Run for Play-In

[slick'81]

I mean this is what spur fan really wants i guess. Beating a Bunch of tanking teams and making a playin game that nobody really wants to be in

[ZeusWillJudge]

The Spurs' will likely finish somewhere between the 7th and 9th worst record in the league.

A full-on tank might get them up (down?) to the 7th worst record.

A play-in berth would get them the 9th worst record (assuming they don't win two road games in row against higher seeded teams).

If they try to tank but don't get to 7 or try to win and don't get to 9, they'll be at 8 (possibly the most likely outcome).

The chances of getting a top 4 pick are as follows:

7th worst record -- 31.9%

8th worst record -- 26.2%

9th worst record -- 20.2%

That's about a 10% difference between going all out to win and trying to lose every game. A one in ten difference is, at most, what all this fuss is about.

The more likely difference is between 8 and 9, so a mere 5% difference is more realistically what all this fuss is about.

Tanking or not tanking is not a binary thing, although as humans we're programmed to think that way. Rather this situation is incremental, statistical. And you don't get points for trying (or not trying) or thinking good/bad thoughts, although again as humans we're programmed to think that way. That's why when people are asked whether they want a 50% chance to get something rather than 50% of losing something, when it's exactly the same choice, they react differently. And I think that's why we're so excited about trying to lose games in this case.

If you had a 20% of winning some bet, how much better would you feel if you had a 26% chance of winning? Would it make that much difference?

I hope the Spurs to go out and play hard and try to get better as a young team. The "fates" may reward you more for that.

Would it make much difference if a bet had a 30% greater chance of winning? Seriously? People like you are the exact reason why Las Vegas continues to rake in billions in profits every year.

You're right, it's not binary. Not only does the 10 slot have a much lower chance of a Top 4 pick, it has a zero percent chance of getting picks 5,6,7,8, or 9. So I guess if draft position doesn't really matter, the Spur would be really smart to trade their first rounder for a couple of second round picks.

And just so you're clear - I know the Fates personally, and only Atropos rewards people for being stupid. And her reward is cutting their life short. So perfect analogy.

[Mr. Body]

This upcoming draft is interesting, I keep hearing it’s deep but there’s no sure thing from the players I’ve been watching imo

It's not deep.

[Ariel]

The more likely difference is between 8 and 9, so a mere 5% difference is more realistically what all this fuss is about.

The Spurs are, as of now, the 8th worst record, and there are 4 other teams than are separated by 2 games (Pelicans, Lakers, Wizards, Kicks). So if you're going all out and you succeed, you might end up at 12-14 and if you end up making the playoffs, you pick at 15, with a ZERO percent chance at a top four pick. So while it's true that the outcome is probabilistic, you're not taking into account the full picture either.

[hoopdreams11]

Later picks can and have happened. But most of todays *stars* are top 5 picks.

15th Greek Freak
15th Kwa Leonard
13th Booker
7th Steffi Curry

Draymond and Middleton were second rounders

[Ariel]

Draymond and Middleton were second rounders

So were Jokic and Manu. But there are 30 secound rounders every year, and in the past 20 years, how many were top 10 talent worthy? you do the math...

[Mr. Body]

Guys, just because like four good players were drafted in the 2nd round lately doesn't mean they're all good. The Spurs also drafted zero of them.

[Degoat]

It's not deep.

That’s not what the draft experts are saying about this years draft

[duncan2150]

It's not deep.

It's deep but i think you talk about high level talent, it's not that deep in that way.

[Ariel]

It's deep but i think you talk about high level talent, it's not that deep in that way.

This. It's probably deep in that you might find a good player in the late teens, but franchise caliber players are all long gone by then.
For instance, I really like Sochan, who I think will go in the late lottery. If things go right and his shot develops, he ends up a quality starter for a competent team for many years. But if Ivey, Banchero or Smith pan out, you've got yourself a franchise player to build around for 10+ years... and that's a difference.

[Mr. Body]

That’s not what the draft experts are saying about this years draft

What draft experts? I haven't seen anything like that. Draft experts are also often full of . This isn't a deep draft.

[offset formation]

Playing and beating the Lakers in the play-in would be a nice consolation prize for not getting a top 5 pick.

I normally would agree cause the lakers but we aren't the lakers. we will just remain in a state of basketball purgatory while they'll bottom out for a year or two and then sign the next two biggest free agents and be right back to the top.

So in this rare instance, not making the play in would be preferable. Though there may not be much of a difference in what kind of draft pick we ultimately get this close to the play-in. It seems the real trajectory changing talent in this draft resides in the top 5 anyway.

[Degoat]

What draft experts? I haven't seen anything like that. Draft experts are also often full of . This isn't a deep draft.

Go read some draft articles online lol they all say it’s a deep draft, there’s just uncertainty with it

[Russ]

If you had a 20% of winning some bet, how much better would you feel if you had a 26% chance of winning? Would it make that much difference?

Would it make much difference if a bet had a 30% greater chance of winning? Seriously?

It depends.

If you had a 1% chance of winning would it make a difference if you had a 1.3% chance? That's 30% greater.

30% of what is the question. In this case 30% equals a mere 6% (from 20% to 26%).

If you had a 77% chance of winning an extra 30% would give you a 100% chance -- that would really matter!

