If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
All: The new Billszone site with the updated software is scheduled to be turned on Tuesday, May 21, 2024. The company that built it, Dynascale, estimates a FOUR HOUR shut down, from 8pm Pacific, (5pm Eastern) while they get it up and running. Nobody will be able to post in any forum until they are done. Afterwards, you may need to do a web search for the site, as old links will not work, because the site is getting a new IP address. Please be patient. If there are bugs, we will tackle them one at a time. Remember the goal is to be up and running with no glitches by camp. Doing this now assures us of that, because it gives us all summer to get our ducks in a row. Thank you!
Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Please fill me in if I've missed something.. because I almost punched a friend out because he wouldn't shut the **** up about it last night.
He said if we win one-two games, the highest we would draft is 2nd or 3rd.. I'm convinced he must have had 4Loko's but who knows, maybe I'm wrong?
“You hold a players only meeting and get each guy to stand up and say what he can bring to the table... and if he doesn't, you punch him in the face.” ~~ Harry Neale, on how to fix the Sabres season.
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Whoever has the least amount of wins gets the top pick. If there are numerous teams, then it's based on tie-breakers. You should have punched him
He must have been saying that b/c he thinks Carolina won't ever win again, which would mean then if we won a game or two, we would be picking 2nd because Carolina wins the tiebreaker against us based on our SOS
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
What the hell are you asking? Of course you get the first pick if you have the worst record. Only thing that changes that is if someone else has the same record and a worse strength of schedule.
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Dude...just punch your friend out. Worst record, first pick. A tie for the worst record is the only way, but that wouldn't be having the least amount of wins...that would be tying for the least amount of wins.
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Technically...yes.
You could tie, record wise, with another team who played a weaker schedule.
In the Bills case, this will make them lose out on the number 1 overall pick as they have thus far played one of, if not the hardest schedules in the NFL.
follow us on instagram www.instagram.com/lootlikemoney & www.instagram.com/5thboy_smgAs seen in the Source,ITunes, Worldstar, Vladtv, CNN & more Itunes http:...
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Got to look at the question asked. Is it possible to have the least number of wins and not get the first overall. Actually, in theory there probably is. Who has a better winning percentage? A team that goes 0-14-2 or a team that goes 1-15?
There has to be some sort of combination that would lead to the answer - but it would invovle a ****load of ties - which don't happen any more. Possible? Yes. Plausible? No.
For all the education and practice each of us undergoes, the achievment of mastery is ultimately the outcome of a personal quest for understanding.
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Originally posted by Ebenezer
Got to look at the question asked. Is it possible to have the least number of wins and not get the first overall. Actually, in theory there probably is. Who has a better winning percentage? A team that goes 0-14-2 or a team that goes 1-15?
There has to be some sort of combination that would lead to the answer - but it would invovle a ****load of ties - which don't happen any more. Possible? Yes. Plausible? No.
If in fact, it is done by winning percentage then a 1-15 team would get the first pick over a team that went 0-13-3. Your friend would owe you a punch in the face.
For all the education and practice each of us undergoes, the achievment of mastery is ultimately the outcome of a personal quest for understanding.
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Originally posted by Ebenezer
If in fact, it is done by winning percentage then a 1-15 team would get the first pick over a team that went 0-13-3. Your friend would owe you a punch in the face.
That assumes three ties in one season by one team is possible, when there hasn't been more than one in a season since they added sudden-death overtime in 1974. (Correction: there've been two seasons with two ties, but no team ever collected more than one of them.)
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Originally posted by Johnny Bugmenot
That assumes three ties in one season by one team is possible, when there hasn't been more than one in a season since they added sudden-death overtime in 1974. (Correction: there've been two seasons with two ties, but no team ever collected more than one of them.)
I don't think it assumes anything it only says it's possible and it is. If you think a team going 0 - 0 - 16 is impossible it isn't. Impossibility means there is something that definitively stops it from happening. Empirically we would say that 3 ties is highly unlikely but not impossible.
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Originally posted by Ebenezer
If in fact, it is done by winning percentage then a 1-15 team would get the first pick over a team that went 0-13-3. Your friend would owe you a punch in the face.
How is zero wins a higher winning percentage than 1. If you went 1-999 you would have a higher win percentage than if you were 0-1-1. Zero wins is a .000 win percentage.
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Originally posted by Beebe's Kid
How is zero wins a higher winning percentage than 1. If you went 1-999 you would have a higher win percentage than if you were 0-1-1. Zero wins is a .000 win percentage.
Isn't it?
Eb is counting a tie as half of a win. So going 0-13-3 actually counts as 1.5 wins. Which, after a quick check, is how the NFL does it. Look at Cincinnati's record in 2008: 4-11-1, for a 0.281 win percentage (= 4.5/16).
Re: Is it possible to have the least number of wins and NOT get the 1st overall??
Originally posted by Beebe's Kid
How is zero wins a higher winning percentage than 1. If you went 1-999 you would have a higher win percentage than if you were 0-1-1. Zero wins is a .000 win percentage.
Isn't it?
That would mean ties would be meaningless in determining standings.
Like say the top two teams in a division are 10-5-1 and 10-6 respectively, who wins the division? The 10-5-1 team would.
Under what you said above both teams would have 10 wins and have the same winning percentage.
Tweet
Comment