The Nets Magic Number

Number of Nets LOSSES and Laker WINS added together that guarantee the Nets will have the worst regular season record, and therefore guarantee the Boston Celtics the best odds of getting the #1 pick.  It does NOT guarantee the pick, only that we will have the best odds when the ping pong balls bounce.

The Magic Number is 9.



bob


.

bobheckler wrote:Number of Nets LOSSES and Laker WINS added together that guarantee the Nets will have the worst regular season record, and therefore guarantee the Boston Celtics the best odds of getting the #1 pick.  It does NOT guarantee the pick, only that we will have the best odds when the ping pong balls bounce.

The Magic Number is 9.



bob


.

 With the chance that we get the #1 pick set at 25% - we are looking at a 75% probability that we will end up with the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th pick. I hope this year that lady luck is a Celtic fan - because the odds of ending up with the 4th pick are.357.

 swish

swish wrote:

bobheckler wrote:Number of Nets LOSSES and Laker WINS added together that guarantee the Nets will have the worst regular season record, and therefore guarantee the Boston Celtics the best odds of getting the #1 pick.  It does NOT guarantee the pick, only that we will have the best odds when the ping pong balls bounce.

The Magic Number is 9.



bob


.

 With the chance that we get the #1 pick set at 25% - we are looking at a 75% probability that we will end up with the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th pick. I hope this year that lady luck is a Celtic fan -  because the odds of ending up with the 4th pick are.357.

 swish

Swish,

What are the other teams' chances of getting #1 vs ours? We're not guaranteed the #1 pick, but we have a better chance at it than anybody else. In other words, vs our peers, we have the best odds regardless of whether that is 25% or 2.5%. If the Nyets lose out we have the inside track and that's better than being a dark horse trying to overtake the leader on the outside.


bob


.

bobheckler wrote:

swish wrote:

bobheckler wrote:Number of Nets LOSSES and Laker WINS added together that guarantee the Nets will have the worst regular season record, and therefore guarantee the Boston Celtics the best odds of getting the #1 pick.  It does NOT guarantee the pick, only that we will have the best odds when the ping pong balls bounce.

The Magic Number is 9.



bob


.

 With the chance that we get the #1 pick set at 25% - we are looking at a 75% probability that we will end up with the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th pick. I hope this year that lady luck is a Celtic fan -  because the odds of ending up with the 4th pick are.357.

 swish

Swish,

What are the other teams' chances of getting #1 vs ours?  We're not guaranteed the #1 pick, but we have a better chance at it than anybody else.  In other words, vs our peers, we have the best odds regardless of whether that is 25% or 2.5%.  If the Nyets lose out we have the inside track and that's better than being a dark horse trying to overtake the leader on the outside.


bob


.

bob

I don't care what the other teams odds are - I'm only concerned about the Celtics.

swish

This is the Celtics best tanking strategy of all. Trade our old players for the draft picks of a terrible team. Tank. Tank. Tank.

worcester wrote:This is the Celtics best tanking strategy of all. Trade our old players for the draft picks of a terrible team. Tank. Tank. Tank.

worcester,

Yes. Position yourself to get a top 4 pick while winning over 50 games. That is a tanking strategy I can get behind.


bob


.

worcester wrote:This is the Celtics best tanking strategy of all. Trade our old players for the draft picks of a terrible team. Tank. Tank. Tank.

worcester

And it also works the other way - Trade draft picks and young players to teams in decline for their super stars - as example the 2007-08 Celts.


swish

So smart Swish.

Lakers officially in full tank mode

The Nets appear to be going no where this year, AND they may be just as bad again next year.

