 11 years that the team with the worst overall record landed the No. 1 overall pick. The team with the second-worst record hasn’t won the lottery since the 76ers snatched up Allen Iverson in 1996. That’s 20 years ago, and over those 20 years the team with the worst record has only won the lottery three times. That’s the same number of wins as the fifth-worst record. Meanwhile the seventh- and ninth-worst records have each won twice. The fourth-, sixth- and eighth-worst records have each won once. The third-worst record has won six times over the last 20 years. That’s basically a dynasty. And while you might look at that and think “Ooh, the third-best odds? The Celtics have the third-best odds! This is good.” — it doesn’t matter. The lottery doesn’t care about history. It has no memory. There’s no karma. It’s all random. And that’s the worst, especially in this media climate.

On Wednesday, Ainge will be a genius or a fool and for no other reason than “because” — because four consecutive ping-pong balls were sucked into a plastic tube. Because he got lucky, or unlucky. And that’s too bad. And there’s probably no stopping it. There will be takes and they will be blazing.

In 1995, the Minnesota Timberwolves had the third-worst record, but were knocked down to No. 5 in the lottery. Then they watched three power forwards (Joe Smith, Antonio McDyess and Rasheed Wallace) plus Jerry Stackhouse fall off the board before Kevin Garnett fell into their laps. In 1998, the Clippers had the third-worst record, won the lottery and drafted Michael Olowokandi. That same year, the Raptors had the second-worst record, fell to fourth in the lottery, drafted Antawn Jamison and flipped him straight up for Vince Carter.

In 2003, the Pistons jumped from sixth in the lottery to second in the draft and took Darko Milicic over Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade. In 2005, the Hornets fell from second to fourth and watched Andrew Bogut, Marvin Williams and Deron Williams disappear and leave them with stuck with Chris Paul.

In 2006, the Blazers had the worst record in the NBA and then the worst luck in the lottery. Andrea Bargnani went first overall on draft day, meanwhile Portland used the No. 4 pick on Tyrus Thomas and then traded him for LaMarcus Aldridge. The next year, the Blazers had the seventh-worst record and the won the most important NBA Lottery since LeBron. Then they drafted Greg Oden.

In 2008, the Sonics/Thunder fell from second in the lottery to fourth in the draft and grabbed Russell Westbrook. In 2009, the Grizzlies jumped from sixth to second and landed Hasheem Thabeet. In 2010, the Kings fell from third to fifth and found DeMarcus Cousins.

OK, finally let’s bring it back to the last time the Celtics found themselves where they are right now, among the three teams with the best chance to win the top pick in a draft that features two clear cut stars; when for one brief moment Ainge and Co. were leaning hard on luck to help turn their franchise around and luck chose to slap them hard across the face with a spike-studded leather glove. You remember how that felt. You remember the things that you said. You remember all the obituaries written that next morning.

And you remember what happened on draft lottery night in 2007. You remember what happened the rest of that offseason. You remember that confetti-filled scene at the Garden, 13 months after bottoming out, when the Celtics were suddenly on top of the world.

So you know that while the ping-pong balls might change the course of NBA history on Tuesday night, they won’t change the Celtics’ ability to re-write it.

https://www.boston.com/sports/boston-celtics/2016/05/16/lottery-luck-danny-ainge-makes
« Last Edit: May 17, 2016, 09:27:04 AM by slightly biased bias fan »

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2016, 09:24:26 AM »

Offline slightly biased bias fan

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1457
  • Tommy Points: 324
Sorry, perhaps a little too long so I've shorted the original piece, but I definite think it puts things in perspective.

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2016, 09:34:50 AM »

Offline PaulP34

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 702
  • Tommy Points: 39
Your right. But one pattern I did see was a cluster of #3 worse teams getting the #1 pick 11-12 years ago. To note: 10-11 years prior there was another cluster of 3's. I know its not the popular idea that the chance on the lottery pick comes in patterns but if it does we may see the Brooklyn pick start a new cluster of 3's starting tonight. Let's keep our fingers crossed...

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2016, 09:39:50 AM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6500
  • Tommy Points: 385
I fully agree in the notion that so much NBA success (more so than any other pro sport given how star-dominated the game is) is derived from luck.  But I don't agree with the assessment that what happens tonight will make Ainge look like a "genius or a fool." 

