Class of 2020 - C Eddie Lampkin (TX) TRANSFERRING TO SYRACUSE (4/2/24) | Page 64 | Syracusefan.com
.

Class of 2020 C Eddie Lampkin (TX) TRANSFERRING TO SYRACUSE (4/2/24)

Forloveoforange said:
It took me 20 hours to figure out that it is absolutely twice as likely that its door number 2!

Door number one is a 1/3 chance. Doors 2 and 3 combined are a 2/3 chance. Monte does the contestant a huge favor by saying that Door number 3 is not it. So that means that number 2 has the full 2/3 chance.

Showing a non-car door does not change the 1/3 chance for door number 1. Again the bottom line is that doors 2 and 3 combined are a 2/3 chance, and Monte let the contestant know that the 2/3 chance is in door number 2 by opening door number 3.

That's quite a tough one to get your head around!
Expand...


Yeah, that's the second option. But why does it rule over the first option?
 
Wow with all this. After 2 gummies in and taking a few hours away from the board, I was looking forward to good news to support my mood, but this didn't help much. Damn this board.

dude abides GIF
 
SWC75 said:
Yeah, that's the second option. But why does it rule over the first option?
Expand...
Take the issue to an absurd level. Let’s say you had 100 suitcases in them 1 with $1mm in it. You pick 1 and the host reveals 98 losers on the other side. Does it make any sense that you have a 50/50 chance now when you started with 1%?
 
AZOrange said:
Take the issue to an absurd level. Let’s say you had 100 suitcases in them 1 with $1mm in it. You pick 1 and the host reveals 98 losers on the other side. Does it make any sense that you have a 50/50 chance now when you started with 1%?
Expand...

Yes. That doesn't make it true, (as I explained), but you are left with two suitcases, one of which has $1mm in it. I understand both arguments. I just don't understand why the second one rules the situation.
 
At this juncture (and I’m sure others feel similarly) I just want to know if he’s coming or going - and the sooner the better.
 
IthacaMatt said:
Nice highlights package. 8 minutes long. He has great mobility compared to Lampkin. Pretty good defensive presence. Plays high post offense. Nothing in the low post.

Good diving on the pick & roll. Good converting inside. Runs the floor VERY well. He doesn't look 250 to me. Looks 240, tops. Excellent athlete. Different player than Lampkin.

We would have no low post offense other than Jyare Davis, if this is the replacement for Fast Eddie.

But if we could actually replace Lampkin with both this guy Boakye, and Noah Waterman, I would be very happy with that. We would still be getting better.

Expand...

Goodness. This guy idles in the red.
Beats e’rbody down the floor. Dunks e’rthang. Intense.
 
ROCuse said:
The first time you pick out of three doors the chance of success is 33%. The next time you pick out of two doors the chance of success is 50%. The scenario is are independent of each other, so given the chance to switch you should always switch to the “roll” with the best odds for success.
Expand...
This is incorrect. Look up the Money Hall problem explained. The correct answer is 67% chance of meeting correct if you switch, not 50.
 
i’m preparing my mind for a season where we have a guy playing out of position at center and is 40 lbs lighter than the guy he’s playing against
 
SWC75 said:
Yes. That doesn't make it true, (as I explained), but you are left with two suitcases, one of which has $1mm in it. I understand both arguments. I just don't understand why the second one rules the situation.
Expand...
Like I said, I understand it is hard to understand. But I think the key is knowing that the combined 2 and 3 doors hold a 2 out of 3 chance. When its known that 3 is not it, it swings all of that 2 out of 3 chance to the 2nd door. Its like ah ha, the host had to pick over the 2nd door ( the scenario being that he knows which door has the car). The 2 remaining doors are not created equally, anymore. The second door absolutely holds the 66 and 2/3 % chance that is missing. (There is still a 33 and 1/3 % chance that it is Door number 1). Its hard to get your head around that fact.
 
Last edited:
Forloveoforange said:
Like I said, I understand it is hard to understand. But I think the key is knowing that the combined 2 and 3 doors hold a 2 out of 3 chance. When its known that 3 is not it, it swings all of that 2 out of 3 chance to the 2nd door. Its like ah ha, the host had to pick over the 2nd door ( the scenario being that he knows which door has the car). The 2 remaining doors are not created equally, anymore. The second door absolutely holds the 66 and 2/3 % chance that is missing. (There is still a 33 and 1/3 % chance that it is Door number 1). Its hard to get your head around that fact.
Expand...
I’ll find Jimmy Hoffa before I can understand this.
 
