eah, but that’s why I didn’t even want to get to that debate (it probably is a fair return for a player like Kawhi if he’s healthy), as just the basic premise was flawed as fuck. Why not just write an article “The Knicks should try to trade for Kawhi Leonard”? Who in the world looks at this Knicks season and says, “Yep, this is proof that tanking doesn’t work.”

Does he get paid per word? I feel like he gets paid per word.

Yeah, but that’s why I didn’t even want to get to that debate (it probably is a fair return for a player like Kawhi if he’s healthy), as just the basic premise was flawed as fuck. Why not just write an article “The Knicks should try to trade for Kawhi Leonard”? Who in the world looks at this Knicks season and says, “Yep, this is proof that tanking doesn’t work.”

The New York Post’s Mike Vaccaro with the awesome dumb take of the day.

In effect, he says that the Knicks tried to tank this year and it didn’t work, so they should stop tanking because it clearly doesn’t work. I won’t even get into his larger point (that the Knicks should trade Frank, this year’s first rounder and next year’s first rounder for Kawhi) because the whole premise is based on something as stupid as “The Knicks tried to tank this year, but they ended up #9, so tanking doesn’t work.”

i really like shamorie ponds also and he should be a mid first rd’er but for whatever reason he’s not being talked about there….

i’m surprised his model didn’t pick up gafford who’s being criminally overlooked….

Anything else is, quite frankly, exploitation by way of market collusion (not to imply that exploitation ends at the NBA level, since owners themselves aren’t the product on the floor either and earn obscene gobs of money as compensation for simply holding onto an appreciating asset that you really don’t have a part in making better, since you’re not the one running fast, jumping high, or dunking the ball.)

I might also add that this collusion has already occurred (with the one-and-done rule being an obvious win-win for the NBA and NCAA, the former being saved from its own bad decision makers and the latter getting the superstar names it needs to maximize TV revenue), but hey, who are the majority of those exploited? Oh, it’s young, poorly-educated, mostly-poor black men who are told to compete against each other to join the “best” schools? Go on the ESPN.com comments if you want to see the true intellectual cancers of America: mostly white men from Trump country who tell these “student-athletes” to take their “free” scholarship and shut up. And to the comment about NCAA football — dead on. Totally unwatchable.

It’s not hard to be right against the (few) voices in this thread who claim “fairness” when proposing two exploitative options that they arbitrarily pulled out of their asses.

Oh and also: Fuck Donald Trump.

1. NCAA teams pay players their market value.
2. The NCAA is dissolved, prep-to-pro becomes allowed again, and the G-League becomes a true minor league farm system (with higher salaries as a result of increased investment.)

Anything else is, quite frankly, exploitation by way of market collusion (not to imply that exploitation ends at the NBA level, since owners themselves aren’t the product on the floor either and earn obscene gobs of money as compensation for simply holding onto an appreciating asset that you really don’t have a part in making better, since you’re not the one running fast, jumping high, or dunking the ball.) American sports–especially American college sports–are the closest thing we have to modern day feudalism.

[#3]Prior-informed RAPM is essentially the best (ITO out-of-sample prediction) version of this family without introducing the box-score. It’s built the same way as RAPM, but the reference matrix uses RAPM values from the previous year, instead of all players being set at 0. Again, as the sample size of the season grows, the reference value holds less and less weight. Obviously this only works once we have multiple years of data, in the 1st year, there is no prior. In the 2nd, we have a prior but it is vanilla RAPM [#2A], but by the 3rd year we can use PI RAPM of the previous year to inform the current year.

[#4A]RPM is RAPM, but the reference matrix is made up of SPM values (SPM is again, regression of box-score metrics on a multi-year non-box-score model such as RAPM). There is also [#4B]multi-year RPM, which is the same as multi-year RAPM, except it presumably uses a reference matrix of multi-year SPM values.

There is also [#5]prior informed RPM. Again, same idea as PI RAPM [#3], single-year, reference matrix of prior-year’s RPM values.