Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

someone talk to me about the total in this game. under looks solid to me. i am sure it moves up by tipoff especially at stupid books. the total is right where gs-dallas totals were, and that series was 4-2 under. i wish i had nba pacing ratings, but utah seems like a totally half court team. they will probably guard golden state much better on the three ball since they aren't skinny wimps like dallas who i think played zone at times. don't see how the warriors keep up their hot shooting in a new gym. under seems so obvious it has to be wrong.

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

I agree with all of your points except for using "high scoring game" as a reason to back the Jazz - wouldn't a high scoring game be coupled with a Warriors win?

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

Utah ML -165 SIA. U must be kidding me. Also good for the arb thread, but I don't arb.

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

Series line for the Jazz is now down to -130 at Bodog. I definitely think there is some value there.

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

[ QUOTE ]
i also took the over at 13.5 in total threes in the game

[/ QUOTE ]

I hit this too, good start so far

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with all of your points except for using "high scoring game" as a reason to back the Jazz - wouldn't a high scoring game be coupled with a Warriors win?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a reason why I think a high scoring game will benefit the better team. Think about this, if a random guy was to play against Jordan 1v1 for 1 basket, the random guy may win if he gets lucky, but if they play for 10 baskets, the effect of luck is minimized & it is more likely for Jordan to win. In a game with less offense, it is easier for a bad team to keep it close, thereby increasing their chance to win, that's the way I understand why underdogs win more often with the under and vice versa.

As for GS- they always play a fast game, but are they really the better team offensively? I use offensive rating to evaluate this, the numbers are 111.76 for Utah and 109.34 for GS, which suggests that Utah is the better team offensively.

That said, Utah is down by 3 at half time.

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with all of your points except for using "high scoring game" as a reason to back the Jazz - wouldn't a high scoring game be coupled with a Warriors win?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a reason why I think a high scoring game will benefit the better team. Think about this, if a random guy was to play against Jordan 1v1 for 1 basket, the random guy may win if he gets lucky, but if they play for 10 baskets, the effect of luck is minimized & it is more likely for Jordan to win. In a game with less offense, it is easier for a bad team to keep it close, thereby increasing their chance to win, that's the way I understand why underdogs win more often with the under and vice versa.

As for GS- they always play a fast game, but are they really the better team offensively? I use offensive rating to evaluate this, the numbers are 111.76 for Utah and 109.34 for GS, which suggests that Utah is the better team offensively.

That said, Utah is down by 3 at half time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice analogy

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

If you asked Don Nelson if his team had a better chance beating the Jazz in a high scoring game vs. a low scoring game he would take the high scoring game. If you asked Jerry Sloan, he would chose the low scoring game against the Warriors. In fact I would venture to guess that each coach's gameplan against the other team is designed to achieve these very things. The Jazz want to grind it out against a Warriors team who lives off of emotion, scoring, 3 pointers, and fast break points. So if the Warriors' gameplan goes as planned and Jerry Sloan's fails, don't the Warriors have a better chance of winning the game? These are two HOF coaches, should Nelly be trying to slow the game down because his team is the worst team of the two and he wants to keep the score down so they have a better chance of winning?

I don't think this issue is a matter of sample size, that analogy does not work here. If this were the case then why would the Jazz not try to run the Warriors out of the building? And to say that when there are more points scored the better team wins is kind of circular logic or defining a word using the word.

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

indeed, that logic might work for a game of horse (or poker) but when you're playing a time limit game where the effectiveness of both your offense and defense is heavily dependent on the pace you play at you can't just take the 55%^n etc.

Re: Jazz v Warriors Game 1
 

Does anyone know if Fisher will be back by game 2? Has anyone heard what his "personal problem" is?