Of course you can always root for your team to fail to achieve their goal. No one would ever say you can't. Seems strange to me though.
Not familiar with ADP -- please inform me what this means.
If we can't see how these are both true, then I don't think we're properly understanding the odds.
Yeah, we need to trade Sexton before the trade deadline. He isn’t a piece for our next contending team, and now that we’re tanking this season, this makes even more sense. I hope Danny finds a trading partner.Humans can't process probability well, it's why I have a job and also why my job is being taken over AIHaving said that, I think a big argument for tanking is that there often isn't much incentive to not tank. There's really no point to having players that are non-essential to the future. I think for guys like Lauri and Walker, it's more clear that it's worth whatever tanking cost they are worth (though Lauri's contract is getting sketchy). It would depend on the trade package return for them. But for guys like John and Sexton, you have to ask that question as to what their future is beyond their current deals. As you're tanking, their winning value is strictly negative. I don't look back at many of the vets we traded and think we made a mistake and wish we still had them. The opposite is true, I wish we traded them earlier.
One of the reasons why I liked this roster going into the year is that I don't think we had much non-essential personal. Everyone was either a young player, a player that will be good for the distant future, or a bad salary that would cost something to get rid of. In other words, everyone had a purpose and/or reason for being on the team. Only issue with how it's played out IMO is that we have basically nerfed Sexton's trade value. If that was the plan, he should have already been gone. I don't really see a future for him here beyond his current deal (and he's easily replaceable), so I'd consider him a player with no purpose on this roster.
BTW, we should include ADP in this calculation, not just the #1 pick odds if we're going to be so specific about what we should consider. ADP is still very close, much and much tighter than people realize IMO, but we should be fair on both sides. Odds at #1 is not the only reason why a higher lotto position is more valuable.
So this is a difference that matters mathematically once every (just under) 12 years. Not totally insignificant. But not very likely to turn out to affect this year (not that we'd ever know which particular year it affects).
It depends on if we are doing a one or two year tank too. If they think this is a two year process (which they probably should by now) then moving off of Sexton/Collins benefits us in a couple years. While the difference between 4 and 6 may not be huge this year... it might be significant next year... in addition to the additional shot at landing 1/2.
So with the numbers I've been playing with, ADP is a difference between 3.7 and 5.0 for the worst vs. 5th worst record. Approximately the difference between getting Kasp or Bailey (depending on who you like least) vs Edgecombe or Tre Johnson (or whoever else you prefer)?
8.5% is not a huge number, I didn't mean for anyone to have that as a takeaway. I guess my mind processes things differently, but thinking in years is not helpful for me. The percentages are good enough. For others it might be though.
I don't disagree with any of this. But we also need to factor in how unlikely it is to "win" the tank (not the lottery, but rather just the worst or worst few records). We're having real trouble this year. What is there to make us think that next year will be any easier?
The risk of a failed tank next year is even worse than this year with the protections on that pick only being top 8 protected vs top 10. That fact could decentivise the FO from trying to be bad, or incentivise them to try even harder.
