MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: MU82 on November 16, 2021, 07:33:33 AM
-
Not to parrot the wades/BLM mantra that the next game is the biggest, but ...
This next game, Thursday in Charleston against Ole Miss, is huge.
First the obvious: Winning is always better than the alternative. But there's more. Ole Miss is ranked 30-some spots higher than us in kenpom, so it would be a chance to get a nice quality win on a neutral site. And then if we win we get to face another quality opponent, West Virginia, on Friday (assuming Huggy beats Elon). And that sets us up for a third quality opponent on Sunday. So beyond giving us a chance to win the event, which would be wonderful obviously, winning Thursday gives us a chance to really help our resume. Even a loss to WVU wouldn't be tragic, especially if we follow with a win in the third-place game.
But if we lose Thursday, that's a missed opportunity against a quality team ... plus it probably will make us have to play Elon instead of WVU in the second round -- and all that really gives us is a chance to suffer a bad loss.
A few years ago in our best season under Wojo, I remember thinking that the Louisville game in the pre-Thanksgiving event could set the tone for the entire season ... and that's exactly what it did. I have a similar feeling this time. Gotta beat Ole Miss!
We Are Marquette!
-
Enormous game. That's why I was saying we need to re-focus quickly after last night. We're going to have to find a way to rebound the ball much better moving forward. It has to be a total team effort, not just the guys up front. Box out, catch the ball and secure it. It's highly unusual to win when your opponent thoroughly dominates you on the glass. The mindset should be that it will not happen anymore. If we can punk Ole Miss we may get Huggy after a full day in Charleston. That means he could not be at his best with the assortment of high quality restaurants. :)
-
Yeah it’s definitely a big one.
Just the difference in schedule strength that will come with a win compared to a loss
Of course, assuming WVU wins.
-
Not to parrot the wades/BLM mantra that the next game is the biggest, but ...
This next game, Thursday in Charleston against Ole Miss, is huge.
First the obvious: Winning is always better than the alternative. But there's more. Ole Miss is ranked 30-some spots higher than us in kenpom, so it would be a chance to get a nice quality win on a neutral site. And then if we win we get to face another quality opponent, West Virginia, on Friday (assuming Huggy beats Elon). And that sets us up for a third quality opponent on Sunday. So beyond giving us a chance to win the event, which would be wonderful obviously, winning Thursday gives us a chance to really help our resume. Even a loss to WVU wouldn't be tragic, especially if we follow with a win in the third-place game.
But if we lose Thursday, that's a missed opportunity against a quality team ... plus it probably will make us have to play Elon instead of WVU in the second round -- and all that really gives us is a chance to suffer a bad loss.
A few years ago in our best season under Wojo, I remember thinking that the Louisville game in the pre-Thanksgiving event could set the tone for the entire season ... and that's exactly what it did. I have a similar feeling this time. Gotta beat Ole Miss!
We Are Marquette!
Put "the letter" in motion?
-
But if we lose Thursday, that's a missed opportunity against a quality team ... plus it probably will make us have to play Elon instead of WVU in the second round -- and all that really gives us is a chance to suffer a bad loss.
You have no idea. My son graduated from Elon...I cannot lose bragging rights. Don't want to even risk it. Beat Ole Miss!
-
Agreed 82. Big game coming up. Opportunity to get more good games on the schedule benefiting us with another quality win and experience against more Big East level competition.
-
I'm going to be the contrarian here. I want to beat Ole Miss, but I think it's far less must-win than it was last night. You want to keep the momentum and I'd really love to see WVU and the Bonnies (I love that matchup for us), but losing to Ole Miss won't be a bad loss and would likely put us in a good spot to come out of Charleston 2-1, which is a good outcome regardless of who ends up in those other games.
Last night totally had that found money feel, so going into Charleston now kind of feels like we're playing with house money.
-
I think everyone would agree we're going to have some ups and downs this year. However, avoiding the "bad loss" is important down the road. We also want to have as many quality win opportunities as possible. Getting a win Thurs would probably give us two more opportunities for solid wins.
BTW Wisconsin looked pretty awful last night. They were without their best player but that team has limited talent. And, as others pointed out, their constant complaining is infantile and totally inexcusable. We all know Flopison's nonsense, perhaps he wasn't hugged as a child. That's a game that should be in Milwaukee but we must take care of business and play with poise amidst what I suspect will be some dirty tactics.
-
I'm going to be the contrarian here. I want to beat Ole Miss, but I think it's far less must-win than it was last night. You want to keep the momentum and I'd really love to see WVU and the Bonnies (I love that matchup for us), but losing to Ole Miss won't be a bad loss and would likely put us in a good spot to come out of Charleston 2-1, which is a good outcome regardless of who ends up in those other games.
Last night totally had that found money feel, so going into Charleston now kind of feels like we're playing with house money.
Is there a way to calculate, today, what going 2-1 with wins over Ole Miss and, say, Clemson would mean vs. going 2-1 with wins over Elon and Boise State?
Otherwise, I just really want to win that tournament opener and not be relegated to the "loser's bracket" right out of the gate. If we lay an egg Thursday, it takes some shine off of beating Illinois. All IMHO of course.
