Game Thread Mar 25, 2024 07:00PM MT: Jazz vs. Mavericks

[Handlogten's Heros]

Lauri playing might lift a 50/50 game to 57/43. And he would increase a 30/70 game by the exact same amount to 37/63. The same expected win probability added in both cases.

You migh feel that swinging a 50/50 game is more meaningful, but for the end result it is not.

If you disagree, I strongly, strongly encourage you to make millions with that info. Because then Vegas and all the gambling odds are wrong pretty much every night in the NBA and you can easily make millions quickly.

If I am betting straight wins and losses, which is all I care about with the tanking approach, and I am trying to find a result that produces 2 losses and I have to play Lauri in one... then I will play him against the team that is likely a heavy favorite no matter what and sit him against the team that is likely a win if he plays. I understand what you are getting at with the 7% change in both games but I think last night we were clear underdogs no matter who plays and against SA if we sit Lauri and JC we go from a basically guaranteed win to a 50/50 type game.

So lets say with Lauri last night we are a 10 point underdog but without him we are a 15 point underdog. The most likely result is a loss... especially if Will Hardy is managing things a bit. Lets say with SA we are 10 point favorites with Lauri and 5 point favorites without him. Again another close result that can move either way with some variance and planning. Is 5 points still just 5 points in that scenario where I am trying to manifest 2 losses.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

If I am betting straight wins and losses, which is all I care about with the tanking approach, and I am trying to find a result that produces 2 losses and I have to play Lauri in one... then I will play him against the team that is likely a heavy favorite no matter what and sit him against the team that is likely a win if he plays. I understand what you are getting at with the 7% change in both games but I think last night we were clear underdogs no matter who plays and against SA if we sit Lauri and JC we go from a basically guaranteed win to a 50/50 type game.

So lets say with Lauri last night we are a 10 point underdog but without him we are a 15 point underdog. The most likely result is a loss... especially if Will Hardy is managing things a bit. Lets say with SA we are 10 point favorites with Lauri and 5 point favorites without him. Again another close result that can move either way with some variance and planning. Is 5 points still just 5 points in that scenario where I am trying to manifest 2 losses.

Wemby didnt play last game. He has an ankle injury. He will likely not play tomorrow either. The Jazz are probably going to win tomorrow no matter who does or does not play.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Also the Spurs have their own tanking to do. They are barely below the Hornets in total wins and with the Wizards recent win streak, there's also a chance they can get below the Wizards.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Wemby didnt play last game. He has an ankle injury. He will likely not play tomorrow either. The Jazz are probably going to win tomorrow no matter who does or does not play.

Yeah... I mean SA is not able to beat anybody without Wemby... except for last night... against the Suns.

Jazz are likely to win tomorrow... but if Lauri and Wemby both miss its closer to a toss up and can be managed by one side or the other. Either way our best chance at coming out with two losses is to play Lauri yesterday and sit him tomorrow.

Without Lauri we have been really bad recently. Maybe Key wakes up but if Tre Jones is playing he can cause some issues.

 

[fishonjazz]

Wemby didnt play last game. He has an ankle injury. He will likely not play tomorrow either. The Jazz are probably going to win tomorrow no matter who does or does not play.

The question is, do you think we have a better chance at winning tomorrow with Lauri or without?

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

 

[Tanktastic]

I understand what you are getting at with the 7% change in both games but I think last night we were clear underdogs no matter who plays and against SA if we sit Lauri and JC we go from a basically guaranteed win to a 50/50 type game.

So lets say with Lauri last night we are a 10 point underdog but without him we are a 15 point underdog. The most likely result is a loss... especially if Will Hardy is managing things a bit. Lets say with SA we are 10 point favorites with Lauri and 5 point favorites without him. Again another close result that can move either way with some variance and planning. Is 5 points still just 5 points in that scenario where I am trying to manifest 2 losses.

I don't think you do. Or rather you value your "feeling" above the actual math. You think you want to affect the result of a "close game", but that's not how probabilities work.

The game is exactly as likely to "land" in the 7 % where it changes the outcome whether it was 57/43 or 37/63.

Being clear underdogs does not mean a sure loss, as you feel. It means the Jazz might have a 30 (or 37) % chance at a win.

For you to call me wrong, you're going to have to prove - against all evidence - that Lauri playing swings the close game 10 % (or whatever) and the heavy dog game 0 % (or whatever much smaller number).

(And thinking that if there's a game that's close at the end, Hardy is making decisions to intentionally lose that one at that point... now you've just lost the plot. #1 he's liable to completely lose the team right that second. #2 if a player says anything to the media about what happened, both Hardy and the FO are likely to lose their jobs.)

 

[MTS]

(And thinking that if there's a game that's close at the end, Hardy is making decisions to intentionally lose that one at that point... now you've just lost the plot. #1 he's liable to completely lose the team right that second. #2 if a player says anything to the media about what happened, both Hardy and the FO are likely to lose their jobs.)

I sincerely hope that Hardy wasn't trying his best to win the game by going with a lineup featuring keyonte/clarkson/sexton/collins down the stretch.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I sincerely hope that Hardy wasn't trying his best to win the game by going with a lineup featuring keyonte/clarkson/sexton/collins down the stretch.

Look when you can point to the exact moment that Hardy was not interested in winning the game last night its tough to argue that he is both

1- an intelligent basketball coach
2- not tanking and fully trying to win a basketball game

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I don't think you do. Or rather you value your "feeling" above the actual math. You think you want to affect the result of a "close game", but that's not how probabilities work.

The game is exactly as likely to "land" in the 7 % where it changes the outcome whether it was 57/43 or 37/63.

Being clear underdogs does not mean a sure loss, as you feel. It means the Jazz might have a 30 (or 37) % chance at a win.

For you to call me wrong, you're going to have to prove - against all evidence - that Lauri playing swings the close game 10 % (or whatever) and the heavy dog game 0 % (or whatever much smaller number).

(And thinking that if there's a game that's close at the end, Hardy is making decisions to intentionally lose that one at that point... now you've just lost the plot. #1 he's liable to completely lose the team right that second. #2 if a player says anything to the media about what happened, both Hardy and the FO are likely to lose their jobs.)

Think however you want homie... the Jazz are doing the damn thing... maybe they don't understand the math either


View: https://twitter.com/utahjazz/status/1772763791480295654

 

[Tanktastic]

Think however you want homie... the Jazz are doing the damn thing... maybe they don't understand the math either

Facts. Proof. Please.

Again, you can easily make millions if you're right.

And doing what? Sitting Clarkson? Him playing or sitting doesn't really affect the Jazz win probability at all, in either direction.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Facts. Proof. Please.

Again, you can easily make millions if you're right.

And doing what? Sitting Clarkson? Him playing or sitting doesn't really affect the Jazz win probability at all, in either direction.

Dear lord... you are giving me all teh Maffs theories but you can't see Lauri is questionable again... JC already declared out. They are trying to lose tomorrow. They didn't need to try as hard to lose yesterday.

Reality is my proof. Jazz may end up going 1-1 but they are giving themselves a chance to seem competitive while going 2-0.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I sincerely hope that Hardy wasn't trying his best to win the game by going with a lineup featuring keyonte/clarkson/sexton/collins down the stretch.

A little person backcourt with a 6-8 center... I am shocked that lineup went -7 in a 2 minute span at a crucial time in the 4th quarter. It seems like it would just crush it.