Clearly, the fact that Ainge was able to nab the Brooklyn picks at all for a fading Pierce and KG was a very intelligent move.  And even if it ends up being the sixth pick, it still is very good compensation for what we gave up. 

That said, if we end up at #1 or #2, Ainge will likely be thought of for decades to come as more of a genius than if we end up with the #6 pick.  So I agree with your general gist of your argument, just not to the full extent. 

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2016, 09:44:56 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
On Wednesday, Ainge will be a genius or a fool and for no other reason than “because” — because four consecutive ping-pong balls were sucked into a plastic tube. Because he got lucky, or unlucky. And that’s too bad. And there’s probably no stopping it. There will be takes and they will be blazing.

I don't really think this is true - if we had tanked and put all our eggs in one basket then missed out on the top 3 Ainge might catch some flak, like the Knicks last year before Porzingis turned out to be good, or the Sixers every year.  But this is all found money at this point, and with 2 more Brooklyn picks to go I don't think anyone's going to argue that trade was a bad decision even if we bottom out at 6.

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2016, 10:47:24 AM »

Offline Boris Badenov

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5227
  • Tommy Points: 1065
If those three picks had been guaranteed to be #10 every year, I bet Brooklyn backs out of the deal as constructed. We are deeply in the money on this one.

No amount of bad luck can make Danny look bad here - though I do agree that if we get bad luck there will be hot takes. They'll just be so absurd that they won't get any traction.

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2016, 10:48:12 AM »

Offline The One

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2017
  • Tommy Points: 203
Excellent post.

I promise to try to keep my cool tonight...no matter what happens.


Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2016, 10:51:43 AM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18205
  • Tommy Points: 2748
  • bammokja
Last year was the first time in 11 years that the team with the worst overall record landed the No. 1 overall pick. The team with the second-worst record hasn’t won the lottery since the 76ers snatched up Allen Iverson in 1996. That’s 20 years ago, and over those 20 years the team with the worst record has only won the lottery three times. That’s the same number of wins as the fifth-worst record. Meanwhile the seventh- and ninth-worst records have each won twice. The fourth-, sixth- and eighth-worst records have each won once. The third-worst record has won six times over the last 20 years. That’s basically a dynasty. And while you might look at that and think “Ooh, the third-best odds? The Celtics have the third-best odds! This is good.” — it doesn’t matter. The lottery doesn’t care about history. It has no memory. There’s no karma. It’s all random. And that’s the worst, especially in this media climate.

On Wednesday, Ainge will be a genius or a fool and for no other reason than “because” — because four consecutive ping-pong balls were sucked into a plastic tube. Because he got lucky, or unlucky. And that’s too bad. And there’s probably no stopping it. There will be takes and they will be blazing.

In 1995, the Minnesota Timberwolves had the third-worst record, but were knocked down to No. 5 in the lottery. Then they watched three power forwards (Joe Smith, Antonio McDyess and Rasheed Wallace) plus Jerry Stackhouse fall off the board before Kevin Garnett fell into their laps. In 1998, the Clippers had the third-worst record, won the lottery and drafted Michael Olowokandi. That same year, the Raptors had the second-worst record, fell to fourth in the lottery, drafted Antawn Jamison and flipped him straight up for Vince Carter.

In 2003, the Pistons jumped from sixth in the lottery to second in the draft and took Darko Milicic over Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade. In 2005, the Hornets fell from second to fourth and watched Andrew Bogut, Marvin Williams and Deron Williams disappear and leave them with stuck with Chris Paul.

In 2006, the Blazers had the worst record in the NBA and then the worst luck in the lottery. Andrea Bargnani went first overall on draft day, meanwhile Portland used the No. 4 pick on Tyrus Thomas and then traded him for LaMarcus Aldridge. The next year, the Blazers had the seventh-worst record and the won the most important NBA Lottery since LeBron. Then they drafted Greg Oden.

In 2008, the Sonics/Thunder fell from second in the lottery to fourth in the draft and grabbed Russell Westbrook. In 2009, the Grizzlies jumped from sixth to second and landed Hasheem Thabeet. In 2010, the Kings fell from third to fifth and found DeMarcus Cousins.

OK, finally let’s bring it back to the last time the Celtics found themselves where they are right now, among the three teams with the best chance to win the top pick in a draft that features two clear cut stars; when for one brief moment Ainge and Co. were leaning hard on luck to help turn their franchise around and luck chose to slap them hard across the face with a spike-studded leather glove. You remember how that felt. You remember the things that you said. You remember all the obituaries written that next morning.

