seems like all the chalk showing except wash st.. not sure what to make of ths.. i believe last nite nit it split (if i remember correctly).. tough to take some of these fav tonite.. not sure what the right thing to do...based on these num kansas wisc lou and ucla should all murder the opponent.. just dont think that will happen... this is one case where the numbers kinda made things more confusibg
GOOD LUCK ALL
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
WASH ST 87.9 NC 90.3
LOU 84.9 TENN 90.5
W,V 90.3 XAVIER 90.4
UCLA 82.9 WEST KEN 94.6
KANSAS 83.8 VILL 92.9
DAVID 92.6 WISC 81.4
MEMPHIS 82.9 MICH ST 90.2
STAN 86.3 TEX 91
seems like all the chalk showing except wash st.. not sure what to make of ths.. i believe last nite nit it split (if i remember correctly).. tough to take some of these fav tonite.. not sure what the right thing to do...based on these num kansas wisc lou and ucla should all murder the opponent.. just dont think that will happen... this is one case where the numbers kinda made things more confusibg
there has been a lot of analysis on def. efficiency, would it also make sense to look at the offensive efficiency?
I pulled these numbers from the website given before.
Tenn 118 louisville 114.7
UNC 126.5 wash st 118
WV 116.3 Xavier 117.9
UCLA 119.3 Wash St 110.3
Kansas 126.7 Nova 110.4
David 115.1 Wisc 116
Memphis 118.4 MST 117.5
Stan 116 Texas 123
I took this a step further and looked at the difference in def. eff and off eff. for each match up then totaled those numbers to see who would have the advantage. I came up with these amounts
Louisville plus 2.3
UNC plus 5.9
Wisc plus 12.1
Texas plus 2.3
UCLA plus 20.7
Xavier plus 1.5
Kansas plus 25.4
Memphis plus 8.2
Not sure what this means really to be honest but if we are following a difference of 3 for the def. efficiency system. Wouldn't it make sense that if that same team that qualified for def eff. and also had an advantade in offensive efficiency would have that much better chance to cover? seems to make sense but who knows.
These are the teams that would fall into this
UCLA, Kansas, and Memphis.
Wisconsin is close with a virtual tie in offensive efficiency with Davidson.
I thought this was pretty interesting to look at Let me know your thoughts on this. There are much more accomplished cappers in here than me.
0
there has been a lot of analysis on def. efficiency, would it also make sense to look at the offensive efficiency?
I pulled these numbers from the website given before.
Tenn 118 louisville 114.7
UNC 126.5 wash st 118
WV 116.3 Xavier 117.9
UCLA 119.3 Wash St 110.3
Kansas 126.7 Nova 110.4
David 115.1 Wisc 116
Memphis 118.4 MST 117.5
Stan 116 Texas 123
I took this a step further and looked at the difference in def. eff and off eff. for each match up then totaled those numbers to see who would have the advantage. I came up with these amounts
Louisville plus 2.3
UNC plus 5.9
Wisc plus 12.1
Texas plus 2.3
UCLA plus 20.7
Xavier plus 1.5
Kansas plus 25.4
Memphis plus 8.2
Not sure what this means really to be honest but if we are following a difference of 3 for the def. efficiency system. Wouldn't it make sense that if that same team that qualified for def eff. and also had an advantade in offensive efficiency would have that much better chance to cover? seems to make sense but who knows.
These are the teams that would fall into this
UCLA, Kansas, and Memphis.
Wisconsin is close with a virtual tie in offensive efficiency with Davidson.
I thought this was pretty interesting to look at Let me know your thoughts on this. There are much more accomplished cappers in here than me.
Is the lower number bette rin offensive eff just as it is in Deffensive? I could see the opposite for intuitive reasons. Just thought I would double check
0
Is the lower number bette rin offensive eff just as it is in Deffensive? I could see the opposite for intuitive reasons. Just thought I would double check
The lower number is the total of both added up. Ex.
Tenn. has a 3.3 advantage in off eff. but louisville has a 5.6 advantage in def. efficiency, therefore the total for the game is Louisville plus 2.3 and a no bet for me
UCLA on the other hand has a 9 advantage in off eff. AND a 11.7 advantage in def efficiency so UCLA is plus 20.7 for the game.
I haven't proven it or bet it, just started looking at both numbers to see what I could some up with and what the relationships were between the offensive and defensive eff. differences.
outside of the 3 number ones being in a positive situation, the other game that popped out was UNC.
Most would think that those numbers would look more like UCLA rather than the small margin they have.
again, just my 2 cents and wanted to see what others though about it in here
0
The lower number is the total of both added up. Ex.