To be brutally honest, Zeus, to mistake a 6% increase in chance of success for a 30% increased chance, that's the kind of enticing thought that makes "Las Vegas continues to rake in billions in profits every year."

[BackHome]

I hate to break it to a lot of people but this team sucks we do not have a lot of talent well we got two legit NBA starters Murray and Poodle and that is it. We are not going to get anyone any good in free agency with this group because everyone knows that we are going to suck for years. So the best thing to get people to actually go to games and watch us on TV is for a couple of years of hard tank and hopefully we can get lucky to get two really really good starters. This team will not get good overnight it is going to take at least 3 years if they embrace the tank and never if we keep drafting in the teens

[CGD]

It's WAY easier to find examples of contenders that didn't get where they are by tanking than finding one that did. Assuming the Spurs are going to draft their next franchise player seems extremely antiquated. The Spurs have to sell themselves to free agents and sell their players/prospects to potential trade partners. Being bad doesn't do that. Having guys like Murray and Johnson stepping up, seeing ballast like Richardson or prospects like Primo playing important roles does. People keep trying to say the Spurs are dumb for not tanking in order to use their scouting expertise to draft a star. They don't consider that the Spurs might not be tanking BECAUSE their vaunted scouts told them it wasn't worth it.

I’ve been thinking about your last point there for some time. I do wonder if the team experts assess or characterize the top of this draft a certain way.

It’s like in the NFL: not all drafts are good QB drafts (like this coming one), so better to allocate resources to replenishing ranks via multiple 3/4 rounds.

[CGD]

This upcoming draft is interesting, I keep hearing it’s deep but there’s no sure thing from the players I’ve been watching imo

I don’t know man. I’m increasingly feeling it’s a little thin out there. Perhaps it’s the lack of decent foreign prospects this time around? No se

May we’ll validate the theory of the case in taking Primo last year where they did.

[K...]

whenever someone says "the spurs aint until we have a franchise player" ...how many such players are in the league today and how did they arrive there. Are any with the original drafting team as of today?

[spurs10]

They should go for it because their draft prospects won't be that different and if TO makes the playoffs we'll have some bargaining chips.

[R. DeMurre]

whenever someone says "the spurs aint until we have a franchise player" ...how many such players are in the league today and how did they arrive there. Are any with the original drafting team as of today?

Giannis, Embiid, Jokic, Doncic, Tatum, Steph... quite a few actually.

[Mr. Body]

Go read some draft articles online lol they all say it’s a deep draft, there’s just uncertainty with it

I think by "deep draft" they mean not top heavy. It's just a bull term they use to mean there aren't any sure things.

[BackHome]

Every year they say the next year is full of talent and then we get to that year and then everyone says not a lot of high for sure talent.

[Kurik]

Every year they say the next year is full of talent and then we get to that year and then everyone says not a lot of high for sure talent.

Basically this, I’ve seen articles every year saying that the next year should be deeper. At this point I just put it all on NBA teams to draft, develop, or maneuver well through trades.

[KingKev]

Ppl need to realize a top 4 pick is all but lost. It’s a sunk cost. I enjoyed watching last night because for the first time in awhile the game had relevance. Hitting the ML +210 for a quick buck was also nice.

and moan about not tanking or enjoy what is left with the season. It was wishful thinking (myself included) from the jump to think this organization could out tank others.

We have infinite cap space, a growing amount of draft capital and potentially two building blocks in Murray and maybe Keldon. Could be worse.

[Mr. Body]

It's WAY easier to find examples of contenders that didn't get where they are by tanking than finding one that did. Assuming the Spurs are going to draft their next franchise player seems extremely antiquated. The Spurs have to sell themselves to free agents and sell their players/prospects to potential trade partners. Being bad doesn't do that. Having guys like Murray and Johnson stepping up, seeing ballast like Richardson or prospects like Primo playing important roles does. People keep trying to say the Spurs are dumb for not tanking in order to use their scouting expertise to draft a star. They don't consider that the Spurs might not be tanking BECAUSE their vaunted scouts told them it wasn't worth it.

Two major things here (and I agree):

1. The Spurs alread have developing players. Getting those developing players experience in games that matter is very important. If they are a playoff team next year, and I think they can be, the push this year will have echoes in how they perform then. The franchise values a winning culture over tanking for a slot or two in the draft. We'll see if a team like Portland can get the gum out of their eyes and actually perform, even with Lillard, after indicating that they're losers. That gets into the bones. Look at the enthusiasm of the Spurs at beating teams right now. It's been a hard year because they can't close games. Here they are, learning how.

2. This franchise values flexibility and the long-term. It is unlikely to commit money to unknowns. This is why dreams of signing a John Collins likely come out of a pipe. The franchise just doesn't work in making big, fat money bets that are really hard to discharge. In a draft where there are no sure things, they aren't too hard pressed to try for a high pick. And the reason why is that those high picks turn out to be really expensive in the long run. If you don't have a franchise or near-franchise player, you're screwed. Jabari Smith, Holmgren, Ivey, Banchero. These are nice players. But are they worth eventually moving a guy like Primo or Vassell down the line, maybe even both?

In short, the Spurs value a winning culture and value long-term flexibility. They make their own luck, even if it doesn't come out well for them, like how they failed to avoid Memphis when they owned us a decade ago. Instead they got two later 1st round picks and still have the LAL 2nd rounder and will see what they can do to trade them around or find guys they like.