NBA over/under win totals
 

Just out on sportbook, so they are -115 on the over or under. Any thoughts, leans?

Atlanta Hawks 38.5
Washington Wizards 39.5
Charlotte BobCats 35.5
Chicago Bulls 50.5
Cleveland 49.5
Dallas Mavericks 56.5
Denver Nuggets 48.5
Detroit Pistons 50.5
Golden State Warriors 42.5
Houston Rockets 53.5
Indiana Pacers 30.5
Los Angeles Clippers 30.5
Los Angeles Lakers 44.5
Memphis Grizzlies 32.5
Miami Heat 46.5
Milwaukee Bucks 35.5
Minnesota T-Wolves 19.5
New Jersey Nets 43.5
New Orleans Hornets O 37.5
New York Knicks Over 37.5
Orlando Magic 47.5
Philadelphia 76ers 32.5
Phoenix Suns 55.5
Portland Blazers 30.5
Sacramento Kings 34.5
San Antonio Spurs 54.5
Seattle Sonics 27.5
Toronto Raptors 41.5
Utah Jazz 47.5
Boston Celtics 50.5

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Portland over. Seattle over. Philadelphia over.
Lakers under. Boston under. Sacramento under.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Wow, thanks for listing 6 teams. Don't be afraid to explain why.

My thoughts:

NJ over. Tons of injuries last year, back and healthy, can make easy single-digit improvement. Kidd, Carter, Jeff, Kristic plus a better big in Magloire.

Chi over. How can the number be this low? All returning, Wallace can only be better, and they won't start as badly as they did last season.

Mem under. It's a year too early, no one realizes just how erratic Gay, Swift, Warrick and Miller are until you're forced to watch them daily. They have 3 point guards, Conley is currently the least talented, but will have to play the most.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Wow. I didn't realize anyone cared.

Lakers under has equity because of a greater than 0% possibility that Kobe Bryant gets traded. Brown and Odom both banged up, a trade would totally reform the team, over .500 at that point would be an unlikely scenario.

Boston under because over 50 wins is a tall order for a team that is totally revamped. Granted, they have a few stars, now, but traded away all their depth, and any prolonged injuries to one or more of the big three makes them very unlikely to reach 51 wins.

Sacramento has not done anything to improve except change coaches, Miller, Artest, Bibby one year older, young core of Douby, Martin and Garcia not enough to improve this record. Hawes too young to provide much needed muscle, didn't improve on their crappy shooting. 34.5 too high. SAC 16-25 last half of last year.

Portland over. Portland going in the opposite direction as SAC. bad body language of Randolph, who is gone, with Frye and Blake filling needs. They can only go up, even without Oden. Portland 15-25 last half of lst year, but I believe have significantly improved.

Philadelphia over 32.5. Reggie Evans is exactly what this team needed. They were so soft. Adding 7'0 banger Jason Smith will help marginally, ultimately he will start grabbing time from Dalembert, another softy. Miller solid, young talented group of Lou Williams, Smith and Rodney Carney ready to step up. Freak Thaddeus Young won't be a factor yet, too young. PHI was 24-17 last half of last year, now they are adding muscle. 32.5 waaay too low, should be about 41.

Seattle over 27.5. What they did lat year means nothign, since this team is totally new. Ridnour and Collison a year better and Durant and Green are not just your average rookies. Durant has LeBron potential and I think can make an impact immediately. I also think they benefit from a slightly weaker West, as will Portland, and I think the 27.5 is a number that is very attractive. I consider them better than SAC, probably around 32 wins, maybe 34. Really with this bet, I am betting that Durant is more than your average rookie.

I agree with you on NJ, by the way.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

I really like the NJ over if Kristic has fully recovered and Richard Jefferson is also completely healthy. Kidd looked awesome in the FIBA's and we all know what Carter can do. Sean Williams and Magliore are nice additions to the team as well. Not to mention I really like L. Frank as a coach.

The cons on it are the divison looks improved this year. Celtics are a title contender, LDO, as well as the Knicks getting Randolph. Raptors proved to be a good team last year and then there is the 6'ers which I feel Allah_In gave a better insight than I could.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

30 Teams x 82 Games each, divide by 2 Teams per game = 1230 games in a season.

Sum of all the O/U wins listed = 1519.5 games.


