Curious why the NBA wants the Cavs #1
Lebron back there may be inevitable. Irving/Lebron/Embiid.
 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
-
05-20-14 07:36 PM #36
-
05-20-14 07:37 PM #37
I'd take Mallory Edens with the #1 pick.
Originally Posted by thetrinity
-
05-20-14 07:40 PM #38
1. Irving 2. Waiters 3. Wiggns/Parker 4. Bennett 5. Thompson. What a young core if they could keep all of them
-
05-20-14 07:41 PM #39
they won't take embid, they know they can't mess it up and with his back no way in hell they take him and Lebron is NOT going to leave so plz stop talking about... Originally Posted by Cuse0323
Curious why the NBA wants the Cavs #1
Lebron back there may be inevitable. Irving/Lebron/Embiid.
-
05-20-14 08:04 PM #40
Originally Posted by bob6199
If you say so...shut it down. bob has spoken.
-
05-20-14 08:19 PM #41
No... The NBA owed Cleveland.
It was very obvious that the league allowed Miami to collude (players, coaches and Riley) and it cost the city over $100 million dollars. I am quite sure that the NBA and the owners had to concede to Cleveland #1 picks in order to quiet Dan Gilbert down. If you remember, Gilbert was going to release information that showed Riley concocting the plan to get James and Bosh. All of a sudden, he shut his trap and you haven't heard a peep from him ever since.
Do the math, they struck a deal.
Originally Posted by bob6199
Nomination(s):This post was nominated 1 time . To view the nominated thread please click here. People who nominated: BennyBigNuts
-
05-20-14 08:24 PM #42
What is the reason you didn't post this before the draft lottery? Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
-
05-20-14 08:26 PM #43
Now, if Miami can go down in flames in this series, Lebron might be going, going, back, back to Cleveland...
Lebron, wake your ass up, we got to get that paper. "Oh, CLE, Cleveland"? "It's all about the cheddar, going back to Cleveland. I'm going, going, back, back to Cleveland, Cleveland"
-
05-20-14 08:28 PM #44
No it's not. But if you really think it is please go fix the US FBI website Originally Posted by trevor123698
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investig...e/sports_bribe
-
05-20-14 08:36 PM #45
I was relaxing in the hot tub after a day at the beach.
If you can go back and search by my name, you will find a post I made the year leading up to the draft after the Heat's collusion. I clearly said that Cleveland would get at least 2 #1 picks in order to quiet Dan Gilbert. I don't know how good the search feature is here anymore and how far back you can go (it use to be very good) but I indeed posted it in this forum. Somebody like Goat Milk, Lakerboy, Paco, maybe JJ would remember. Not trying to toot my horn because I really don't care but here's the math...
Cavs chances in 2011: 2.8%
Cavs chances in 2013: 15.6%
Cavs chances in 2014: 1.7%
Chances to get #1 in ALL THREE of those years? .007426%
Originally Posted by James D
-
05-20-14 08:44 PM #46
Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
If you say you posted that prior to 2011 draft I believe you. However this mathematical formula you added is not accurate data. The reason is they were also in the 2012 draft and had a 13.8% chance of winning the 2012 draft. They did not and you are just excluding that year. There is no data that is ever relevant if that type of action is allowed. however three number ones is amazing and a #4 pick is amazing in four years. I had totally forgot the first year in 2011. Thanks for the reminder LOL
-
05-20-14 08:54 PM #47
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...ottery-p2.html Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
Called it fate here, not sure if sarcastic or missed another post but figured I'd pull it up.
-
05-20-14 08:59 PM #48
Jesus Cuse0323 nice find. Don sterling should have hired you as his archivist and not V. Apparently it pays about 3 million a year so I assume you would have accepted the position LOL
-
05-20-14 09:02 PM #49
It is accurate... It's the odds of getting 3 number ones in 3 years. That was the odds of getting a number 1 in that year. It doesn't matter what years you use. They still got number 1 in those years against those odds. I didn't use 2012 because they didn't win the #1 pick in that year. Now you can also compute the chance of them getting number 1 in all 4 years but why? If you do that then why not go back 30 years in Cleveland history too? Because I was talking about the years they actually got the number 1 pick not the others.
I wasn't trying to be disingenuous, my main point was that to get the number 1 pick 3 out of 4 years is not blind luck. The odds of doing that is ridiculously low.
I believe in conspiracies by nature. I also think the Ewing pick was rigged as well. The NBA may not have to rig it every year but I don't have a lot of faith in their behind closed doors process.
Originally Posted by James D
-
05-20-14 09:03 PM #50
lololololol Originally Posted by mac4lyfe
-
05-20-14 09:07 PM #51
I had several post where I talked about the lottery conspiracy, including Ewing's (posted the video) and why Cleveland would win BEFORE they won.
Originally Posted by Cuse0323
-
05-20-14 09:07 PM #52
I'm not a fan of any of the new players in the draft I did not like their performance this year
-
05-20-14 09:17 PM #53
Parker is the most NBA ready but Jabari has the most upside. I'd be worried about Embiid and his back.
Originally Posted by jjgold
-
05-20-14 09:20 PM #54
Not doubting that...a lot of posts are archived from that time and earlier. Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
-
05-20-14 09:21 PM #55
Originally Posted by James D
Definitely...50K would be just fine.
