Recent Posts

Thread Author JFen31 Post Entries
VegasFishman
VegasFishman
Quote Originally Posted by VegasFishman:

The "fishy" line is absolutely subjective. That's why I like to get other peoples perspectives on what lines they do and don't find odd. Would we both agree that Vegas does try to "bait" the public with lines that are obviously too low/high? The lines I posted are ones that at first glance, my gut tells me something seems off. Doesn't mean that's the case for everyone. I just track which ones seem fishy to me.


I cannot agree with that. 

It goes to the original point - the public isn't being 'baited" at all. In many instances, the public - writ large - simply has an incorrect or flawed perception of a particular team's strength/weakness.
VegasFishman
VegasFishman
I'm not really sure how you could reliably track "fishy" lines, as there really is no such thing as an objectively "fishy" line.

The relative "fishiness" is in the eye of the beholder, right? 

Oddsmakers set CBB lines using power ratings. For them, there's no emotional component or bias involved. The ratings system spits out a line and the oddsmakers hang it on the board. They adjust as needed for injuries, suspensions, etc. 

For many bettors - including much of this forum - perception is not reality. Unlike the books, bettors often cannot overcome their own subjective perception and bias. 

"Maryland is good and Penn State is bad" is not a power ratings system, but that doesn't stop posters here from creating threads suggesting that lines derived from emotionless, math-based formulas are nonetheless "fishy."

It doesn't make sense, honestly.

Good luck tonight.    
TheSquare
TheSquare
Lines aren't made based on head-to-head results. Never have been and never will be. It's strictly based on power ratings. This is one of the most frequent misconceptions I see on this forum.

Buffalo can win (again) by 30 tonight, and if they played next week, the line wouldn't change.
hillardoh1
hillardoh1
One long, rambling paragraph about taking the dog because Roger Ayers is officiating the game...followed up by a suggestion to take Virginia tomorrow in a game where they will be favored.

Brilliant. As usual. 
Titusblink
Titusblink
Roger Ayers again. Just like Monday night in Norman.


LB_Dirtbags
LB_Dirtbags
UVA -3/-3.5
MoPinkie
MoPinkie
Quote Originally Posted by davemsh:


Home court is worth more than 4 points in CBB..

Interesting topic. KenPom released a study during the preseason assigning a home court advantage "value" for every team based on their last 60 home/road conference games.

The median home court advantage was 3.1 points, with the highest being 4.5 (Arkansas and Colorado) and the lowest being 1.6 (Navy and Canisius). 
AllAboutTheU615
AllAboutTheU615
Quote Originally Posted by davemsh:

I wonder what the line would have been had Clemson beaten NC State...Clemson choked away that game missing 4 straight Ft's in the last 20 seconds....

It wouldn't change. The lines are based on power rankings, all of which are calculated on a per-possession basis. Two possessions going "the other way" aren't going to change anything.

UVA could win by 30 tonight and a hypothetical rematch between these teams next week would open with the exact same line. 
bballplaya88
bballplaya88
Am I understanding correctly here? You're going to play Baylor if the line drops? 
Hawks4life
Hawks4life
The first issue is that Iowa isn't actually ranked team. 

You know that the AP poll isn't a legitimate measure of a team's strength/weakness. It's voted on by a collection of lazy beat writers, most of whom scroll through box scores once a week and submit a ballot.

Here's where Iowa stands in the actual metrics:

KenPom: #34
Haslametrics: #40
Sagarin: #37
ESPN BPI: #33
NCAA NET: #30

So you have the (approximately) 35th ranked team in the country travelling to the (approximately) 65th ranked team in the country. That's not much of a gap, and it's reduced by another 3-4 points when allocating for home court advantage.  


finallyracing
finallyracing
Not so sure about the fouling thing.

Both teams are exceptionally good at not fouling. VA Tech is #4/353 in opponent's FT rate and UVA is #8/353.

The Hokies' offense is perimeter-based and extremely reliant on catch-and-shoot opportunities created off of pick-and-roll. They're 266th in FT rate offensively and only have one post player (Blackshear). Virginia will always, always, always bring a double-team on any post entry, which makes it difficult for a big guy to get to the FT line against them.  

Last year's meeting in CVille (with very similar personnel on both sides) only produced a combined 17 FT attempts despite an added five minutes of overtime.

Good luck if you play it.

 
In2it
In2it
The not-so-well-kept secret is that KenPom has been setting the lines for the last several years. 

Oddsmakers do very little work in CBB. 
TheSquare
TheSquare
Records don't matter in setting CBB lines.

Oddsmakers rely exclusively on power rankings sites (KenPom, Sagarin, et al.) in setting lines. KenPom has GMU at 170 and JMU at 204. 

Mason is the better team and is at home. Figure 2-3 points for being the slightly better team and 3/3.5 points for home court. 

Line is exactly where it should be. 
ILoveCover88
ILoveCover88
Completely flukish and a result of an entirely unsustainable 4.8% HR/FB ratio. 

Nothing is different in the profile. He's throwing the same mix of pitches with identical velocity. 

Regression should be in order.

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/landing.php?player=448306&b_hand=-1&gFilt=&pFilt=FA|SI|FC|CU|SL|CS|KN|CH|FS|SB&time=year&startDate=03/31/2017&endDate=06/02/2018&s_type=2
ChrisCovers
ChrisCovers
This site remains the only place that uses "Villy" or "Villa."

It's Villanova or Nova. Quite simple, really. 
lmb4321
lmb4321
+800 is lousy value. You're better served betting the ML against Michigan and rolling over your winnings vs. Nova/Kansas.

Your average ML for Loyola against Michigan is +225. Say you bet 1u to win 2.25u. Then, depending on Nova/Kansas outcome, you can roll over your 2.25u + 1u original bet.

Projected spread vs. Kansas is 7/7.5. Loyola ML there would be around +300. Roll over your 3.25u to win 9.75u. That's a better value than the +800 presently offered as a future. 

Projected spread vs. Nova is 12/12.5. Loyola ML there would be around +550. Roll over your 3.25u to win 17.8u. Again, that's a significantly better value than betting the +800 future.

Good luck.






sportswagers
sportswagers
Quote Originally Posted by El_Terrible:


Oh really? I don't know what the hell youre talking about. I don't watch Tv or listen to radio..And I thought Allen wasn't anything before the game started yesterday



I'm not going to punch down here, but by all means feel free to wear your objectively misinformed take as a badge of honor. 
sportswagers
sportswagers
It's unfortunate what the hot take industry has done to sports discussion.

If that last shot in regulation rolls in - rather than skimming every inch of the rim - Grayson is deemed a hero and his shot is replayed for the next three decades.

Instead, it inexplicably rolls off the rim, and you get reactionary blowhards in threads like this one blaming him for losing the game. 




Joke77
Joke77
Quote Originally Posted by undermysac:

JFen

Look for the St. Joes logo. He doesn't post picks, but when he does make a comment don't ignore it

Thanks for the kind words, Sac. I still peruse the forum on occasion, as despite all of the BS there's still some quality folks here.

I did some writing for a bunch of 1st round games here:

https://dictatethepace.wordpress.com/2018/03/12/round-1-notes/
realscififan
realscififan
Nice to see some good totals discussion here.

Got some concerns with UNCG/Gonzaga...

As was widely expected, the Committee again disregarded its latest vow to incorporate advanced metrics into the seeding process. It is the opinion of this writer that Gonzaga is the most egregiously seeded team in the field (other than perhaps Butler and URI). Of course, not only should the Zags be on the 2-line, but they drew an unorthodox and difficult 13 seed. Surely Mark Few would prefer to see Marshall or Charleston, both of whom the Zags would likely boatrace. Instead, it’ll be UNCG in a 10:30 A.M. PST tip-off. 

Both teams have a 9-day layoff between games. The variable most affected by long layoffs tends to be jump shooting, a concern compounded by an early start time for the Zags and an opponent that plays a style the Zags haven’t seen all season. UNCG extends full-court pressure at a 40.4% rate, the second-highest mark in the country (#1 is Portland State). The Spartans then fall back into a high-pressure matchup zone anchored by freakish shotblocker James Dickey (10.2% block rate). 

It’s worth emphasizing that Gonzaga legitimately never sees full-court pressure, having spent the previous 2+ months exclusively against WCC competition. Among WCC teams, only Loyola Marymount utilizes any form of full-court pressure (15.5%). Everyone else is 3% or less. Can the Zags handle it? Likely. However, it’s probably not going to be seamless. I hesitate to draw a comparison here, but the only relevant point of reference in evaluating Gonzaga against full-court pressure is the December 5th matchup versus Villanova. Like UNCG, Nova deploys its zone press as more of a “nuisance” than an in-your-grill Press Virginia/40 Minutes of Hell iteration. GU struggled mightily in the Nova game, coughing up the ball 19 times on 72 possessions. Further, UNCG is the best transition defense in the country (0.792 ppp allowed), a byproduct of the zone press forcing teams to eat up clock bringing the ball up the floor. Perhaps my worries about Gonzaga’s press offense will be allayed early…or not.

There’s no such concern for the Gonzaga defense. UNCG’s offense is a mediocre outfit that relies heavily on freeing up Francis Alonso for threes via a dizzying array of screens, and then relentlessly crashing the offensive glass to clean up misses. That’s almost certainly not going to work against Gonzaga, with defensive ace Silas Melson likely to chase Alonso around for most of the game, with help from long-armed athletes like Zach Norvell and Rui Hachimura. Only 9/351 teams score 10% or more of their points directly from off-ball screens (i.e. not pick and roll or pick and pop) – UNCG is one of them, but the Zags grade out in the 89th percentile in defending off screens. Further, The Zags are exceedingly unlikely to allow second-chance points (#11/351 defensive rebound rate) and they’re more athletic around the rim than last year’s stellar interior defense.

This is a really interesting game with a bunch of intriguing matchups. Barring some incredible perimeter shooting, I’m hard-pressed to see the UNCG offense having any success against the Zags. Conversely, don’t be shocked if it takes some time for GU to acclimate to a unique and sight-unseen UNCG press/matchup zone combo.

Desktop View: Switch to Mobile View