What a shame that they own none of their first round picks this year or next.

dboss wrote:Lakers officially in full tank mode

The Lakers are in tank mode and play the young guys mode.
Mozgov officially won't play again this season and I doubt Deng will either.
The Lakers will either have a great pick or Philly will have a pick in the 4-6 range, besides their own pick which could be in the top 5.

tjmakz wrote:

dboss wrote:Lakers officially in full tank mode

The Lakers are in tank mode and play the young guys mode.
Mozgov officially won't play again this season and I doubt Deng will either.
The Lakers will either have a great pick or Philly will have a pick in the 4-6 range, besides their own pick which could be in the top 5.

TJ,

What a horrible lesson to teach the kids. Yeah, you're "developing" them, but you're also saying that it's ok to lose by benching your best players.

Not a good message to send to any potential future free agents either, who might have considered following Mozgov and Deng's footsteps to LA.


bob


.

Let the basketball Gods be in full Celtic green the night of the lottery.

As for Mosgov and Deng, why didn't they cut them loose so they could catch on somewhere It is amazing how the basketball skills of Deng deteriorated so fast once he left Chicago. He was a Paul Pierce killer for years. Then again, Pierce's skills deteriorated once he left Boston. Funny how things work out

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Let the basketball Gods be in full Celtic green the night of the lottery.

As for Mosgov and Deng, why didn't they cut them loose so they could catch on somewhere  It is amazing how the basketball skills of Deng deteriorated so fast once he left Chicago. He was a Paul Pierce killer for years. Then again, Pierce's skills deteriorated once he left Boston. Funny how things work out

Mozgov and Deng are in the 1st year of 4 year contracts.
If either is released, I don't see it happening until after next season.
They were mainly removed from the rotation because the Lakers want the young guys  to play as much as possible.
Deng has had a poor year.
Can he bounce back? Who knows.
He could just be on the downside of his career.

tjmakz wrote:

dboss wrote:Lakers officially in full tank mode

The Lakers are in tank mode and play the young guys mode.
Mozgov officially won't play again this season and I doubt Deng will either.
The Lakers will either have a great pick or Philly will have a pick in the 4-6 range, besides their own pick which could be in the top 5.

tj

The players play to win - while management has the added burden of looking to the future - the Lakers are hopelessly bad now so management would be guilty of extremely poor judgement if they did not play a lineup that gave them the best chance of loosing this year - especially when a high draft pick is at stake. As long as there is a reward for loosing - there will be legitimate reasons for team managements to "tank". Your Lakers are playing it smart - just like when the Celtics tanked back in 2006.

swish

bobheckler wrote:

tjmakz wrote:

dboss wrote:Lakers officially in full tank mode

The Lakers are in tank mode and play the young guys mode.
Mozgov officially won't play again this season and I doubt Deng will either.
The Lakers will either have a great pick or Philly will have a pick in the 4-6 range, besides their own pick which could be in the top 5.

TJ,

What a horrible lesson to teach the kids.  Yeah, you're "developing" them, but you're also saying that it's ok to lose by benching your best players.

Not a good message to send to any potential future free agents either, who might have considered following Mozgov and Deng's footsteps to LA.


bob


.

Bob,

Do you really think Deng and Mozgov are much better than the players that are playing now?
Even if they helped the Lakers win a game or two extra, that could hurt their chances at keeping their pick.
It makes no sense to play older players instead of younger players.
Many teams will do the same this year.
Tyson Chandler hasn't played the last 10 games with Phoenix and its' doubtful he plays again this season.
If Mozgov or Deng were having great years, I'm not so sure they would be benched.

Deng and Mozgov have the 2nd and 3rd worst PER's out of the top 11 guys in the Lakers rotation.
They really haven't earned the right to stay in the rotation, even if the Lakers weren't tanking.

Deng and Mosgov are killing the Lakers future chances for success with the huge impact of of the salaries on the cap. To play them and win just enough games to hand over the LA draft pick to Philly would be to add insult to injury. I'm never in favor of the Celtics tanking. LA, Philly - go right ahead.

