OT - Dikembe Otumbo tweets congratulations to 76ers before lottery was held

[Kontradiction]

Whatever team LeBron is on is going to be good for ratings. He is the league's marquee player over the past 10+ years. The Cavaliers are a top draw because of LeBron, not because of the city of Cleveland. Without LeBron, Cleveland was a crappy team from a crappy city with no ratings appeal whatsoever, so there is no reason to rig the lottery in favor of Cleveland.

You basically just agreed with me. You're aware of this, correct?

 

[XLIX]

.017% is 1.7%. Spare me your faux outrage.

LOLOLOL Lord have mercy, look at what I am up against people!

".017% is 1.7%"

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

By the way, I did a little research. FACT is that Cleveland had a 22.7% chance of winning the draft lottery the year Kyrie Irving came out because they had 2 lottery chances. So their chance wasn't 1.7%, and it certainly wasn't 0.017%. There was one only 1 team, Minnesota, with a slightly higher chance of winning.

 

[XLIX]

You basically just agreed with me. You're aware of this, correct?

You said that with LeBron in Miami, the NBA wanted to load Cleveland up on talent to generate a Cleveland-Miami rivalry, but that does nothing to change the fact that Cleveland without LeBron is a crap ass team in a crap ass city that nobody wants to watch. If the NBA wanted to rig a rivalry with Miami, they would go with NY, Philly, Chicago or even NJ/Brooklyn or Boston before Cleveland.

 

[ausbacker]

LOLOLOL Lord have mercy, look at what I am up against people!

".017% is 1.7%"

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

By the way, I did a little research. FACT is that Cleveland had a 22.7% chance of winning the draft lottery the year Kyrie Irving came out because they had 2 lottery chances. So their chance wasn't 1.7%, and it certainly wasn't 0.017%. There was one only 1 team, Minnesota, with a slightly higher chance of winning.

2014 NBA draft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Cleveland Cavaliers, who had the ninth-worst record, won the lottery with just a 1.7% chance to win the first pick. It was the second year in a row the Cavaliers won the lottery, as well as their third time in four years."

Even the piece acknowledges 1.7% is 0.017%. By all means, continue your double-down and continue confusing draft years in an attempt to confuse the dialogue.

 

[patchick]

For those who have never used social media for professional/publicity purposes, here's how it works:

You don't just dash off a Tweet. You subscribe to a 3rd-party service that lets you prepare and pre-schedule posts, and optimize timing to have the greatest impact. You might have a queue of posts pre-programmed days in advance to make sure your account looks active. Sometimes, if you want to be out front with your response to a breaking news event, you even prepare multiple versions of posts in advance, anticipating various possible outcomes of the event. Then you're prepared to say something cogent the moment the outcome is known.

It sure sounds like Dikembe accidentally hit "publish" on a prepared Tweet too early. Maybe the "Congrats" quote was in the queue right next to a "Good luck" post and he clicked the wrong button.

 

[IllegalContact]

it's entertainment......it should not matter so much

 

[XLIX]

2014 NBA draft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Cleveland Cavaliers, who had the ninth-worst record, won the lottery with just a 1.7% chance to win the first pick. It was the second year in a row the Cavaliers won the lottery, as well as their third time in four years."

People are bouncing between talking about the Kyrie Irving year and the Andrew Wiggins year as "proof" of a conspiracy. As I stated, the Kyrie Irving year, they had a 22.7% chance of winning. Yes, the Andrew Wiggins year was an improbable event. Whoop de doo.

Even the piece acknowledges 1.7% is 0.017%. By all means, continue your double-down and continue confusing draft years in an attempt to confuse the dialogue.

Your obscene ignorance of 5th grade level mathematics does not help strengthen the argument you are presenting.

 

[ausbacker]

No, they won 3 out of 4 lotteries and the Wiggins one was especially dubious given they had a 33-49 record and .017% chance of winning it. There were 8 teams with worse records than the Cavs at the 2014 NBA Lottery. In fact, they never owned the worst record in the league in all 3 lottery wins.

My post.

People are bouncing between talking about the Kyrie Irving year and the Andrew Wiggins year as "proof" of a conspiracy. As I stated, the Kyrie Irving year, they had a 22.7% chance of winning. Yes, the Andrew Wiggins year was an improbable event. Whoop de doo.
Your obscene ignorance of 5th grade level mathematics does not help strengthen the argument you are presenting.

You're right. I guess the graphic in the Wikipedia link is also wrong and I assume the they're finally at .500 commanding an 8-8 record doesn't mean you've won 50% and lost 50% of games either.

 

[XLIX]

My post.


You're right. I guess this graphic in the Wikipedia link is also wrong and I assume the they're finally at .500 commanding an 8-8 record doesn't mean you've won 50% and lost 50% of games either.

You do realize that Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that any moron can edit right? I remember once reading in Wikipedia that Tedy Bruschi died. Pretty disappointing, huh?

You're not even reading your own link right. Go back and look at it verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry carefully, and maybe you can figure out that 1.7% does not equal 0.017%. As noted before, your obscene ignorance of 5th grade math skills does not strengthen your point.

 

[ausbacker]

You do realize that Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that any moron can edit right? I remember once reading in Wikipedia that Tedy Bruschi died. Pretty disappointing, huh?

You're not even reading your own link right. Go back and look at it verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry carefully, and maybe you can figure out that 1.7% does not equal 0.017%. As noted before, your obscene ignorance of 5th grade math skills does not strengthen your point.

This is the last dialogue we'll have on this topic. Not much more I can say to you given you simply won't admit your mistake.

 

[patchick]

.017% is 1.7%. Spare me your faux outrage.

Just to clarify, a 1.7% chance means you'd expect it to happen 1.7 times out of every hundred. A .017% chance means you'd expect it to happen 1.7 times out of every ten thousand. Obviously, that's a huge difference in likelihood.

The key is to remember that writing the percentage sign changes the way you interpret the number by a factor of 100. So 1.7% = .017 while .017% = .00017.

 

[XLIX]

This is the last dialogue we'll have on this topic. Not much more I can say to you given you simply won't admit your mistake.

NEWSFLASH: THAT'S NOT A PERCENTAGE SIGN IN THAT CHART THERE!!! I told you to look at it verrrrrrrrrrrrry carefully!!!

And even if it was, anyone who graduated the 5th grade should realize that 1.7% does not equal 0.017%

 

[ausbacker]

Just to clarify, a 1.7% chance means you'd expect it to happen 1.7 times out of every hundred. A .017% chance means you'd expect it to happen 1.7 times out of every ten thousand. Obviously, that's a huge difference in likelihood.

The key is to remember that writing the percentage sign changes the way you interpret the number by a factor of 100. So 1.7% = .017 while .017% = .00017.

I don't really feel like arguing decimal form right now.

 

[XLIX]

Just to clarify, a 1.7% chance means you'd expect it to happen 1.7 times out of every hundred. A .017% chance means you'd expect it to happen 1.7 times out of every ten thousand. Obviously, that's a huge difference in likelihood.

The key is to remember that writing the percentage sign changes the way you interpret the number by a factor of 100. So 1.7% = .017 while .017% = .00017.

THIS THIS THIS!!!!!!!!!

I did not want to post the above explanation. I was hoping he would figure it out on his own. But I guess even 5th grade mathematics is too daunting for some......

 

[XLIX]

I don't really feel like arguing decimal form right now.

Not much more we can say to you given you simply won't admit your mistake.

There's nothing to argue. You were wrong and you're too stubborn to admit it.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

OK, fair warning, the link is from ESPN.

Dikembe Mutombo congratulates 76ers on lottery ... before it begins

"Yes, that's right -- the former All-Star center congratulated one of his former teams, the Philadelphia 76ers, on winning this year's lottery. The only problem? He sent out the tweet hours before the lottery was due to be held.

This crap in pro sports is really moving me closer to the breaking point."

If this isn't corruption it will do until real corruption comes along.

As corrupt as the NFL* is just be glad they haven't listen to the siren's call to institute a lottery yet. Currently the only way they can manipulate the results is to steal draft picks from the best team.

Imagine if the Celtics had gotten Tim Duncan instead of San Antonio, who wasn't really a bad team but had suffered through an injury-riddled down season.

The NBA lottery is fixed?!?!?!?!

 

[Kontradiction]

You said that with LeBron in Miami, the NBA wanted to load Cleveland up on talent to generate a Cleveland-Miami rivalry, but that does nothing to change the fact that Cleveland without LeBron is a crap ass team in a crap ass city that nobody wants to watch. If the NBA wanted to rig a rivalry with Miami, they would go with NY, Philly, Chicago or even NJ/Brooklyn or Boston before Cleveland.

Like I said, you're making my point. With LeBron in Cleveland, ratings were high in that city. Without LeBron, ratings dropped in that city. The NBA gave the Cavs the first pick three out of four years even though they were not the worst team in the league and, one of the years, had an extremely low statistical probability to win the lottery. With loading Cleveland up, the NBA would accomplish two things:

1. Restore television ratings in that market.

2. Build an actual rivalry between Cleveland in Miami where the two teams would be guaranteed to meet in the playoffs.

But, as I said before, they underestimated how fickle LeBron is and he actually went to the team they gave a helping hand to. You're more than welcome to believe that things are on the up and up, though. I mean, the only had a referee complete a prison sentence because of how the games were fixed.

 

[patchick]

I don't really feel like arguing decimal form right now.

OK, no problem! BTW, I was going to change your income tax bracket from 25% to .25%, but now that I know you don't consider the difference meaningful...

 

[XLIX]

Like I said, you're making my point. With LeBron in Cleveland, ratings were high in that city. Without LeBron, ratings dropped in that city. The NBA gave the Cavs the first pick three out of four years even though they were not the worst team in the league and, one of the years, had an extremely low statistical probability to win the lottery. With loading Cleveland up, the NBA would accomplish two things:

1. Restore television ratings in that market.

OK I'll try again: Why restore ratings in Cleveland? If it was rigged, they would give the top pick to big markets. Not sucky Cleveland.

2. Build an actual rivalry between Cleveland in Miami where the two teams would be guaranteed to meet in the playoffs.

And how did that work out?

But, as I said before, they underestimated how fickle LeBron is and he actually went to the team they gave a helping hand to. You're more than welcome to believe that things are on the up and up, though. I mean, the only had a referee complete a prison sentence because of how the games were fixed.

We are not talking about Donaghy, we're talking about the draft lottery. If you want to talk about crooked officiating, that's another story.

 

[Kontradiction]

OK I'll try again: Why restore ratings in Cleveland? If it was rigged, they would give the top pick to big markets. Not sucky Cleveland.
And how did that work out?We are not talking about Donaghy, we're talking about the draft lottery. If you want to talk about crooked officiating, that's another story.

Pray tell, how would the NBA get away with that when all of those teams were either too good to get lottery picks or, even better, playoff teams during that time period? Cleveland was not that.