ROCuse said:
The first time you pick out of three doors the chance of success is 33%. The next time you pick out of two doors the chance of success is 50%. The scenario is are independent of each other, so given the chance to switch you should always switch to the “roll” with the best odds for success.
Expand...
Took me a while to get it, too.
The scenarios aren’t independent. They exist on a continuum. The 50/50 would only exist if Monty had the curtain closed so they could move the prizes around (or not) between the 2 choices. Because that doesn’t happen, door #1 will always have a1/3 probability.
Another way to think of it is after choosing door #1, there is a 2/3 probability the car is behind one of the other two. That doesn’t change with the elimination of door 3.
The determinating condition is that there were 3 choices for the original placement of the car. That doesn’t change.
 
Last edited:
Niastri said:
Apparently, Lampkin was at least partially swayed by the "no income tax in Texas" argument. In NY he'll pay 6.85% state income tax at his income level... But the fact is (and this thread proves it) most people don't understand taxes AT ALL. So for a kid who doesn't know anything about taxes, the idea of paying NO TAXES to the state must seem compelling. Little does he know how little that matters to his overall financial picture.

When I was a brand new financial planner, the new hire instructor made us memorize the Federal income tax brackets... He said "if you can even tell them the tax brackets, you're going to seem like a freaking wizard to most people!"

I laughed out loud, and then I used it in my next meeting. My potential clients had wide eyes like they were astonished I could be so knowledgeable! Lol

Red should bring a qualified financial planner to his NIL meetings with potential recruits. I could absolutely wow him with his much money he was going to have, state income tax bedamned.

So anyway, that's how we got on the topic of state tax.

:)Frankly, I'm on the side of thinking you can't legally make his income earned from NIL in Syracuse to be from Texas.

Closing a kid by doing tricky accounting and then getting him audited seems like a bad plan.
Expand...
The school should be arranging 3rd party advisors that work for the kid, not nil, not the school.

Agree entirely with your last two sentences.
 
I still don’t know What is happening. But, regardless it doesn’t bode well for the character and maturity of Lampkin IMO. How about this, don’t commit anywhere until you are completely bought in. Be careful stirring up drama, you may end up at McNeese state “Where they love him who he is”.

I find myself in a tussle with being all in on players NIL opportunities and also being a grouch about how this is too much BS. Like most things in life the answer is typically in between the two ends of the spectrum. One end being no pay for player and the other being the Wild West and players can up and leave and do whatever they want all the time.

If I am exhausted as a fan imagine the coaching staff.
 
OrangeXtreme said:
Imagine being a NY Yankee.

You live in Jersey. You earn half your paycheck in NY. The other half comes from all over the country and even Canada.
Expand...
If I’m a Yankee I’m living in Westchester so I do not have to fight bridge traffic
 
Forloveoforange said:
There is a 2/3 chance that Monte did not pick door number 2 because the car was behind it, right? That's why the 2 doors are not equal 50-50 chances.
Expand...
I think that is sort of the simple way to go about it. You are basically being given a second door. All the doors had 33% chance, you picked 2, he gave you 3 the idea (I think) is you’re going into your next decision with a 66% of being right because you KNOW 3 is a goat and 2 was your choice. You implicitly received information that 2 is not 1 of the 2 non-car doors, thus giving you the improved chance of being right.
 
SWC75 said:
Yes. That doesn't make it true, (as I explained), but you are left with two suitcases, one of which has $1mm in it. I understand both arguments. I just don't understand why the second one rules the situation.
Expand...
You odds don’t change just because an answer is revealed. When this”problem” came out many disputed it until they did a large number of testing of the hypothesis.
 
Capt. Tuttle said:
probaby because our coaches are professionals and actually know how to evaluate talent and how a player will fit into their schemes.
Expand...
Mounir, Carey, Patterson, McLoed, are all recent examples of players who were clearly not up to task and yet the staff deemed them a fit. The track record doesn’t exactly scream “we can effectively evaluate the 5”
 
Last edited:
rocklloyd said:
i’m preparing my mind for a season where we have a guy playing out of position at center and is 40 lbs lighter than the guy he’s playing against
Expand...
How DOES someone prepare for that kind of torture?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
175,020
Messages
5,199,866
Members
6,164
Latest member
Nnelg

Online statistics

Members online
23
Guests online
1,759
Total visitors
1,782
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom