Joel Embiid turns into Greg Oden

[The Human Q-Tip]

Just had to read those downvotes, didn't I.....

Every thread does not need to turn into a Wiggins trade debate, especially when you're calling other posters "stupid."

You misrepresenting posts is the primary reason I have you on ignore. I did not call other posters "stupid".

In an alternate world, I picture nobody ever again claiming that Minnesota would have been stupid enough to trade Kevin Love for two trash players and two bottom of the barrel first round picks.....But it's not fair to assume that the guys on the other side of the bargaining table were incompetent, and would have taken a package that turned out to have comparatively little value.

Hoping that someone else does something stupid to benefit you isn't being stupid. It's just not being very realistic.

 

[gourimoko]

Just had to read those downvotes, didn't I.....

You misrepresenting posts is the primary reason I have you on ignore. I did not call other posters "stupid".

Hoping that someone else does something stupid to benefit you isn't being stupid. It's just not being very realistic.

Ugh...

Again, there is no reason to bring up the Wiggins trade in this thread, especially when you go about it by then declaring your opinion as the only reasonable outcome.

Let the Embiid folks talk about Embiid without us needing to derail/argue the Love-Wiggins trade in the 15th fucking thread.

 

[Mdog1]

You do know that losing that coin flip doesn't guarantee us Davis, right? Changing one event can change others.

Well since NOH and CLE swapped numbers, and the NOH numbers are the ones that won, it's a pretty safe assumption. It doesn't change the draw in any way, not even the time it starts at.

 

[gourimoko]

Well since NOH and CLE swapped numbers, and the NOH numbers are the ones that won, it's a pretty safe assumption. It doesn't change the draw in any way, not even the time it starts at.

Off-topic science stuff; hidden since I just went off about going off topic.

Spoiler

...A random draw is always a random draw, even if you go back in time and redo it. The flip side of this is that ping-poll ball draws may not be sufficiently random.

If there were any non-deterministic factors in the ping-pong ball outcomes then we still may not have won.

It really boils down to how random the ping-pong ball selection was. If it's not random at all, but based on ball-placement - and that placement was also not random, then you'd be right. But if that placement or the selection itself had some non-deterministic quality to it, then the outcome can not be predicted with certainty one way or the other.

In other words, if you do a coin toss of a quarter (depending upon the input variables), you might be able to record the outcome, step back in time, and watch the outcome repeat itself over and over with certainty. But if you used some kind of quantum coin, a coin that if flipped did not have a deterministic outcome, then you would record it's result, step back, and find yourself knowing absolutely nothing about the next flip regardless of the fact that you had previously observed it.

Hope this helps.

p.s.
With respect to Free Agency's point, unless you can demonstrate the coin flip was causally related to the ping-pong ball's draw then there should be no reason to assume the flip could effect the draw.

 

[The Process God]

Off-topic science stuff; hidden since I just went off about going off topic.

Spoiler

...A random draw is always a random draw, even if you go back in time and redo it. The flip side of this is that ping-poll ball draws may not be sufficiently random.

If there were any non-deterministic factors in the ping-pong ball outcomes then we still may not have won.

It really boils down to how random the ping-pong ball selection was. If it's not random at all, but based on ball-placement - and that placement was also not random, then you'd be right. But if that placement or the selection itself had some non-deterministic quality to it, then the outcome can not be predicted with certainty one way or the other.

In other words, if you do a coin toss of a quarter (depending upon the input variables), you might be able to record the outcome, step back in time, and watch the outcome repeat itself over and over with certainty. But if you used some kind of quantum coin, a coin that if flipped did not have a deterministic outcome, then you would record it's result, step back, and find yourself knowing absolutely nothing about the next flip regardless of the fact that you had previously observed it.

Hope this helps.

p.s.
With respect to Free Agency's point, unless you can demonstrate the coin flip was causally related to the ping-pong ball's draw then there should be no reason to assume the flip could effect the draw.

Of course us losing the flip could have affected the coin flip. Let's say that the man rolling the ping pong ball lottery machine to the lottery room was a Cavs fan, and, by being pissed off from the Cavs losing the coin flip, he hits his hand on the machine in disgust of the thought. That could have jolted the balls enough to change which ones are drawn. Even slight alterations in timing of the turning on of the machine and how fast the balls are pulled out could affect which balls come out due to slight changes in air pressure from leaving the balls at the top of the machine for longer or shorter periods of time as well. It's definitely possible we might not have won.

 

[blommen]

And so it came to be that a thread about an injured cameroonian basketball player turned into a discussion on the finer points of theoretical science in lotteries.

Just another hot summer day in RCF.

 

[gourimoko]

And so it came to be that a thread about an injured cameroonian basketball player turned into a discussion on the finer points of theoretical science in lotteries.

Just another hot summer day in RCF.

I tried to use the spoiler tag..

I am sorry...

I will now tell myself to get the fuck outta here..

 

[gourimoko]

Of course us losing the flip could have affected the coin flip. Let's say that the man rolling the ping pong ball lottery machine to the lottery room was a Cavs fan, and, by being pissed off from the Cavs losing the coin flip, he hits his hand on the machine in disgust of the thought. That could have jolted the balls enough to change which ones are drawn. Even slight alterations in timing of the turning on of the machine and how fast the balls are pulled out could affect which balls come out due to slight changes in air pressure from leaving the balls at the top of the machine for longer or shorter periods of time as well. It's definitely possible we might not have won.

Spoiler

Again, it all depends on the degree of randomness as well as the causal effect of one action as it relates to a future chance outcome. You're right though, if the guy pouring the ping pong balls is a Cavs fan, that likely would effect the outcome; but what if it's a machine? Then the degree of randomness is reduced. If the balls aren't poured, but placed -- again, the degree of randomness is reduced.

Air pressure at various points in space, etc, is not a known random quantity. We don't know if air pressure is truly random. Instead, we believe motion in vast systems like this is instead chaotic, which is really a term that describes our inability to predict rather than the intrinsic nature of the outcome itself.

Chaotic systems can be (and usually are) deterministic. So again, that it all boils down to the degree of randomness in the total system.

 

[Cavatt]

Anyone know what the purpose of the bone graft is? Medical evaluation anyone?

 

[Kizzle]

We would've drafted him if he didn't break his foot before the draft



Think about that for a second




Would LeBron have come?

Would Minny have accepted him in the deal?