And you remember what happened on draft lottery night in 2007. You remember what happened the rest of that offseason. You remember that confetti-filled scene at the Garden, 13 months after bottoming out, when the Celtics were suddenly on top of the world.

So you know that while the ping-pong balls might change the course of NBA history on Tuesday night, they won’t change the Celtics’ ability to re-write it.

https://www.boston.com/sports/boston-celtics/2016/05/16/lottery-luck-danny-ainge-makes
well written and interesting thread. thanks for taking the time to post it. and a tp as a reward.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2016, 11:11:06 AM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
What helps remove the stress for me is looking around the league, and seeing all the stars and superstars who were NOT taken in the top 3.  Curry, Thompson, Draymond, Westbrook, Kobe, KG, Kawhi, Parker, Ginobili, Pierce, Dirk, Drummond, IT, Cousins, Chris Paul, D Jordan, Love, Lillard, George, Butler, M Gasol, Conley, Lowry, Mo Williams, DeRozan, Wade, and plenty of others I'm sure I'm leaving out. 

All these guys were available outside the top 3 - many were taken right at the 4-6 range we'll fall in if the Ping-Pong balls don't break our way.  Quite a few in the range of our lesser picks.  There's no guarantee we'll nab a guy like that, and we all want one of those top picks, but a 4-6 spot is far from a lost cause.  Lots of All-Stars and HOFers historically available around there.  Add that this is found money and it's a huge opportunity for the team no matter where we wind up.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2016, 11:25:35 AM by foulweatherfan »

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2016, 11:35:56 AM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37811
  • Tommy Points: 3030
Can 't get your hopes up too much

It's more up to,Danny , than luck.....he has several picks , players to trade and future assets.

A lot of stars came from outside the top five picks ,many top fives become busts

So....it really is up to Celtics mgmt to find the golden nugget in the top 20 or 30 picks .


Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2016, 11:49:14 AM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
That's the abridged version?!!

TP
DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2016, 12:29:15 PM »

Online Vermont Green

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13808
  • Tommy Points: 1034
It doesn't seem possible that Simmons or Ingram will become the next Milicic or Thabeet or Olawakandi but it is possible.  I am still hoping we get the Simmons and don't trade him or get Ingram and do trade him with someone hopefully overpaying.  After that, who knows.  History has shown over and over again that it is very hard to project the future ability of college freshmen.

I also hope that Danny swings for the fences a few times with all these picks.  We don't need more mediocre combo players.

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2016, 12:32:13 PM »

Offline Surferdad

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15247
  • Tommy Points: 1034
  • "He fiddles...and diddles..."
Can 't get your hopes up too much

It's more up to,Danny , than luck.....he has several picks , players to trade and future assets.

A lot of stars came from outside the top five picks ,many top fives become busts

So....it really is up to Celtics mgmt to find the golden nugget in the top 20 or 30 picks .
Yup, Ainge traded for both Ray Allen and KG holding the #5 pick.

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2016, 01:07:35 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 34783
  • Tommy Points: 1607
Teams miss on draft picks all the time, but the difference between the 1st pick and the 5th pick is the ability to draft any of the four players that get drafted 1, 2, 3, and 4.  And the difference in the trade value between the 1st and 5th pick is significantly greater as well.

Boston may very well end up with the best player in the draft no matter where Boston selects, but there is an incredibly difference between having the 1st pick and the 5th pick. 
2025 Historical Draft - Cleveland Cavaliers - 1st pick

Starters - Luka, JB, Lebron, Wemby, Shaq
Rotation - D. Daniels, Mitchell, G. Wallace, Melo, Noah
Deep Bench - Korver, Turner

Re: Lottery retrospective perspective
« Reply #14 on: May 17, 2016, 01:13:19 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16186
  • Tommy Points: 1407
Teams miss on draft picks all the time, but the difference between the 1st pick and the 5th pick is the ability to draft any of the four players that get drafted 1, 2, 3, and 4.  And the difference in the trade value between the 1st and 5th pick is significantly greater as well.

Boston may very well end up with the best player in the draft no matter where Boston selects, but there is an incredibly difference between having the 1st pick and the 5th pick.