-
I'm going to be the contrarian here. I want to beat Ole Miss, but I think it's far less must-win than it was last night. You want to keep the momentum and I'd really love to see WVU and the Bonnies (I love that matchup for us), but losing to Ole Miss won't be a bad loss and would likely put us in a good spot to come out of Charleston 2-1, which is a good outcome regardless of who ends up in those other games.
Last night totally had that found money feel, so going into Charleston now kind of feels like we're playing with house money.
Without knowing for sure who MU plays in Charleston...the concerning part is the Wisconsin (away), Kansas State (away), UCLA games prior to entering conference play. Two wins in Charleston is likely fine any way you want to cut it, but they are guaranteed four solid opponents prior to conference...would like to see 2 wins against those four. I'm guessing they will be dogs in all four of those games. Getting that UI win was such a big deal...
-
Is there a way to calculate, today, what going 2-1 with wins over Ole Miss and, say, Clemson would mean vs. going 2-1 with wins over Elon and Boise State?
Otherwise, I just really want to win that tournament opener and not be relegated to the "loser's bracket" right out of the gate. If we lay an egg Thursday, it takes some shine off of beating Illinois. All IMHO of course.
In years past, it would've meant more. I know people talk about Strength of Schedule, but it really doesn't matter the way it used to. What matters is margins. Either winning by more than you're expected to or losing by less than you should. Generally, it comes down to season results, so if you are performing 2-3 points per night better than your expected, you are going to put yourself in good position. If we beat Ole Miss and Clemson by 1 each and lose to WVU by 25, that's not great, whereas if we lose to Ole Miss by 1 and beat Elon by 30 and Boise by 15, we'll be moving up because we exceed expectations in all three games.
I think SOS is the last factor anyone looks at when it comes to the bracket, and only when there's a tie to be broken. In RPI, it was huge, but at the end of the day, no matter what the NCAA says, NET only cares about margins. When you win, win big, when you lose, lose small.
-
In years past, it would've meant more. I know people talk about Strength of Schedule, but it really doesn't matter the way it used to. What matters is margins. Either winning by more than you're expected to or losing by less than you should. Generally, it comes down to season results, so if you are performing 2-3 points per night better than your expected, you are going to put yourself in good position. If we beat Ole Miss and Clemson by 1 each and lose to WVU by 25, that's not great, whereas if we lose to Ole Miss by 1 and beat Elon by 30 and Boise by 15, we'll be moving up because we exceed expectations in all three games.
I think SOS is the last factor anyone looks at when it comes to the bracket, and only when there's a tie to be broken. In RPI, it was huge, but at the end of the day, no matter what the NCAA says, NET only cares about margins. When you win, win big, when you lose, lose small.
Frankly, to me, that's effed up. There shouldn't be an incentive to us running up the score against Elon or Duke beating Presbyterian by 70 instead of by 60. But it's good to have the info, brew, so thanks.
-
I think I’m most looking for them to come out and play hard against Ole Miss. As others have called out, in the last 7 years, we’d get a big win and come out the next game looking like we were hungover from celebrating.
With a young team, I won’t be super upset if we show a bit of a letdown. It is part of the learning process. However, if we come out with our hair on fire and look hungry to build on the Illinois win, I will be very encouraged. Even if we don’t end up winning.
-
First game outside of Fiserv. Defense travels. Will they be able to sustain the effort without the crowd?
-
Frankly, to me, that's effed up. There shouldn't be an incentive to us running up the score against Elon or Duke beating Presbyterian by 70 instead of by 60. But it's good to have the info, brew, so thanks.
I don't think that was the intention when they created it, especially as they talked about all the factors that went into NET. They also talked about limiting the scoring margin at a cap of 10, but it's an artificial cap because NET primarily operates on efficiency, so if you win a 70 possession game by a score of 90-50, the scoring cap is only a bonus added on to the efficiency margin of 1.29 points per possession on offense vs 0.71 points per possession on defense.
Ultimately, it's a far better metric than the RPI. I do think there should be a difference if Marquette beats Elon by 1 or 20, because past scoring margins are the most reliable predictor of future results, but I'm not sure there should be a difference between beating them by 30 or 40 if it's a game that's in your control the entire time.
The scoring cap actually became a scoring bonus that is added to your efficiency margin but the bonus caps at 10. What they should have done was create a regressive efficiency margin so as the margin grows, the impact of it lessens. That would mean you still are rewarded for the bigger margins, but the reward lessens the further up you go, so that 60 or 70 point win example would be negligible, but the difference between a 1 and 11 point win would be significant despite the same scoring margin change.
-
I don't think that was the intention when they created it, especially as they talked about all the factors that went into NET. They also talked about limiting the scoring margin at a cap of 10, but it's an artificial cap because NET primarily operates on efficiency, so if you win a 70 possession game by a score of 90-50, the scoring cap is only a bonus added on to the efficiency margin of 1.29 points per possession on offense vs 0.71 points per possession on defense.