-
05-20-14 09:38 PM #56
Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
Originally Posted by James D
You don't see the fact that when you are eliminating losing years the data is flawed? You are essentially free rolling the other years. If it happens you include the data if it does not you don't. It's like me saying the odds of the spurs winning the title in 1999/2003/2005/2007 is over 614000-1 . While independently that is true. The fact remains the only reason I am using only those years is they were the years they won. Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
-
05-20-14 09:41 PM #57
Originally Posted by James D
you are a penetrating idiot.
http://thefixisin.net/legal.html
-
05-20-14 09:41 PM #58
Mac none of us are saying we don't believe you when you said the cavs would get two number ones after the Lebron debacle. I personally don't think it is relevant but I believe you said it. I am just arguing the math behind the draft odds.
are you a Cleveland fan? Would love to hear from a few cavs fans ITT
-
05-20-14 09:46 PM #59
I remember you predicting Waiters going early. I was a bit upset by the pick as a Cleveland fan but Waiters is a baller, no doubt. I'd rather keep him than Kyrie.
Amazing how DRose ended up at home in Chicago, Lebron to Cleveland. Cleveland loses their franchise player, number 1 picks, Nola lose their franchise player, the league prevents Lakers from getting him, pumps up the Clippers, throw a bone to NOLA with the top pick in Anthony Davis.
Originally Posted by Cuse0323
-
05-20-14 09:49 PM #60
your one of those people..... Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
-
05-20-14 09:50 PM #61
lol if you think he is going to CLE you are the biggest idiot in the world, i wish you could bet where he goes in 2014 because it would the easiest bet in the world Originally Posted by Cuse0323
If you say so...shut it down. bob has spoken.
-
05-20-14 09:53 PM #62
Originally Posted by James D
I am the second person you insulted ITT while posting your stupid ignorant nonsense. Most internet tough guys like yourself are brain dead so I am not surprised. If you really believe that game fixing is legal in the United States because a website named thefixisin.net says so when I post the relevant data from the us govt FBI.gov website you must have a REALLY REALLY productive life. Originally Posted by trevor123698
-
05-20-14 09:54 PM #63
I'm a huge Cleveland fan. Browns, Indians, Cav's, we're dying for a championship in anything.... Hackey Sack will do.
Let's say you won the Mega Millions last Saturday. You also won it a year ago. No one would use all the lottery drawings that you didn't win. They would say that you won the lottery twice and use the odds of winning it twice.
I'm perfectly fine looking at the odds of winning it 3 out of 4 years. It's just easier to calculate using just the 3 years they won it.
Originally Posted by James D
-
05-20-14 09:57 PM #64
I'm a fan of about the entire top 15 or 20 Originally Posted by jjgold
-
05-20-14 10:04 PM #65
Very cool you are a clev fan. We are going to disagree though on the odds issue. The example you use people can say the odds of you winning it the lottery twice in one year is ..... But the number is different if you only played twice or if you played every week. Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
If not then I could sit here and say the odds of the spurs winning the nba title in 1999/2003/2005/2007 is over 600k-1 . But that's a ridiculous stat because it ignores all the losing years. I think we can just agree to disagree. Let's just hope my clippers meet your cavs in the finals sometime soon. At least my jets meet your browns in the AFC title game. Ok now I am delirious. LOL
-
05-20-14 10:06 PM #66
Just think it's a possibility...nice of you to call people idiots when your grammar is closer to idiotic than someone thinking LeBron may go back home. Originally Posted by bob6199
-
05-20-14 10:07 PM #67
Yes sir, Dion and Kyrie just won't work. I would rather have him as well, Kyrie is one of the most overrated in the league, IMO. Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
-
05-20-14 10:37 PM #68
It's easier???? Originally Posted by Mac4Lyfe
Um, no.
It's not easier, it's simply incorrect. And for the stat to hold any weight in a conversation, it needs to be accurate. Or you get called out.
So instead of going for the easy route, try calculating the correct odds.
And what you'll find is that the true odds are still insanely low. And you can still argue your conspiracy, it will just be with correct odds and more importantly, correct logic.
-
05-20-14 10:48 PM #69
If it's easier than why don't you calculate it? I'm not some steppin fetchit. Ooh, you called me out. I now feel less than a man.
Reread my stat
Chances to get #1 in ALL THREE of those years?
There is nothing incorrect in what I posted. If you want to figure it out for the last 4 years or for all 44 years the Cav's have played in the NBA, have at it.
Originally Posted by The Kraken
It's easier????
Um, no.
It's not easier, it's simply incorrect. And for the stat to hold any weight in a conversation, it needs to be accurate. Or you get called out.
So instead of going for the easy route, try calculating the correct odds.
And what you'll find is that the true odds are still insanely low. And you can still argue your conspiracy, it will just be with correct odds and more importantly, correct logic.
-
05-20-14 11:02 PM #70
"@NBA_thoughts_: Cavs chances in 2011: 2.8%
Cavs chances in 2013: 15.6%
Cavs chances in 2014: 1.7%
Chances to get #1 in ALL THREE of those years? .007426%"
Reply With Quote
