As a predicted, total has gone up. U still play at 150/150.5 ? thanks...
I would, but obviously it has lost some of the initial value from the opening #
Stanford has averaged 70.2 possessions and 78.8 points in regulation in its 5 postseason games this year. This is despite 4 of their opponents ranked #213 or lower with respect to adjusted tempo.
As a predicted, total has gone up. U still play at 150/150.5 ? thanks...
I would, but obviously it has lost some of the initial value from the opening #
Stanford has averaged 70.2 possessions and 78.8 points in regulation in its 5 postseason games this year. This is despite 4 of their opponents ranked #213 or lower with respect to adjusted tempo.
I would, but obviously it has lost some of the initial value from the opening #
Stanford has averaged 70.2 possessions and 78.8 points in regulation in its 5 postseason games this year. This is despite 4 of their opponents ranked #213 or lower with respect to adjusted tempo.
GL
Those numbers are an obvious concern for us under backers, but what should concern you guys on the over is that Stanford put up those numbers in the comfort of home, and now go to Madison Square Garden. Jump shooting team after team's been brought back to earth with the cavernous sight lines,and lighting, at that venue. The earlier starting time may also throw off their scoring, with the coast to coast travel another possible factor against them scoring. As much as UMass likes to force pace, we've seen they can in fact play either way, and I'm not expecting them to force a track meet, but will take what's given to them. I could easily be wrong, but I'm willing to pay to find out. BOL
I would, but obviously it has lost some of the initial value from the opening #
Stanford has averaged 70.2 possessions and 78.8 points in regulation in its 5 postseason games this year. This is despite 4 of their opponents ranked #213 or lower with respect to adjusted tempo.
GL
Those numbers are an obvious concern for us under backers, but what should concern you guys on the over is that Stanford put up those numbers in the comfort of home, and now go to Madison Square Garden. Jump shooting team after team's been brought back to earth with the cavernous sight lines,and lighting, at that venue. The earlier starting time may also throw off their scoring, with the coast to coast travel another possible factor against them scoring. As much as UMass likes to force pace, we've seen they can in fact play either way, and I'm not expecting them to force a track meet, but will take what's given to them. I could easily be wrong, but I'm willing to pay to find out. BOL
Those numbers are an obvious concern for us under backers, but what should concern you guys on the over is that Stanford put up those numbers in the comfort of home, and now go to Madison Square Garden. Jump shooting team after team's been brought back to earth with the cavernous sight lines,and lighting, at that venue. The earlier starting time may also throw off their scoring, with the coast to coast travel another possible factor against them scoring. As much as UMass likes to force pace, we've seen they can in fact play either way, and I'm not expecting them to force a track meet, but will take what's given to them. I could easily be wrong, but I'm willing to pay to find out. BOL
I appreciate your post and always welcome a different viewpoint. But I do need to disagree with some of the points in your post.
1. 2 of the 5 games referenced were not at home, rather they were played on at the Staples Center in LA as part of the PAC12 tournament
2. This is the not the first trip to MSG for Stanford this year, they already played Oklahoma St and Syracuse there back in November. And in those two games, they shot 16-37 (43.2%) from behind the arc....which is actually 5.1% better than they shoot on the year on 3PA. This is quite significant when you consider Stanford is #30 in the nation in 3P FG%.
3. UMass only plays one pace....and that is FAST. The national average of adjusted possessions per game is 66. Do you know how many games the Minutemen have played this year that went below the national average -- only ONE. And that was in their last game vs Drexel that saw 62 possessions.
Best of luck with your card tonight, but I wanted to be able to clarify too many of the generalities that I'm seeing in today's forum that are being applied to this match-up tonight
Those numbers are an obvious concern for us under backers, but what should concern you guys on the over is that Stanford put up those numbers in the comfort of home, and now go to Madison Square Garden. Jump shooting team after team's been brought back to earth with the cavernous sight lines,and lighting, at that venue. The earlier starting time may also throw off their scoring, with the coast to coast travel another possible factor against them scoring. As much as UMass likes to force pace, we've seen they can in fact play either way, and I'm not expecting them to force a track meet, but will take what's given to them. I could easily be wrong, but I'm willing to pay to find out. BOL
I appreciate your post and always welcome a different viewpoint. But I do need to disagree with some of the points in your post.
1. 2 of the 5 games referenced were not at home, rather they were played on at the Staples Center in LA as part of the PAC12 tournament
2. This is the not the first trip to MSG for Stanford this year, they already played Oklahoma St and Syracuse there back in November. And in those two games, they shot 16-37 (43.2%) from behind the arc....which is actually 5.1% better than they shoot on the year on 3PA. This is quite significant when you consider Stanford is #30 in the nation in 3P FG%.
3. UMass only plays one pace....and that is FAST. The national average of adjusted possessions per game is 66. Do you know how many games the Minutemen have played this year that went below the national average -- only ONE. And that was in their last game vs Drexel that saw 62 possessions.
Best of luck with your card tonight, but I wanted to be able to clarify too many of the generalities that I'm seeing in today's forum that are being applied to this match-up tonight
And this is not to say that the game can't go under because it certainly can -- especially due to some of the situational factors you mention (travel, start time, etc.). It's just that I am very comfortable with my over ticket in my pocket in this game.
And this is not to say that the game can't go under because it certainly can -- especially due to some of the situational factors you mention (travel, start time, etc.). It's just that I am very comfortable with my over ticket in my pocket in this game.
And this is not to say that the game can't go under because it certainly can -- especially due to some of the situational factors you mention (travel, start time, etc.). It's just that I am very comfortable with my over ticket in my pocket in this game.
And this is not to say that the game can't go under because it certainly can -- especially due to some of the situational factors you mention (travel, start time, etc.). It's just that I am very comfortable with my over ticket in my pocket in this game.
the pace is incredible. maybe 80 shots per team. but they cant hit the ocean. seems to happen to unfamiliar teams in the Garden. not sure if the just take NBA 3s or they dont see as well.
7 of 40 from 3 point land combined....
if these teams shot 40% like they normally would it'd be a good over.
the pace is incredible. maybe 80 shots per team. but they cant hit the ocean. seems to happen to unfamiliar teams in the Garden. not sure if the just take NBA 3s or they dont see as well.
7 of 40 from 3 point land combined....
if these teams shot 40% like they normally would it'd be a good over.
Game sees 80+ possessions (fastest paced game for Stanford this season), but unfortunately both teams shoot under 37% for the game and missed a combined 86 shots
Game sees 80+ possessions (fastest paced game for Stanford this season), but unfortunately both teams shoot under 37% for the game and missed a combined 86 shots
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.