There has to be value on selecting unders.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Good looking out. We are an over-betting public, some things never change.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
30 Teams x 82 Games each, divide by 2 Teams per game = 1230 games in a season.

Sum of all the O/U wins listed = 1245 games.


There has to be value on selecting unders.

[/ QUOTE ]

You missed the decimal place on the Sonics.

I just feel like being nitty today since I don't wanna poker and there are no games [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Oops, my bad. It was actually the LA Clippers where I missed the decimal place.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

someone has to keep people in line

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
Portland over. Seattle over. Philadelphia over.
Lakers under. Boston under. Sacramento under.

[/ QUOTE ]

im w you except boston, that team is really unprecented so its hard to predict that one. sacramento isnt bad but not good. w a healthy artest and miller theyre not a bad team.

i do think the miami line is high. its only training camp and their team is already hurting.

lakers is def high also.

i like sixers but losing joe smith and stevenhunter is going to hurt them much more than most ppl believe unless reggie evans steps up.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

especially hunter

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
especially hunter

[/ QUOTE ]

i really think hunter is a bench player but for some reason phillys interior d got a lot better when he played w dalembert. nad losing joe smith takes away their only post scorer. thats kind of scary calling j smith a post scorer

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

I don't know much but Boston UNDER and Toronto OVER look really tempting to me ... will need to think some more on this.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

noone here thinks that the miami is too high?
thats one ricketedy team

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

I think they are a little high, but they wouldn't be in my top picks. If they were in the West, I would agree.

If you get a healthy DWade and Shaq, Smush Parker, Haslem, Walker, that's a team that could make a decent run in a still very weak conference.

By the way, if Tony is short for Anthony, is phony short for Anfernee?

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know much but Boston UNDER and Toronto OVER look really tempting to me ... will need to think some more on this.

[/ QUOTE ]

holla

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

yeah I'm not seeing any reason why Toronto would be that low, either. 28-13 last half of last year. Same team except for Peterson. Now it's coming back to me, they really disappointed me in the playoffs. But they were really hot at the end of the regular season.

As long as that's the ONLY over you bet this year on Toronto, you should be ok [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
especially hunter

[/ QUOTE ]

i really think hunter is a bench player but for some reason phillys interior d got a lot better when he played w dalembert. nad losing joe smith takes away their only post scorer. thats kind of scary calling j smith a post scorer

[/ QUOTE ]

If Hunter got 25% of the calls a reg player got, he'd be written up in SI and ESPN, he's turned into a great low-post defender. Refs just kill him.

PHL line looks right to me, maybe a touch low but <5%.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

I think the over 53.5 on houston is a lock

They won 52 last year with HUGE yao + tmac injuries plus their roster is much much improved any way you look at it this year.

Edits:

- I also like the over on the hornets. Chris Paul is legit and will lead the team from a disappointing season last year to improvement

- The under looks good on the Magic. They don't have anybody with any kind of real offensive game, no way they win 40+ when their main source of scoring is howard rebound putbacks

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Johnd - I am semi-with you on Houston. They have one hell of a talented team. The only issues are 1) will Yao and T-Mac stay healthy (T-Mac finally did for once) and 2) How will Steve Francis and Mike James do in sharing the ball. Those are two me-first PGs with big heads. Could hurt a lot of team chemistry, which is what got Houston where it went last year. They didn't have near the talent they have this year, but they all knew their role and did their role well.

I think Atlanta is an UNDER. They are listed at 9 wins higher than they had last year. I do not think Horford and Law IV are worth 9 extra wins. They are also the #9 team in the East in terms of projected wins for the over/under and I don't think they should be there yet. Maybe in 2 years.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

the problem with Houston is 53.5 is a really large number, especially considering the teams they play day in and day out

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Some words of caution before making these season long wagers:

There is a slight over-bias in these numbers as the average # of wins per team is 41.5 (should be 41). This should make you more likely to take an Under.

One thing you guys should also consider before wagering is regression to the mean from season to season. A typical team will move closer to .500 from one season to the next, this is a given.

So, in order to make a play on an over above 41 wins, hopefully you will have some real strong evidence of improvement for that team. Especially if they won 41 or less games last year.