Ultimately, it's a far better metric than the RPI. I do think there should be a difference if Marquette beats Elon by 1 or 20, because past scoring margins are the most reliable predictor of future results, but I'm not sure there should be a difference between beating them by 30 or 40 if it's a game that's in your control the entire time.
The scoring cap actually became a scoring bonus that is added to your efficiency margin but the bonus caps at 10. What they should have done was create a regressive efficiency margin so as the margin grows, the impact of it lessens. That would mean you still are rewarded for the bigger margins, but the reward lessens the further up you go, so that 60 or 70 point win example would be negligible, but the difference between a 1 and 11 point win would be significant despite the same scoring margin change.
Agreed. You're hired!
-
In years past, it would've meant more. I know people talk about Strength of Schedule, but it really doesn't matter the way it used to. What matters is margins. Either winning by more than you're expected to or losing by less than you should. Generally, it comes down to season results, so if you are performing 2-3 points per night better than your expected, you are going to put yourself in good position. If we beat Ole Miss and Clemson by 1 each and lose to WVU by 25, that's not great, whereas if we lose to Ole Miss by 1 and beat Elon by 30 and Boise by 15, we'll be moving up because we exceed expectations in all three games.
I think SOS is the last factor anyone looks at when it comes to the bracket, and only when there's a tie to be broken. In RPI, it was huge, but at the end of the day, no matter what the NCAA says, NET only cares about margins. When you win, win big, when you lose, lose small.
This is correct but supposedly the selection committee does value the Quadrants. Losing to Ole Miss likely guarantees a Q4 game and a Q2/Q3 game whereas a win likely guarantees two Q1/Q2 games. Means nothing if you lose those Q1/Q2 games but it at least gives you two opportunities for significant wins.
-
This is correct but supposedly the selection committee does value the Quadrants. Losing to Ole Miss likely guarantees a Q4 game and a Q2/Q3 game whereas a win likely guarantees two Q1/Q2 games. Means nothing if you lose those Q1/Q2 games but it at least gives you two opportunities for significant wins.
That's a good point. I'd definitely prefer 2-1 on the winning side of the bracket to 2-1 on the losing side, but I'm not sure once you get to the 2-1 losing vs 1-2 winning sides debate. The Quadrants for Charleston will all be neutral site. Here's the breakdown of where teams are expected currently if NET were to mimic kenpom and finish where teams are at now:
Quadrant 1 (1-50): #33 St. Bonaventure, #48 West Virginia
Quadrant 2 (51-100): #54 Ole Miss, #55 Clemson, #73 Boise State
Quadrant 3 (101-200): #109 Temple, #200 Elon
Quadrant 4 (201+): None
Clearly, a lot of those teams are very close to quadrants, but I think I'd prefer a Q2 loss to Ole Miss with a Q3 win over Elon and Q2 win over Boise to a Q2 win over Ole Miss followed by a Q1 loss to WVU and Q2 loss to Clemson, assuming everything goes according to kenpom. Ultimately, I will always cheer for a win, but looking at this field, I don't think a loss will hurt us as much as it some other tournaments we've been in. 2012 and 2017 Maui were big in terms of SOS based on the first game, and that was when RPI was the metric of choice.
I will admit, I really want to see St. Bonaventure in Charleston, which probably means being on the winners side of the bracket. I think our downhill style would put a lot of pressure on their defense and short rotation. I think we could wear them out with pace and foul trouble and like our odds of getting that win. But it probably means beating Ole Miss and WVU first, and that's a tall order.
-
This is correct but supposedly the selection committee does value the Quadrants. Losing to Ole Miss likely guarantees a Q4 game and a Q2/Q3 game whereas a win likely guarantees two Q1/Q2 games. Means nothing if you lose those Q1/Q2 games but it at least gives you two opportunities for significant wins.
Good info, TAMU. Thanks.
I think I'd prefer a Q2 loss to Ole Miss with a Q3 win over Elon and Q2 win over Boise to a Q2 win over Ole Miss followed by a Q1 loss to WVU and Q2 loss to Clemson
How 'bout a Q2 win over Ole Miss, a Q1 loss to WVU and a Q2 win over Clemson?
I want to be on the winner's side just because I always want to win every game. But I also want all the intangible goodies that could come with beating Ole Miss.
Now ... how do we go about getting you and TAMU in charge of the rating system?
-
I am in the camp that wants a win over Ole Miss. To me every non conference game is a must win game. Our 20 game conference schedule is a brutal gauntlet, and I want to see as many wins as possible going into conference season.
-
Good info, TAMU. Thanks.
How 'bout a Q2 win over Ole Miss, a Q1 loss to WVU and a Q2 win over Clemson?
I want to be on the winner's side just because I always want to win every game. But I also want all the intangible goodies that could come with beating Ole Miss.
Now ... how do we go about getting you and TAMU in charge of the rating system?
Like I said, 2-1 on the winning side, no matter how it comes (I'm okay with Q2 over Ole Miss, Q1 over WVU, and losing a Q1 to SBU too) is the better outcome than 2-1 on the losing side. But it might be easier to get to 2-1 if we lose to Ole Miss than if we beat them simply because getting one against WVU/SBU/Clemson might be harder than getting two against Elon/Boise/Temple, assuming the expected results hold.