Ditto Worcester. Philly has shown how advantageous it is to tank, once Simmons and Emblid are in the lineup together, they will be a good team. Without them, they will just get stronger thru the draft as they will have a good shot at a top three or four pick. Just think, if they all gel together, they will be a force to be dealt with in the future

i forgot to add, with a coach like Stevens, tanking is out of the question. Look at what he has gotten from picks that others never would have made

[quote="worcester"]Deng and Mosgov are killing the Lakers future chances for success with the huge impact of of the salaries on the cap. To play them and win just enough games to hand over the LA draft pick to Philly would be to add insult to injury. I'm never in favor of the Celtics tanking. LA, Philly - go right ahead.[/quote


Lakers will likely waive both Deng and Mozgov using the "stretch provision" of their contract so as to greatly reduce their salaries impact on the salary cap.


swish

The Lakers showed how important it is to sign the right free agents for the future development of your franchise.

worcester wrote:The Lakers showed how important it is to sign the right free agents for the future development of your franchise.

The Mozgov and Deng signings are a big reason why Jimmy Buss and Mitch Kupchak are gone.
These contracts won't be a big issue if the Lakers decide to waive them after next season in order for the Lakers to make an offer to Paul George, Cousins or someone else.
Waiving Deng and Mozgov after next season would cost the Lakers $13.9m/year over 5 years.
I don't think Mozgov will be waived unless LA wants to offer 2 max contracts in July of 2018.

The Lakers lost to Houston by 39 points last night.  Getting your brains beat in night after night is not good for development because you're only learning what isn't working and not what is.  It takes more than just minutes, it takes "successful and productive" minutes".  Jaylen Brown is getting successful and productive minutes, and is showing steady improvement, precisely because he is not being thrown to the wolves.  He is being put into situations he can have some success in.  He's mostly going against bench players, starters for only short periods.  Even when he started when Bradley was out he wasn't playing 30+ minutes against starters.  

I'm not the salary capologist here, GYSO is, but I believe a team cannot stretch a player if that player's salary is 15% or more of the salary cap.  The projected NBA salary cap for 2017-2018 is $103M.  

$103M x 15% = $15.45M.

Luol Deng will make $17.1M next year.  That makes him ineligible for stretching.

Timofey Mozgov will make $15.28M next year.  He could be stretched, assuming the cap is $103M.  If it is only $101.86M, then he wouldn't be eligible for stretching either because then he'd be 15% too.

Even if they are stretched, there's a reason why teams do not regularly stretch players they are done with.  Stretching Gerald Wallace would have been an easy decision to make if it was an easy decision to make.  I admired Wallace for what he brought to the locker room and the bench but, as a player, he was done.  Despite that, Danny didn't stretch his contract.  Stretching players, especially ones like Deng and Mozgov who have 3 more years on their contracts after this year, severely hamstrings teams from signing free agents for twice as many years as they would if they didn't stretch them.  Sure, you get short-term relief but over the next 6 years those contracts are being stretched over you are bringing your salary up closer to the cap.  We would not have been able to sign Horford this past summer if we had stretched Gerald Wallace 3 years ago.

Deng = $54M left over 3 years = $9M/year for 6 years
Mozgov = $48M left over 3 years = $8M/year for 6 years

If the Lakers can somehow stretch both of them this summer, that's $17M/year of cap space consumed for 6 years and no players to show for it.  If the cap goes down in a couple of years then $17M is a lot of money.  If they stretch Mozgov only, because they can't stretch Deng because he's over 15%, then that's still an $8M/year salary cap hit for 6 years.  You can get a pretty good player for $8M.  If we had stretched Gerald Wallace we would have had a $5M/year hit on our cap for 6 years.  Even with the higher cap today $8M is still money.  Put another way, that's $8M that's not available to throw at a max agent like Paul George.  And if you do pay George, where's your bench, how do you pay for them?  Not just next year, but for the next 5 years after that, since that's how long the cap hit will last.


http://hardwoodparoxysm.com/2015/04/15/why-dont-nba-teams-use-the-stretch-provision-on-big-contracts/



bob


.