Also, you are tying up money for a long time, it is often better used during the season.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]

One thing you guys should also consider before wagering is regression to the mean from season to season. A typical team will move closer to .500 from one season to the next, this is a given.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is one major problem with your rationale. Each team is not created equal (or 'typical' as you said) so the "mean" for a certain team is not 41 wins. There is no way you can look at the Wolves and look at the Mavs and say that each teams expected win total is the same. If you played out 1000 seasons with these exact two teams as they are set up right now they would not go .500. They WOULD revert to a certain number, but that number would be different for the two teams and it would be that team's expected win total. Not the average win total for the league.


There are different players, different coaches and different front offices. Some are good and competent, others aren't. If all of these things were the same then yes you would make a very good point.

Your argument is more or less the same as saying that Mike Cameron and Ichiro Suzuki will end up with the same batting average over their careers because the mean BA for the league is .270 (or somewhere around there) and only random chance will keep that from happening.

There are reasons why the same teams, people, companies lead categories year in and year out and isn't attributed to luck (which is what you are suggesting if everyone and everything should average out to the same).

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

One thing you guys should also consider before wagering is regression to the mean from season to season. A typical team will move closer to .500 from one season to the next, this is a given.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is one major problem with your rationale. Each team is not created equal (or 'typical' as you said) so the "mean" for a certain team is not 41 wins. There is no way you can look at the Wolves and look at the Mavs and say that each teams expected win total is the same. If you played out 1000 seasons with these exact two teams as they are set up right now they would not go .500. They WOULD revert to a certain number, but that number would be different for the two teams and it would be that team's expected win total. Not the average win total for the league.


There are different players, different coaches and different front offices. Some are good and competent, others aren't. If all of these things were the same then yes you would make a very good point.

Your argument is more or less the same as saying that Mike Cameron and Ichiro Suzuki will end up with the same batting average over their careers because the mean BA for the league is .270 (or somewhere around there) and only random chance will keep that from happening.

There are reasons why the same teams, people, companies lead categories year in and year out and isn't attributed to luck (which is what you are suggesting if everyone and everything should average out to the same).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misunderstood what I said, I said that a typical team will move towards .500. This is simple and inevitable. It has nothing to do with any teams in particular, just that in any given year, there will be more teams that move towards .500 then there are teams that move away from .500.

So, try and have a real strong data if you are picking a team to have more wins then last year and above 41 wins. Also, the same thing goes for unders where you expect a team to lose more then last year and below 41 wins.

A simple way of understanding what I am saying, is that there is a push towards mediocrity in sports that acts like gravity, bringing the good teams down and the bad teams up from year to year. There are teams that sometimes buck this trend, but the push does exist.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
Johnd - I am semi-with you on Houston. They have one hell of a talented team. The only issues are 1) will Yao and T-Mac stay healthy (T-Mac finally did for once) and 2) How will Steve Francis and Mike James do in sharing the ball. Those are two me-first PGs with big heads. Could hurt a lot of team chemistry, which is what got Houston where it went last year. They didn't have near the talent they have this year, but they all knew their role and did their role well.

I think Atlanta is an UNDER. They are listed at 9 wins higher than they had last year. I do not think Horford and Law IV are worth 9 extra wins. They are also the #9 team in the East in terms of projected wins for the over/under and I don't think they should be there yet. Maybe in 2 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

def agree w u there.
atlanta is in the east but still v inexperienced

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

One thing you guys should also consider before wagering is regression to the mean from season to season. A typical team will move closer to .500 from one season to the next, this is a given.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is one major problem with your rationale. Each team is not created equal (or 'typical' as you said) so the "mean" for a certain team is not 41 wins. There is no way you can look at the Wolves and look at the Mavs and say that each teams expected win total is the same. If you played out 1000 seasons with these exact two teams as they are set up right now they would not go .500. They WOULD revert to a certain number, but that number would be different for the two teams and it would be that team's expected win total. Not the average win total for the league.


There are different players, different coaches and different front offices. Some are good and competent, others aren't. If all of these things were the same then yes you would make a very good point.

Your argument is more or less the same as saying that Mike Cameron and Ichiro Suzuki will end up with the same batting average over their careers because the mean BA for the league is .270 (or somewhere around there) and only random chance will keep that from happening.

There are reasons why the same teams, people, companies lead categories year in and year out and isn't attributed to luck (which is what you are suggesting if everyone and everything should average out to the same).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misunderstood what I said, I said that a typical team will move towards .500. This is simple and inevitable. It has nothing to do with any teams in particular, just that in any given year, there will be more teams that move towards .500 then there are teams that move away from .500.