Regardless, this tournament is now house money. Last night was one of those injections of energy and program faith that will last at least a few weeks for me, especially in a year where my hope has been NIT.
-
Like I said, 2-1 on the winning side, no matter how it comes (I'm okay with Q2 over Ole Miss, Q1 over WVU, and losing a Q1 to SBU too) is the better outcome than 2-1 on the losing side. But it might be easier to get to 2-1 if we lose to Ole Miss than if we beat them simply because getting one against WVU/SBU/Clemson might be harder than getting two against Elon/Boise/Temple, assuming the expected results hold.
Regardless, this tournament is now house money. Last night was one of those injections of energy and program faith that will last at least a few weeks for me, especially in a year where my hope has been NIT.
Well, I know what you're saying about house money, but we've both been around Scoop for a few years. Shyte the bed in Charleston, and last night's win becomes a "fluke" and a distant memory. So let's hope there ain't no bed-shytting (for all kinds of reasons).
-
Well, I know what you're saying about house money, but we've both been around Scoop for a few years. Shyte the bed in Charleston, and last night's win becomes a "fluke" and a distant memory. So let's hope there ain't no bed-shytting (for all kinds of reasons).
Of course it does, but I've also been around Scoop long enough to know I won't let the UnSmart fans get me down.
-
Of course it does, but I've also been around Scoop long enough to know I won't let the UnSmart fans get me down.
Nice!
-
Of course it does, but I've also been around Scoop long enough to know I won't let the UnSmart fans get me down.
If they arn't Smart fans that means they are Wojo fans.
-
I think everyone would agree we're going to have some ups and downs this year. However, avoiding the "bad loss" is important down the road. We also want to have as many quality win opportunities as possible. Getting a win Thurs would probably give us two more opportunities for solid wins.
BTW Wisconsin looked pretty awful last night. They were without their best player but that team has limited talent. And, as others pointed out, their constant complaining is infantile and totally inexcusable. We all know Flopison's nonsense, perhaps he wasn't hugged as a child. That's a game that should be in Milwaukee but we must take care of business and play with poise amidst what I suspect will be some dirty tactics.
IL didn’t have their best guy last night, yes? Probably a MU loss if the big Cock had played. I would cool the jets at this point. Are we suddenly confident MU is a ncaa tourney team? Im still hoping for a 16-18 win season as a mojo builder for bigger things. As for UW, RED isn’t bad on their court and they’ll be favored on 12/04 if they have full strength.
As always, better dead, than RED.
-
IL didn’t have their best guy last night, yes? Probably a MU loss if the big Cock had played. I would cool the jets at this point. Are we suddenly confident MU is a ncaa tourney team? Im still hoping for a 16-18 win season as a mojo builder for bigger things. As for UW, RED isn’t bad on their court and they’ll be favored on 12/04 if they have full strength.
As always, better dead, than RED.
I'm not close to saying we're a tournament team. I just hope we can shoot and rebound better Thurs. The game is quite important is what I think most people are conveying here.
-
Ole Miss should open around -5.5 to -6.5 over MU on Thursday.
-
Ole Miss should open around -5.5 to -6.5 over MU on Thursday.
I’ll bet you it’ll be less. 2 to 3
-
Betting on what the Vegas line will be. Meta.
-
Will they be able to sustain the effort without the crowd?
And with back to back games given the style of play.
-
Ole Miss should open around -5.5 to -6.5 over MU on Thursday.
Why do you think it'll be that big of a spread?
-
Last night was huge because it gives this team a chance. Find a way go 2-1 in Charleston (even on the loser's side) and finish the non-con 4-1 (2-1 @Wisco, @KState and vs. UCLA, which will be tough), and you're likely in the convo with a .500 BE finish. Even if you go 4-2 in non-con after a 2-1 Charleston trip, an 11-9 BE record probably gets you in.
I didn't expect to be in the convo whatsoever, but I'd sure love to be wrong.
That all being said, the boys did look pretty bad offensively for long stretches last night and Illinois and the refs did us a lot of favors. Will be very interesting to see how the next 3 go.
-
I'm expecting Ole Miss -2.5 to -3
-
Why do you think it'll be that big of a spread?
It doesn’t matter what I think, it comes down to which analytics site one prefers.
I didn’t look up KenPom, I’m guessing JayBee is a Torvik fan though. The power rankings I’ve used for years has Ole Miss -6, Miya has it at -7 for Ole Miss, so it’s all over the board.
-
I'm not close to saying we're a tournament team. I just hope we can shoot and rebound better Thurs. The game is quite important is what I think most people are conveying here.
I hear ya
-
It doesn’t matter what I think, it comes down to which analytics site one prefers.
I didn’t look up KenPom, I’m guessing JayBee is a Torvik fan though. The power rankings I’ve used for years has Ole Miss -6, Miya has it at -7 for Ole Miss, so it’s all over the board.
Got it. Torvik and KenPom are the 2.5-3 that JayBee mentioned. Haven't looked at Miya before, I'll have to start paying attention.
