NBA 2011-2012 Thread - Page 47

How much did you lose on the game RaiNKhAN?

I won spurs 1st quarter. I lost an 11:1 future on spurs i made in the middle of the season which was obviously massively bigger than what I had on game 6

On June 06 2012 22:43 RaiNKhAN wrote: apparently it's not hip to allow the better team in the finals. can we bank on mia winning 2 in a row? lol... okc 25-31, spurs 14-18 (freethrow stats) 4th q: okc 12 attempts (14 if u count hardens last 2, but i wont b/c it was an intentional foul) and spurs 7 attempts. when joey crawford is summoned for an elimination game you can bet your ass something fucked up will happen. I mean it seems clear as day to me that boston will now beat miami but after what I saw tonight looks like NBA is in demand of OKC/MIA finals. I was wrong about it: I thought the league was in favor of rematches like lakers/boston finals and dallas/miami finals. Someone above said okc/mia would be better ratings and they were right. Nice call

Ur level of conspiracy thinking is mind boggling...the number 3 team in the league consisting of young athletic players, who was most peoples pick to come out of the west this year managed to beat the number 1 team (separated by a distance of 3 games in the regular season) which is made up of a far older line up who eventually would tire out due to age...the only reason the spurs were even favored to win this series is because they played the last dozen games of the regular season and opening 2 playoff series so phenomenally. Once the Thunder beat them by 20 points in game 3 the spurs never played the same.

On June 06 2012 23:08 palak wrote: Show nested quote + On June 06 2012 22:43 RaiNKhAN wrote: apparently it's not hip to allow the better team in the finals. can we bank on mia winning 2 in a row? lol... okc 25-31, spurs 14-18 (freethrow stats) 4th q: okc 12 attempts (14 if u count hardens last 2, but i wont b/c it was an intentional foul) and spurs 7 attempts. when joey crawford is summoned for an elimination game you can bet your ass something fucked up will happen. I mean it seems clear as day to me that boston will now beat miami but after what I saw tonight looks like NBA is in demand of OKC/MIA finals. I was wrong about it: I thought the league was in favor of rematches like lakers/boston finals and dallas/miami finals. Someone above said okc/mia would be better ratings and they were right. Nice call Ur level of conspiracy thinking is mind boggling...the number 3 team in the league consisting of young athletic players, who was most peoples pick to come out of the west this year managed to beat the number 1 team (separated by a distance of 3 games in the regular season) which is made up of a far older line up who eventually would tire out due to age...the only reason the spurs were even favored to win this series is because they played the last dozen games of the regular season and opening 2 playoff series so phenomenally. Once the Thunder beat them by 20 points in game 3 the spurs never played the same.

no.

the spurs were favored because of home court

thunder avg star age 23
Spurs avg star age 32.
The roughly 4 pt home court advantage goes away come conference finals time. I thought the Spurs could hold on long enough to take out the Thunder in 5 and get some rest before the finals. After game 4 though the Spurs went going to be able to muster enough energy to win 2 out of 3 vs the thunder

On June 06 2012 23:33 palak wrote: thunder avg star age 23 Spurs avg star age 32. The roughly 4 pt home court advantage goes away come conference finals time. I thought the Spurs could hold on long enough to take out the Thunder in 5 and get some rest before the finals. After game 4 though the Spurs went going to be able to muster enough energy to win 2 out of 3 vs the thunder

thunder and spurs are just about equal in the eyes of the books. spurs -5 home, okc -4.5 to -5 home. spurs one extra home game = -5/-200 to -220 moneyline. this league disgusts me. 10 fouls in the 4th quarter in a one possession game with the second most controversial ref in the game. lesson learned and good luck thunder but you are drinking nba-kool aid if you think this was legit

NBA is the easily most rigged sport in all of pro sports and they also have the dirtiest commissioner of all the pro sports running the show. I'd never bet on an NBA game. I don't care if its the 2012 Bobcats versus the '96 Bulls.

