What's new

over/under jazz wins- 25.5

Betting on things you have an emotional attachment is for fools.

Nah, I've won a lot more money than I've lost betting for/against the Jazz. Knowing what side of the spread they're going to land on is like a sixth sense.
 
Sometimes fools win.

I don't gamble because I've looked at the size of the casinos and it's pretty clear who is winning this game.

Sports betting is quite a bit different animal than your average casino games. The line makers adjust the odds to assure the rake will come in. This opens the door for gaming the system, which attracts a lot of very smart people doing very smart things trying to gain an advantage. The question is if you are smarter than a whole lot of money behind finding out and destroying your advantage. Most don't have more than a fool's chance, even though a few key opportunities spring up every year. Find QSH's thread last year for a prime example. I think it was CHA on the over, I don't recall exactly.
 
Last year I was 1 game off from my pre-season prediction. If Trey hadn't have nailed that buzzer beater against Orlando then I would have been spot on. The three not only knocked out my perfect prediction, but also it was the difference between us getting more ping pong balls and being able to move up to third where we could have drafted the Marsupial Marvel! Oh wait...

I look forward to some pre-season games, but if the youth movement hasn't really improved (and frankly Hayward didn't show me ANYTHING at the US men's national team games he played in) then I wouldn't be that shocked if they won less than 25 games. Either way, I wouldn't bet on it until after pre-season when I can consider any growth that they do with Quin.
 
Frank give me $50 bucks I'm heading to Vegas next week, me being the mediator takes the emotion out of it!!!
 
Interesting. So in other words, the odds makers believe the loss of Marvin and Jefferson and the addition of a better coach equals a net zero change in wins.
 
Interesting. So in other words, the odds makers believe the loss of Marvin and Jefferson and the addition of a better coach equals a net zero change in wins.

Guess the oddsmakers also believe Hayward will have another terrible shooting year and Exum will be about equal to Tinsley/Garrett playing behind Burke. Also, if you follow Hollinger's PER rankings, Booker was much better than Marvin and Novak was about equal to Jefferson.

And, of course, no internal improvement from Gobert, Burke, etc.

If I were a betting man, I'd definitely take the over.
 
Guess the oddsmakers also believe Hayward will have another terrible shooting year

Career shooting pct:

2010-2011: .485
2011-2012: .456
2012-2013: .435
2013-2014: .413

and Exum will be about equal to Tinsley/Garrett playing behind Burke. Also, if you follow Hollinger's PER rankings, Booker was much better than Marvin and Novak was about equal to Jefferson.

All we know about Exum is what we saw in the summer league (since he didn't play at the world championships). He shot .308 FG, .167 3P, and .647 FT. His assist-to-turnover ratio was less than 1. It is hardly inconceivable he is worse than Tinsley/Garrett this season.

You are going to put money on Booker and Novak... really?

And, of course, no internal improvement from Gobert, Burke, etc.

The only Jazz player who improved over the past 2 years is Burks. The other young guys: Hayward, Favors, Kanter, Evans all flatlined.

If I were a betting man, I'd definitely take the over.

Probably a good thing you aren't.
 
I am not a big sports better. Really gambling at all besides blackjack, where I do pretty well. So if I were to drop $50 or so on this and take the over and win, how does that pay out? Is it even money or are there some kind of odds that drive it up or down from there?
 
Back
Top