-
Got it. Torvik and KenPom are the 2.5-3 that JayBee mentioned. Haven't looked at Miya before, I'll have to start paying attention.
Is KenPom at the same number as Torvik? I honestly don't know. ShotQuality didn't have it posted yet, or I just blatantly missed it there. If KenPom and Torvik have it at -3, I'd gather the books will have it there.
I would encourage people to look at different sites if they have time though. KenPom is McDonald's, I follow it, but everyone follows it, and obviously Ken's numbers set lines. There's enough data out there from other sites though to dig around. If anyone has some, I'm more than game to suggestions. The info has gotten so much better over the last five years, and you can hone in on areas (I've always liked first half plays).
shotquality.com (never seems to work in Chrome, but seems to work in Twitter's browser)
evanmiya.com
haslametrics.com (site always messes up my eyes, but I like the team write ups a lot)
-
Is KenPom at the same number as Torvik? I honestly don't know. ShotQuality didn't have it posted yet, or I just blatantly missed it there. If KenPom and Torvik have it at -3, I'd gather the books will have it there.
I would encourage people to look at different sites if they have time though. KenPom is McDonald's, I follow it, but everyone follows it, and obviously Ken's numbers set lines. There's enough data out there from other sites though to dig around. If anyone has some, I'm more than game to suggestions. The info has gotten so much better over the last five years, and you can hone in on areas (I've always liked first half plays).
shotquality.com (never seems to work in Chrome, but seems to work in Twitter's browser)
evanmiya.com
haslametrics.com (site always messes up my eyes, but I like the team write ups a lot)
Dish
Do any of the gambling sites use lines from rating services other than Pomeroy? A “middle” of Ole Miss -3 and MU +6 would be a must play for big $$$.
-
Gotta beat.... EVERYONE
That's why you play the game.
-
Dish
Do any of the gambling sites use lines from rating services other than Pomeroy? A “middle” of Ole Miss -3 and MU +6 would be a must play for big $$$.
Good question Lenny, I know early on in the season, books rely heavily (exclusively?) on KenPom, especially for creating totals. I really don’t have a great answer here. Part of the reason I’ve shied away from KenPom is because I feel the books rely on it so much (right or wrong on my end).
-
The line will open at -3 or -3.5 favoring Ole Miss and move towards a pick ‘em as the public, who have been watching Havoc highlights on twitter all week, let the money flow in. My thought is it closes at -1.5 or -2.
-5 or more is off the table.
I’ll be sure to bump when I’m right.
-
As far as actual game results are concerned:
This is a very traditional letdown spot. Going on the road after a huge, emotional win. However - I agree with the premise of what 82, Muggsy, and others have said, we should be locking in and treating this game as a must-win for legitimacy sake.
This game is the hump we could never quite make it over with Voldechowski. No excuses - we can win it. We will win it. No reason we can’t be a tourney team this year. It’ll be another close one though. I think we get hot from 3 and bring it home.
-
I am guessing the games opens up close to a pick em. KP has Mississippi as the favorite by 3. But the SQ stats favor MU by a fair bit.
-
As far as actual game results are concerned:
This is a very traditional letdown spot. Going on the road after a huge, emotional win. However - I agree with the premise of what 82, Muggsy, and others have said, we should be locking in and treating this game as a must-win for legitimacy sake.
This game is the hump we could never quite make it over with Voldechowski. No excuses - we can win it. We will win it. No reason we can’t be a tourney team this year. It’ll be another close one though. I think we get hot from 3 and bring it home.
Who even has the capability to get hot from 3?
-
Who even has the capability to get hot from 3?
This individual is 42.3 % career 3 Pointers
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/greg-elliott-1.html
-
Who even has the capability to get hot from 3?
Morsell is currently shooting over 56% beyond the arc. Kolek knocked down 3+ threes on 12 occasions last year. If he plays, Greg is a career 42.3% shooter from deep. And many of the freshmen have the range to hit but haven't had the opportunities to show if they can or not, so until proven otherwise, Stevie, Kam, O-Max, and Joplin have the capability since they can make threes, they just haven't done it yet.
-
This individual is 42.3 % career 3 Pointers
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/greg-elliott-1.html
Not back til game 2 of the this tournament, right?
-
Maybe some shots fall on some rims that aren't an NBA basket.
-
Dish
Do any of the gambling sites use lines from rating services other than Pomeroy? A “middle” of Ole Miss -3 and MU +6 would be a must play for big $$$.
Not much...because then all of us who bet would use KenPom and take their money...the same way we did before they decided they better just use Ken's numbers. There is still money to be made playing Ken's numbers against the books for 1H O/U's in the mid-majors. I'm not aware of anyone more accurate on college hoops. If there out there...vegas will find them. That said...I had Oregon -4 last night...
-
Not back til game 2 of the this tournament, right?
I think but anyone certain?
Would be really nice if it was 4 games and included the exhibition. Anyone recall if it was announced before or after the exhibition?
It’s an internal suspension so Shaka can pretty much handle it as he chooses.