Or there is the notion that the nba has occasional rigging.by outside sources influencing refs. The concept that there is a top down system in place to rig the games in order to generate higher ratings is ridiculous and doesn't hold up to any type of objective scrutiny at all.

plus from a league viewpoint the series ending like it did is suboptimal. Thunder should have lost game 5 or 6 in order to ensure a game 7. Y bother rigging this game only in the 4th to cost urself a highly anticipated game 7? The 4 point home advantage I was talking about has.nothing to do with booking, it was the advantage a statistical analysis if multiple NBA seasons.came up with, home team has a 3.8 pt edge. ( study by Dylan small in 07)

On June 07 2012 06:24 palak wrote: Or there is the notion that the nba has occasional rigging.by outside sources influencing refs. The concept that there is a top down system in place to rig the games in order to generate higher ratings is ridiculous and doesn't hold up to any type of objective scrutiny at all. plus from a league viewpoint the series ending like it did is suboptimal. Thunder should have lost game 5 or 6 in order to ensure a game 7. Y bother rigging this game only in the 4th to cost urself a highly anticipated game 7? The 4 point home advantage I was talking about has.nothing to do with booking, it was the advantage a statistical analysis if multiple NBA seasons.came up with, home team has a 3.8 pt edge. ( study by Dylan small in 07)

I don't believe I can carry this out any further. It's my conclusion that you have never bet on sports before and don't understand just how insane the influence of a referee can be in a basketball game. You are citing and bringing up everything that someone who would produce the easy counter-argument to. How do you explain ten fouls in the fourth quarter? How do you explain offensive foul on every single spurs possession that would certainly turn the tide of the game? The next thing to follow is "Well, why do you bet on it then?" to which I will reply: good point.

I hope to God that the Celtics win today and that I am completely wrong about all of this. The NBA isn't 100% rigged but fucked up shit happens just often enough to make everyone scratch their heads. I think it is definitely the easy road to take when someone approaches me with your side of the argument because none of this bullshit has been brought up in the light often enough. Who the fuck would risk a mega-million dollar contract to embark on a journey of leprosy when trying to out the conspiracies and the match-altering during playoff contests. Do you really believe that because this hasn't been pointed out as 100% fact that it makes them completely void of any guilt? A billion dollar industry is going to protect its investment. Why do the refs hand out technicals for disagreeing with calls? You make a gigantic rule book about how a game is to be called/ref'ed but when they clearly just botch the entire game a person is now slapped with a $5000 fine for speaking out against the call. Why bother? I might become an MLB fan after what I witnessed last night. At least there the worst thing is that an umpire will widen or shorten his strike zone but at the end of the day the batter has to hit the ball and the umpires aren't that bad at their job. It's no coincidence that home field means shit in MLB/NHL but it means the world in NBA/NFL.

Never bet on sports. I did play basketball and baseball til junior yr of high school. I know very well how much refs affect a game. I'm not saying all games are fair since its been clear that there have been cases of rigging. What I'm saying is that the league is not some all mighty organization fixing the outcomes. To many clear inconsistenciess come from that idea, e.g. the Mavs sweeping the Lakers last year, or Celtics sweeping the Knicks when ppl claiming the league was rigged always say "o the NBA never let's a series go below 5 games." Both are instances of a big market team going down in 4 games. Also people that follow the MLB have the same "o it's rigged" group of fans too, umps can do much more than widening the strike zone: foul vs fair, favoriting on tag calls. Home advantage does effect refs and refs have the largest effect on NBA games on a night-night basis, but the home advantage of 60%, and 57% in the.NBA and NFL respectively isn't exactly large compared to the NHL and MLB, 55 and 53% respectively. MLS actually has the largest home advantage at 69%, I think we can agree it's doubtful anyone in America gives enough fucks bout the MLS to rig those games that much.

Edit: The Spurs shot 32.5% from the field in the second half, the Thunder shot 57.6%. Going into the 4th the Thunder were down 1, the spurs were 0-6 from 3 in the 4th and only 6-18 from the field. The Thunder would have beaten the Spurs with the 4th quarter field goal stats even without the free throw advantage. The first 3 quarter the thunder had a slim 1, 2, 3 fta advantage, not a big deal.

At least there the worst thing is that an umpire will widen or shorten his strike zone but at the end of the day the batter has to hit the ball and the umpires aren't that bad at their job.

