@Stew Baker
You’re probably right it’s more when everyone is on one side. I’ll try and give some examples in a bit when I get some free time with work.
Friday:
OKC 1Q -2
OKC 1H -3.5
Likely play the under. G4s L10 years avg 204 points with the last 10 of 11 games going under. Played the under last game but wasn’t able to post on time. I can’t remember totals being this high in the Finals. bol
Haliban strikes again. If OKC doesn’t come out early, I think they’re toast and the series is a wrap.
@MrFreedo
Stepping back to Gm. 3 for a bit, I looked at the points you made in favor of OKC, did an analysis, and added in some points of my own.
When sentiment is all one sided, it usually doesn't end well. Right on board with that. However, when talking heads sentiment or forum sentiment is heavily one sided, or even when both are heavily one sided and concur, I don't put a lot of significance in those alone (with one exception noted below), until specific data proves me wrong. The two to me are just fragments of broader sentiment as a whole, which has a lot more significance. I believe ticket count %s and possibly line movement are a more true indications of broad sentiment, and the ticket count %s were roughly even. Not seeing an OKC advantage there.
You made the point that when data is all one sided, it usually doesn't end well. Data was all one sided, agreed on that point. However, I'm not buying. just on say so, that heavily one sided data alone, without correspondingly heavy onesidedness on sentiment, is a good predictor of outcome. Looking forward to some evidence to the contrary.
One thing I did do though, was envision an outcome where OKC did win Gm. 3 (without anything flukey like injuries or outrageous refereeing), and think of what cause and effect relationship could have led to that outcome. I did think of one: Talking heads touting Indiana based on OKC's underperformance on the road. OKC players (I believe most players are aware of what the analysts are saying, to some degree) individually and as a team, get tired of hearing about it, and figure out a way to get their road act together. This is the only thing I could think of which would have had a meaningful pro-OKC impact on the game. But it didn't happen. I think we have to be ready for 0-9. And then possibly 8-2 in gm. 5.
@Stew Baker
I can agree with you to trust the data more, especially compared to what everyone is on. My problem with this series is I’m stubborn as hell and bias with these damn futures. Probably should pass on this game but I do like OKC to bounce back and win the game. I have a couple plays on OKC early but don’t trust them late in the game. Also took Indiana TT under. Pacers are 14-0 this postseason when scoring 111+ but 0-5 when below 111. I still think this total is high for a finals game at 226 even with these offenses being so efficient and fast paced. Hoping for a stronger defensive effort from OKC. Maybe some offensive regression from Indiana. Each time in the playoffs Indiana shot above 50%, they’ve scored on average 106 points the next game.
Not gonna lie, I feel like I’m betting this with my heart not my brain lol. If you like Indy I would sprinkle on the ML.
The ATS records would be more telling with a stat like this. For example, if a team has a 40% win % with a certain ref, but their overall win % is 35%, then that ref would be seen as beneficial to the team. Similarly, for a team with a 60% WP with a certain ref, but their overall WP was 65%, the ref would be seen as detrimental to the team. Not suggesting necessarily that it would make an appreciable difference here; rather, I'm just saying.
@MrFreedo
2 of the first 3 games have gone under. Game 2 had a lot of points late in garbage time.
Game 1 and 2 had point totals in the low 40's in Quarter 1.
Game 3 looked like a for certain over with around 120 points in the first half but OKC struggled in the 2nd half and both teams combined for less than 100 points.
SGA needs a huge game tonight after a poor performance.
3 point shooting has been a streaky, OKC seems to lose their offensive identity at times and I still question if a team with great depth and young talent has enough star power. Clearly a very good team, but the Pacers are proving to be a formidable team.
Low scoring quarters that made a total around 228 hard to beat when you basically need 55-60 points per quarter to get these past
Seems like the total range is somewhere in the 215 - 232 range so I definitely see more likelihood to an under.
OKC probably playing for their season tonight.
Does that mean more defensive?
@cubd80
I’ll give you some of my notes/trends for the under, and I already played Indy TT under. Playing devils advocate both teams want to play fast (especially Indiana), are statistically at the top for offensive efficiency, and this total is somewhat high for a reason. I still think this numbers just a bit high or inflated but the bottom line is Thunder have to show up with their lockdown style of defense and create turnovers. Do or die for them tonight.
L10 years Finals g4 avgs 204 points per game
When Indy loses in the postseason they are 0-5 to the their TT u111 points
After a win, Indiana is 29-34 to the full game under (46%)
Each time in the playoffs Indiana shot above 50%, they’ve scored on average 106 points the next game
Established in 1995,
some of my risk because I’m in a position to do so 
that trend of winner is ats cover is just good to know regardless
Hot Forum Topics