It would be really nice against a heavy zone team if he was back versus Ole Miss but my assumption was always 4 regular season games
-
Is KenPom at the same number as Torvik? I honestly don't know. ShotQuality didn't have it posted yet, or I just blatantly missed it there. If KenPom and Torvik have it at -3, I'd gather the books will have it there.
I would encourage people to look at different sites if they have time though. KenPom is McDonald's, I follow it, but everyone follows it, and obviously Ken's numbers set lines. There's enough data out there from other sites though to dig around. If anyone has some, I'm more than game to suggestions. The info has gotten so much better over the last five years, and you can hone in on areas (I've always liked first half plays).
shotquality.com (never seems to work in Chrome, but seems to work in Twitter's browser)
evanmiya.com
haslametrics.com (site always messes up my eyes, but I like the team write ups a lot)
Torvik has it at 2.4 and Pomeroy has it at 3. Kenpom has Ole Miss at #53 and Torvik has them at #74, which seems like a pretty big discrepancy for the two sites.
-
Torvik has it at 2.4 and Pomeroy has it at 3. Kenpom has Ole Miss at #53 and Torvik has them at #74, which seems like a pretty big discrepancy for the two sites.
The rankings I use came down from -6 to -5.5 this morning, and Miya came down from -7 to -5.5 overnight. I guess we'll see soon enough where it comes in at.
Good back and forth, I by no means am retiring anytime soon from wagering, and hope I don't come off as a know it all (very far from it). I enjoy learning what works for people, finding value, and hoping to come out at the end of the day at 50.1%.
-
The rankings I use came down from -6 to -5.5 this morning, and Miya came down from -7 to -5.5 overnight. I guess we'll see soon enough where it comes in at.
They must’ve read Scoop
-
The rankings I use came down from -6 to -5.5 this morning, and Miya came down from -7 to -5.5 overnight. I guess we'll see soon enough where it comes in at.
Good back and forth, I by no means am retiring anytime soon from wagering, and hope I don't come off as a know it all (very far from it). I enjoy learning what works for people, finding value, and hoping to come out at the end of the day at 50.1%.
My friend...if you hit on 50.1% of your bets you are going to lose some serious cash.
-
My friend...if you hit on 50.1% of your bets you are going to lose some serious cash.
50.1% cash...I know how vig works, thanks. I'm not betting -130 moneylines, or -115 spreads.
-
Line open now.
Ole Miss -5 (-110)
-
Oooh ... I think I like our guys getting 5.
Or I would if I bet on these things.
-
I’ll bet you it’ll be less. 2 to 3
Good thing we didn’t bet?
-
The line will open at -3 or -3.5 favoring Ole Miss and move towards a pick ‘em as the public, who have been watching Havoc highlights on twitter all week, let the money flow in. My thought is it closes at -1.5 or -2.
-5 or more is off the table.
I’ll be sure to bump when I’m right.
We’re all wrong sometimes, no sweat.
-
Picking games with this squad is going to be tough to do. My son got MU at 5-1 when they were down 12 in the second half on Monday and in game bets may be the way to go. That said, I would not take MU until they have a couple games of better shooting under their belt.
-
We’re all wrong sometimes, no sweat.
Pardon me but what Sportsbook is live with this game right now??
OddsShark consensus spread is -3.5 at this moment. I see no line set at any reputable book. Caesars, MGM, offshores, don’t post until day of or very late the night before.
I did think something was off about your sources when you thought 50.1% keeps you in the green.
-
Pardon me but what Sportsbook is live with this game right now??
OddsShark consensus spread is -3.5 at this moment. I see no line set at any reputable book. Caesars, MGM, offshores, don’t post until day of or very late the night before.
I did think something was off about your sources when you thought 50.1% keeps you in the green.
Jesus…making money > losing money, that was my quote.
You were wrong, it’s totally fine. Have a great night.
-
Jesus…making money > losing money, that was my quote.
You were wrong, it’s totally fine. Have a great night.
How about we wait until the real books come out?
-
Are people really going that literally on the "be right 50.1% of the time" math? Come on, now. Did anyone here honestly not understand what that meant?
-
How about we wait until the real books come out?
So we should ignore the opening line? Which was the precipitous of the entire argument? And we should wait until “the real books come out”, who make a business decision to post numbers after the offshores so they can limit exposure to an opening line?
If you wanted to argue closing line, then that’s different, but trying to shift the goalposts now is dumb.
-
So we should ignore the opening line? Which was the precipitous of the entire argument? And we should wait until “the real books come out”, who make a business decision to post numbers after the offshores so they can limit exposure to an opening line?
If you wanted to argue closing line, then that’s different, but trying to shift the goalposts now is dumb.
My definition of the opening line is what the reputable Vegas books open at. Caesars, MGM, Wynn. If your definition is different - sorry.
-
My definition of the opening line is what the reputable Vegas books open at. Caesars, MGM, Wynn. If your definition is different - sorry.
Agreed
-
After reading this thread I checked Torvik's site, which I hadn't done in a long time. He has our chances of getting into the dance as less likely than DePaul's. Can that man be trusted?