Tenn. has a 3.3 advantage in off eff. but louisville has a 5.6 advantage in def. efficiency, therefore the total for the game is Louisville plus 2.3 and a no bet for me
UCLA on the other hand has a 9 advantage in off eff. AND a 11.7 advantage in def efficiency so UCLA is plus 20.7 for the game.
I haven't proven it or bet it, just started looking at both numbers to see what I could some up with and what the relationships were between the offensive and defensive eff. differences.
outside of the 3 number ones being in a positive situation, the other game that popped out was UNC.
Most would think that those numbers would look more like UCLA rather than the small margin they have.
again, just my 2 cents and wanted to see what others though about it in here
If those numbers stayed the same, is the lower number still better in this site's ratings? I could see them making the higher offensive eff number better.
0
sorry, what I meant was:
in Def Eff if Wisky has 72 and Davids has 82
that is a 10 pt adv for Wisky
But,
If those numbers stayed the same, is the lower number still better in this site's ratings? I could see them making the higher offensive eff number better.
bruzie.. NOT SURE WHERE YOU GOT THE NUMBERS FROM NUT HERE ARE THE POSTED NUMBERS (I i am using the ones listed as adjusted numbers.
THEY WILL BE LISTED OFF FIRST THEN DEFENSE... THEN DIFFERENCE IF YOU DO THE MATH
WASH ST..118.6 87.9 NC 124 90.3 208.9 TO 211.9 NC
LOU 113.6 84.7 TENN 118.8 90.5 204.1 203.3 LOU
W.V 116.3 90.3 XAVIER 117.1 90.4 206.7 207.4 XMEN
WEST KEN 110.2 94.6 UCLA 120.1 82.9 193.1 214.1 UCL
NOVA 110.3 92.9 KAN 126.7 83.8 194.1 219 .6 25 KAN
DAV 113.7 92.9 WISC 115 81.4 195.1 207 12 WISC
MICH ST 117.7 90.2 MEM 117.7 82.9 199.2 207.9 8 MEM
STAN 115.7 86.3 TEX 123 91 204.6 TEX 209 4.4 TEX
my feeling is this is how they make the lines on the games with the addition to who's hot and who yhe "public" teams are..i dont think its the only thing but i think its a starting point for the lines makers..either way there are quite a few mismatches on paper using these numbers.. which ones hold up is anybodies guess..i actually kinda like wash st and w ken and maybe even mich st with points but these numbers seem to say opposite..i think ill be playing mostly 2nd halves or totals.. TOO MUCH INFO
0
bruzie.. NOT SURE WHERE YOU GOT THE NUMBERS FROM NUT HERE ARE THE POSTED NUMBERS (I i am using the ones listed as adjusted numbers.
THEY WILL BE LISTED OFF FIRST THEN DEFENSE... THEN DIFFERENCE IF YOU DO THE MATH
WASH ST..118.6 87.9 NC 124 90.3 208.9 TO 211.9 NC
LOU 113.6 84.7 TENN 118.8 90.5 204.1 203.3 LOU
W.V 116.3 90.3 XAVIER 117.1 90.4 206.7 207.4 XMEN
WEST KEN 110.2 94.6 UCLA 120.1 82.9 193.1 214.1 UCL
NOVA 110.3 92.9 KAN 126.7 83.8 194.1 219 .6 25 KAN
DAV 113.7 92.9 WISC 115 81.4 195.1 207 12 WISC
MICH ST 117.7 90.2 MEM 117.7 82.9 199.2 207.9 8 MEM
STAN 115.7 86.3 TEX 123 91 204.6 TEX 209 4.4 TEX
my feeling is this is how they make the lines on the games with the addition to who's hot and who yhe "public" teams are..i dont think its the only thing but i think its a starting point for the lines makers..either way there are quite a few mismatches on paper using these numbers.. which ones hold up is anybodies guess..i actually kinda like wash st and w ken and maybe even mich st with points but these numbers seem to say opposite..i think ill be playing mostly 2nd halves or totals.. TOO MUCH INFO
BY HE WAY i tried adding the numbers together.. subtracting the number from each other.. even adding and dividing by 2 .. each time with different results.. if it was start of season i would take the time to chart which is more accurate but since its the end of season we will have to take this up next year early and see where it leads us..
0
BY HE WAY i tried adding the numbers together.. subtracting the number from each other.. even adding and dividing by 2 .. each time with different results.. if it was start of season i would take the time to chart which is more accurate but since its the end of season we will have to take this up next year early and see where it leads us..
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