On June 06 2012 22:43 RaiNKhAN wrote: apparently it's not hip to allow the better team in the finals. can we bank on mia winning 2 in a row? lol... okc 25-31, spurs 14-18 (freethrow stats) 4th q: okc 12 attempts (14 if u count hardens last 2, but i wont b/c it was an intentional foul) and spurs 7 attempts. when joey crawford is summoned for an elimination game you can bet your ass something fucked up will happen. I mean it seems clear as day to me that boston will now beat miami but after what I saw tonight looks like NBA is in demand of OKC/MIA finals. I was wrong about it: I thought the league was in favor of rematches like lakers/boston finals and dallas/miami finals. Someone above said okc/mia would be better ratings and they were right. Nice call

spurs intentionally fouling last 2 min tho lol

after watching the OKC vs Spurs game, i can't help but feel sorry for lebron / wade. Durant and Westbrook have a lot much freedom (can add kobe in there too), they can take a shot from anywhere at any time, miss 5-6x in a row, and no1 minds, the crowd still loves them. There's SOO much pressure / scrutiny on the heat - James/wade very often pass up on wide open long range shots / theres so much hesitation when they actually do shoot them. The level of freedom isn't there like it was before the big moves last year, probably has a lot to do with why wade had such a poor season. FG %'s are up, but happiness looks like its an all time low.

I think there is a similar dilema in poker, you can play 16+ tables and make optimal RB + winrate $$/hour and hate the game, or you can play a lot less tables, make a little less hourly, but have way bigger winrate and happiness - which I think is often overlooked and is super critical to being successful and maintaining success in the long run

Anytime I feel bad for LeBron I remember this

What palak said.

On June 03 2012 12:52 Stat.Quo wrote: after the spurs won the first two games, i made a 6:1 bet with a friend, 50$ for 300$, lets goo okc!!!

what a win

now bet on boston plz

cmon celtics do it for basketball , do it for captain america :D

On June 07 2012 08:03 palak wrote: Edit: The Spurs shot 32.5% from the field in the second half, the Thunder shot 57.6%. Going into the 4th the Thunder were down 1, the spurs were 0-6 from 3 in the 4th and only 6-18 from the field. The Thunder would have beaten the Spurs with the 4th quarter field goal stats even without the free throw advantage. The first 3 quarter the thunder had a slim 1, 2, 3 fta advantage, not a big deal.

This only adds to khan's point about refs not calling fouls. If refs had been calling fouls evenly, the stats you're pointing out would be completely different. You rarely shoot 33% from the field in the 4th quarter if you receive 10+ more free throws than your opposing team.
Also, I played basketball up until my sophomore year of high school and if I thought that equaled credentials in terms of understanding NBA refereeing, I would consider myself a moron...just sayin. I know you're not one so I was a little baffled that you pointed that out.

^ pt was teams rarely shoot 33% period. The spurs were tired and missed open shots, plus the variance of god mode in the 1st half.caught up to them. Spurs 6-18 and 0-6, meanwhile thunder (who had 8 more fta than the spurs that quarter) came in down 1 and went 7-14 from the field and 2-3 from 3. Even counting the 4 extra shooting fouls as missed shots and taking away the free throws made the thunder would have shot 7-18 from the field 2-3 from 3 and gone 5-7 from the line giving them 21 points in the 4th vs the Spurs 18 meaning they'd still have won the game.

also if Bosh is healthy enough to play over 24 minutes I fail to see how the heat arnt favored or even odds on the Celtics. With Bosh out the heat r below .5 and the.Celtics have been struggling to beat them. Add in a healthy Bosh and the Heat r in good shape.

On June 07 2012 15:43 palak wrote: ^ pt was teams rarely shoot 33% period. The spurs were tied and missed open shots, plus the variance of god mode in the 1st half caught up to them. Spurs 6-18 and 0-6, meanwhile thunder (who had 8 more fta than the spurs that quarter) came in down 1 and went 7-14 from the field and 2-3 from 3. Even counting the 4 extra shooting fouls as missed shots and taking away the free throws made the thunder would have shot 7-18 from the field 2-3 from 3 and gone 5-7 from the line giving them 21 points in the 4th vs the Spurs 18 meaning they'd still have won the game.

Too bad variance doesn't work like that. If you're correct on variance, why didn't Dirk only tear it up for one half and then suck the second half of every playoff game last year?
And you're missing the entire point of how poorly SA shot. You can't just say take away OKC's free throws and say look the numbers still don't add up for SAS to have won. The game should have been an entirely different scenario and dynamic. Do you think the Spurs would have put up as many desperation shots in the last 1.5 minutes of the game if they were ahead 2 - 4 instead of down 5 - 8?