-
My definition of the opening line is what the reputable Vegas books open at. Caesars, MGM, Wynn. If your definition is different - sorry.
You (!) referenced OddsShark earlier. Their opening line is literally -5!
This is comical. Dude, you and Jay Bee were wrong, just take the L already.
-
You (!) referenced OddsShark earlier. Their opening line is literally -5!
This is comical. Dude, you and Jay Bee were wrong, just take the L already.
Man, that ain’t happening with 5 Dollar B
-
You (!) referenced OddsShark earlier. Their opening line is literally -5!
This is comical. Dude, you and Jay Bee were wrong, just take the L already.
I referenced OddsShark while simultaneously saying no reputable books posted a line yet. OddsShark is not a reputable book. It’s a guessing tool.
-
I referenced OddsShark while simultaneously saying no reputable books posted a line yet. OddsShark is not a reputable book. It’s a guessing tool.
OddsShark isn't even a book! It's literally a resource for providing info on lines. There's literally nothing for them to guess on! They get data from books and post it!
If you just Google "what is OddsShark?", this is what comes up:
Odds Shark is your one-stop shop for picks, odds, betting news and trends – a resource for fans, bettors and media outlets looking for wagering information on all the sports and pop culture events you could want.
-
OddsShark isn't even a book! It's literally a resource for providing info on lines. There's literally nothing for them to guess on! They get data from books and post it!
If you just Google "what is OddsShark?", this is what comes up:
Odds Shark is your one-stop shop for picks, odds, betting news and trends – a resource for fans, bettors and media outlets looking for wagering information on all the sports and pop culture events you could want.
You’re proving my point. Which is - no reputable book has posted a line. Which means the opening line hasn’t come out yet per the common definition of the “opening line”.
-
50.1% cash...I know how vig works, thanks. I'm not betting -130 moneylines, or -115 spreads.
Yeah...you're betting -110 unless you are on overseas books (and those are few and far between) with reduced juice...52.4% to break even. Enlighten me though...
-
You’re proving my point. Which is - no reputable book has posted a line. Which means the opening line hasn’t come out yet per the common definition of the “opening line”.
Have a great night. I'm losing time watching paint dry with this conversation.
-
Have a great night. I'm losing time watching paint dry with this conversation.
You too bud. We’ll reconvene when Vegas posts the opening line tomorrow!
-
Spread is MU -4 and that's reputable...because you can wager on it. Bookmaker is a great place to grab CLV value if you set your own spreads. I'm not that talented...but I pay a guy that is...57% over 4 years. I'm on Miss St -15 and Northern Iowa +13 tonight.
-
Yeah...you're betting -110 unless you are on overseas books (and those are few and far between) with reduced juice...52.4% to break even. Enlighten me though...
I'm 100% confident in knowing what I meant with my quote, and with how I wager. Thank you for your concern though.
Making money=good! Losing money=bad. I'm sorry you interpreted it to mean something wayyyyyy different, but I greatly appreciate your concern for my betting well being.
Man, there are some really hot wagering takes on this board from a lot of smart guys. Hope life is good on your luxury yachts.
-
Making money=good! Losing money=bad. I'm sorry you interpreted it to mean something wayyyyyy different, but I greatly appreciate your concern for my betting well being.
If you win 501 straight spread bets and lose 499 straight spread bets you’ve lost money at any traditional sportsbook.
Any bookie not taking vig is just a gambler - just like you.
-
I'm 100% confident in knowing what I meant with my quote, and with how I wager. Thank you for your concern though.
Making money=good! Losing money=bad. I'm sorry you interpreted it to mean something wayyyyyy different, but I greatly appreciate your concern for my betting well being.
Man, there are some really hot wagering takes on this board from a lot of smart guys. Hope life is good on your luxury yachts.
And yet another quote proving you are clueless.
-
If you win 501 straight spread bets and lose 499 straight spread bets you’ve lost money at any traditional sportsbook.
Any bookie not taking vig is just a gambler - just like you.
Everyone knows what he meant you insufferable pedant.
-
If you win 501 straight spread bets and lose 499 straight spread bets you’ve lost money at any traditional sportsbook.
Any bookie not taking vig is just a gambler - just like you.
Hitting 50% on $200 unit bet over a year at 4 bets per night loses about $7K.
-
I’m going to go enjoy a nice dinner with my family. Take my daughter to dance class, help my youngest son with his homework. Maybe watch Bulls/Blazers later.
Hope everyone has as good a night as me.
1+1=3.
-
I’m going to go enjoy a nice dinner with my family. Take my daughter to dance class, help my youngest son with his homework. Maybe watch Bulls/Blazers later.
Hope everyone has as good a night as me.
1+1=3.
The other 1 comes from vig. That's what I learned in this thread.
-
This is among the dumbest scoop arguments of all time. And that is really saying something.
-
ESPN says Ole Miss -3.5 for what it’s worth in this battle
-
ESPN says Ole Miss -3.5 for what it’s worth in this battle
For it to really be part of this battle we all have to deliberately misinterpret your expression of "battle" to mean literal armed conflict and then spend several posts stubbornly insisting that your post must be interpreted literally.