So, try and have a real strong data if you are picking a team to have more wins then last year and above 41 wins. Also, the same thing goes for unders where you expect a team to lose more then last year and below 41 wins.

A simple way of understanding what I am saying, is that there is a push towards mediocrity in sports that acts like gravity, bringing the good teams down and the bad teams up from year to year. There are teams that sometimes buck this trend, but the push does exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I now understand what you meant and I can see your point.

It does turn out that about 1/3 of the teams from the past 5 years do not move IN THE DIRECTION OF (not necessarily closer to) .500 (I mean not necessarily closer in that a team could have been 40-42 and then the next year they are 45-37). I only went on win totals. It would be over 1/3 (by another 2 or 3 teams a year from 11 teams a year to about 13 teams a year) of teams if I went by actual distance from .500.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

The only line I've played so far is Toronto over 41.5. I'm eying Phoenix under as well.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

I havn't read any of the thread yet. I'll give my initial reactions first then think it over more as I read through the thread.



Washington Wizards 39.5: I'll give a disclaimer that I'm a Wizards homer. With that said, this is the very first line that jumped out at me as exploitable. In 04-05 the Wizards won 45 games. In 05-06 they won 42 games. Last year it looked like they had finally started to put it all together. In late January they found themselves in 2nd place in the entire East, only Detroit ahead of them. Detroit was on a roll- they had just added Chris Webber and won something like 9 out of 11 games- the two losses? Both to Washington. It legitimately looked like Washington was making a run at the #1 overall seed! Gilbert Arenas was getting legit MVP consideration, Caron Butler had raised his game to a new All Star level, and optimism was high. That all ended when Butler and Arenas went down with injuries. Washington lost 15 of its last 20 games. Even still...they finished with 41 wins. How on earth are they only predicted to get 39.5 wins now? I guess their division is a bit tougher with R Lewis going to Orlando and J Rich to Charlotte...but still. I think this is the best line on the board, and those of you who follow my NFL picks know that I'm not a blind homer(have only picked the Redskins once this entire year and it was a winner). Also Jamison is playing for one last big contract, which can only help his efforts imo.

Detroit 50.5: I can make a legitimate argument for well more than 1/2 the teams in the East that they've improved their teams from last year, both through added playing and having young talent that should only get better. I can't do that for Detroit. This team won 64 games 2 years ago and slipped to 53 last year. They lose Chris Webber, and while you may mock him he helped fill the void of Ben Wallace a lot. Rasheed Wallace and Antonio McDyess are a very old frontcourt that isn't nearly as intimidating defensively as the Pistons of a few years ago. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they finished in 3rd place in their division. I'd take the under.

Memphis 32.5: Everything that could go wrong went wrong with them last year. Two years ago they won 49 games. Conley is obviously a question mark, but Rudy Gay is showing tons of improvement and last year was good for Mike Miller to get some experience as a go to guy...he'll find things a lot easier this year with Gasol back to draw double teams. Adding Juan Carlos Navarro was a great move imo. He is experienced with good international competition. Darko will fit in well here...hes still supremely talented. PG Stoudamire/Conley, SG Miller/Navarro, SF Gay, PF Milicic/Warrick, C Gasol/Swift....thats a very solid and deep lineup. I wouldn't be surprised to see Memphis crush this line.

Utah Jazz 47.5: Remember Elton Brand 2 years ago when he put up career highs seemingly out of nowhere? And remember how he regressed last year? Same exact thing will happen to Carlos Boozer imo. The Jazz are a bit overrated becuase everything seemed to go perfectly for them last year and they had an easy road to the WCF so they are fresh in people's minds. I still think they'll get into the playoffs, but with Denver, Houston, and Golden State among others looking improved I think they'll be the 7th or 8th seed. Take the under.

L.A. Clippers 30.5: This team got bad in a hurry. Brand and Livingston are out. Sam Cassell really started to show his age last season(he'll be 38 in a month). Corey Magette is their best player. Thats not a good thing. Under under under!

Toronto 41.5: I think this team is really underrated....maybe its because they have so many foreign players that people don't know well. But I really like the foundation of Bosh/Bargnani...big men aren't easy to come by in this league. Ford/Calderon provide a solid PG duo. Adding Kapono really lets them space the floor. They won 47 last year...could it have been a one year fluke? Perhaps, but I still think theres good value in this line.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
30 Teams x 82 Games each, divide by 2 Teams per game = 1230 games in a season.

