From a WL perspective, where the Raptors go from here
Earlier in November, Bryan Colangelo was quoted in an interview with Eric Smith [FAN590], as saying:
“ … we’ll know what we’ve got by the end of the month.”
For the benefit of those now looking ahead in the schedule:
RAPTORS’ UPCOMING SCHEDULE 

Game 
December 
Opponent 
Opp WL 
Likely Result 

19 
Tue 01 
vs Washington 

W, 8 

20 
Wed 02 
@ Atlanta 
>.500 
L, 12 

21 
Fri 04 
@ Washington 

? 

22 
Sat 05 
@ Chicago 

? 

23 
Tue 08 
vs Minnesota 

W, 9 

24 
Wed 09 
@ Milwaukee 
>.500 
L, 13 

25 
Fri 11 
vs Atlanta 
>.500 
? 

26 
Sun 13 * 
vs Houston 
>.500 
? 

27 
Tue 15 
@ Miami 
>.500 
L, 14 

28 
Wed 16 
@ Orlando 
>.500 
L, 15 

29 
Fri 18 
vs New Jersey 

W, 10 

30 
Sun 20 * 
vs New Orleans 

W, 11 

31 
Wed 23 
@ Detroit 

? 

32 
Sun 27 * 
vs Detroit 

W, 12 

33 
Wed 30 
Vs Charlotte 

W, 13 

Possible Raptors’ WonLost Records at the end of December


Best Case Scenario 
? = 50, 16.7% 
33.3% 
1815/.545 

Most Likely Scenario A 
? = 41, 16.7% 
1716/.515 



Most Likely Scenario B 
? = 32, 16.7% 
66.7% 
1617/.485 

Most Likely Scenario C 
? = 23, 16.7% 
1518/.455 

Most Likely Scenario D 
? = 14, 16.7% 
1419/.424 

Worst Case Scenario 
? = 05, 16.7% 
1320/.394 

Legend: W – Win; L – Loss; ? – W or L; * – Afternoon start time. 
————————————————————
————————————————————
Use the comments section to elaborate on your answer.
Related:
Raptors Face Major Decisions About Bosh and the Future
Tags: Bryan Colangelo, Chris Bosh, Eric Smith, FAN590, Raptortalk.com, Toronto Raptors
November 30th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
I’ll go with 1518 record with a .455 winning percentage would be what? 37 or so wins if it held up over a full season? That sounds about right.
November 30th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
You should really stop using numbers in your posts. You don’t seem to have a grasp of the meaning of the numbers you include. I won’t comment on your “basketball acumen” or lack thereof, but it seems like every time I read your blog there are numbers being grossly mistreated. For example, in this post: given 5 games of uncertain outcome, it’s not possible for there to be an equal probability of going 50 and going 05. If there was a 5050 chance of victory in each one, the probabilities would be:
50: 1/32
41: 5/32
32: 10/32
23: 10/32
14: 5/32
05: 1/32
I’ve also seen you add ordinal numbers to make a point, an operation which renders the numbers completely meaningless.
By all means, make your points and make your arguments, but don’t use numbers you don’t understand to do it. The numbers deserve better.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:13 am
tkfu,
1. Welcome aboard.
———————————
2. Individuals like you bring a smile to my face.
i. Did I say anthing about the numbers [percentages] which I provided in this instance being a calculation of the “true odds” [i.e. mathematical probabilities] of these respective scenarios actually coming to pass? [Hint: The answer might surprise you. ]
ii. re: For example, in this post: given 5 games of uncertain outcome, it’s not possible for there to be an equal probability of going 50 and going 05.
According to what you then wrote …
50: 1/32
05: 1/32
Unless, of course, my eyesight is failing me … those two polar opposite scenarios represent the exact same “true odds”, according to YOU.
———————————
3. re: I’ve also seen you add ordinal numbers to make a point, an operation which renders the numbers completely meaningless.
Only to individuals like YOU … who, perhaps, are incapable of [or have difficulty with] thinking outside of the box.
For example:
What does the symbol represent to you?
“< "
If you said "less than" ... then you'd be considered right, according to all those who think [only] in a linear way.
What if I then placed that symbol in the following expression AND stipulated that, in this instance, what you also have to do is read from right to left, instead of from left to right.
"l < 5"
What would that symbol then represent?
Would you say:
a. "l is less than 5"
b. "5 is greater than l"
c. "2 [which is really a backwards 5] is greater than l"
d. b and c
e. none of the above
f. all of the above

4. re: By all means, make your points and make your arguments, but don’t use numbers you don’t understand to do it. The numbers deserve better.
IMO, closer examination would definitely reveal that one of us does not have the ability to play with numbers … and, therefore, understand them and their use properly … at all.
I will gladly allow others to decide for themselves, re: which one of us this just happens to be.
———————————
5. re: I won’t comment on your “basketball acumen” or lack thereof,
Neither will I bother to make this type of judgment about you.
Cheers