Sum of all the O/U wins listed = 1519.5 games.


There has to be value on selecting unders.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, great point. Very interesting too imo. Could one actually beat the -115 line by taking all the unders?

Edit: Nevermind I guess.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think they are a little high, but they wouldn't be in my top picks. If they were in the West, I would agree.

If you get a healthy DWade and Shaq, Smush Parker, Haslem, Walker, that's a team that could make a decent run in a still very weak conference.

By the way, if Tony is short for Anthony, is phony short for Anfernee?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know its preseason where tons of players get overhyped, but word is that Jason Williams is in the best shape of his career and looking great. This team really could go either way imo...I'd stay clear of this line.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]


- The under looks good on the Magic. They don't have anybody with any kind of real offensive game, no way they win 40+ when their main source of scoring is howard rebound putbacks

[/ QUOTE ]

Rashard Lewis?

I think you're underestimating them a bit. I actually expected the line to be lower though. Dwight Howard is still learning and improving...for God's sake hes only 21 years old still! I also think that Reddick will actually silence his critics a bit this year....nothing phenomenal but with defenses having to key on Howard and Lewis he'll get his share of open looks.

This team started great last year and faded like young teams are prone to do. Not sure if that'll happen this year.


Meh....actually I do think the line is a bit high now that I think about it more. I'd still stay away, but yeah if I had to choose a side I'd agree with you....oh well, already wrote this whole thing- might as well leave it.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Great call on Memphis, barring major injuries you are right and I can see them crushing this line.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
Johnd - I am semi-with you on Houston. They have one hell of a talented team. The only issues are 1) will Yao and T-Mac stay healthy (T-Mac finally did for once) and 2) How will Steve Francis and Mike James do in sharing the ball. Those are two me-first PGs with big heads. Could hurt a lot of team chemistry, which is what got Houston where it went last year. They didn't have near the talent they have this year, but they all knew their role and did their role well.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think that T-Mac will have the ball in his hands the majority of the time across the half way line so it shouldn't be too much of a problem. I think this is almost the safest lock of the entire list.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

safest is to lock, like (blank) is to Women?

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think the over 53.5 on houston is a lock

They won 52 last year with HUGE yao + tmac injuries plus their roster is much much improved any way you look at it this year.

houston will def be good but i dont see it as a lock. im sure there will be some adjustments coming from van ugndys
grind it out style to adelmans more open way of running offense. and houston still has a pg question. francis is def not the answer.

Edits:

- I also like the over on the hornets. Chris Paul is legit and will lead the team from a disappointing season last year to improvement

- The under looks good on the Magic. They don't have anybody with any kind of real offensive game, no way they win 40+ when their main source of scoring is howard rebound putbacks

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

i think toronto is the best of the bunch.
they are a v deep team.
i was thinking it would be maybe 45ish. 41.5 seems like great value to me. would be shocking to see them as
sub .500 team
i also think the atl seems a little high.
finally having a half decent pf in horford will help
but not sure its enough.
there are some others but need to thinkbout those more...

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

- Rashard lewis is greatly overrated imo, he put up decent scoring #s while on a lottery team. max contract? gg.

- The job of the houston pg is to dribble across half court and pass the ball to tmac. They don't need steve nash back there. Francis isnt the truth and probably will not be starting, just a good energy off the bench guy. They also have mike james, who is solid and not as much of a ballhog as some people think. And Rafer Alston is perfectly capable of dribbling the ball, so he will do fine too.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

what do you guys think off dallas? it would be pretty shocking imo if they won less than 57.

They are bringing back the exact same team that won 67, even while coasting the last 10 games of the season.

I guess you could argue that they will be mentally beaten down this year, or that they realize the reg season doesnt matter so they'll tone it down. But I really don't think avery will allow that to happen.

Also, if they get the Kobe trade, all bets are off.

Re: NBA over/under win totals
 

Lewis shot 39% from 3pt range and 50.5% from 2pt last year. He hits over 84% of his FTs. He rebounds well for his position. His turnovers are low for a guy that handles the ball a decent amount. Honestly I don't get to watch him a ton, but his numbers looked very good imo. What exactly don't you like about him?