-
For it to really be part of this battle we all have to deliberately misinterpret your expression of "battle" to mean literal armed conflict and then spend several posts stubbornly insisting that your post must be interpreted literally.
Your "win some lose some" attitude when it comes to battle is why you're literally poor.
-
ESPN says Ole Miss -3.5 for what it’s worth in this battle
ESPN has a deal with Caesars and uses their odds when referencing sports gambling on and off-air.
In short, it means the first reputable sportsbook, Caesars, has set the opening line at -3.5 in favor of Ole Miss.
In even shorter, it means I was exactly right. It’s alright @Degen - you can take your L now.
By the way, watch the line move toward a pick ‘em before the game tomorrow. The second half of my prediction.
-
-3.5 at Caesars and #1 in our hearts.
Who's winning the match?
-
I honestly don’t know how I’m going to sleep tonight.
-
I honestly don’t know how I’m going to sleep tonight.
With your mind on the next big bet?
-
With your mind on the next big bet?
No, with my ego shattered.
Thoughts & Prayers please.
-
Not back til game 2 of the this tournament, right?
Is that right? I thought Elliot got suspension for exhibition plus 3. Hmm. Maybe I’m wrong
-
You (!) referenced OddsShark earlier. Their opening line is literally -5!
This is comical. Dude, you and Jay Bee were wrong, just take the L already.
Nope. Your guess was piss poor. Most opening lines are at 3.5.
-
Its like watching these two guys...
(https://media0.giphy.com/media/xT5LMRUtJ1LhW4IxBC/giphy.webp?cid=6c09b952e777bfa19a527c960ed9ca29f4d11e0d8080defc&rid=giphy.webp&ct=g)
(https://i.gifer.com/KW9a.gif)
-
Nope. Your guess was piss poor. Most opening lines are at 3.5.
To the 99% of you following this back and forth, my apologies in advance.
I tried explaining this earlier, but I'll provide data (which we know you love) here. After I'm done, you can call me names or whatever you like. Avid and 5 buck can chime in too to let me know how stupid I am, and I have zero clue about any of this.
Early in the college basketball season, "the real" books wait to put out lines. Let's look at some real life example, shall we?
Last week, offshores opened Citadel +12 at Pitt everywhere offshore, hell, even Wynn opened at +12. None of the "real books" ever posted +12 as their opening line. Do you know why? Because these books will wait to see what happens at the offshores. If money comes in semi-heavy on an early number at an offshore, obviously the number will change within minutes. Once that settles down, the "real books" will wait a while and then open at the lower/higher number. The "real books" goal early in a college basketball season is to let offshores settle on a number, because the "real books" invest next to nothing internally on setting early season college basketball lines due to the sheer inventory of games on a nightly basis.
Other examples: Clemson/Presbyterian O/U from 146, to "real books" opening at 139. Heck, Barstool had it open at 146 for seven minutes before it mysteriously went off the board. Niagara (+21.5 to +15.5 at Xavier). The best one yet...Offshores opened at 136.5 (KP at 136) total on Grambling St/Grand Canyon, the "real books" opened at 147. It was taken down 90 seconds later, and "opened" by the "real books" at 136.
My "guess" on Ole Miss -5.5 to -6.5 was based on analytics that I use. I'm sorry that the data I provided from OddsShark showed Ole Miss open at -5, my apologies to everyone.
It's great having you back after your "hiatus" JayBee.
-
I get what you’re saying. I think we just definitionally disagree on what an opening line is. I don’t care what a couple random offshores (not even the biggest ones) open at and immediately move off of because they were wildly wrong. Vegas is opening at -3.5.
-
Gotta beat Ole Miss!
-
Gotta beat Ole Miss!
What’s the line?
-
To the 99% of you following this back and forth, my apologies in advance.
I tried explaining this earlier, but I'll provide data (which we know you love) here. After I'm done, you can call me names or whatever you like. Avid and 5 buck can chime in too to let me know how stupid I am, and I have zero clue about any of this.
Early in the college basketball season, "the real" books wait to put out lines. Let's look at some real life example, shall we?
Last week, offshores opened Citadel +12 at Pitt everywhere offshore, hell, even Wynn opened at +12. None of the "real books" ever posted +12 as their opening line. Do you know why? Because these books will wait to see what happens at the offshores. If money comes in semi-heavy on an early number at an offshore, obviously the number will change within minutes. Once that settles down, the "real books" will wait a while and then open at the lower/higher number. The "real books" goal early in a college basketball season is to let offshores settle on a number, because the "real books" invest next to nothing internally on setting early season college basketball lines due to the sheer inventory of games on a nightly basis.
Other examples: Clemson/Presbyterian O/U from 146, to "real books" opening at 139. Heck, Barstool had it open at 146 for seven minutes before it mysteriously went off the board. Niagara (+21.5 to +15.5 at Xavier). The best one yet...Offshores opened at 136.5 (KP at 136) total on Grambling St/Grand Canyon, the "real books" opened at 147. It was taken down 90 seconds later, and "opened" by the "real books" at 136.
My "guess" on Ole Miss -5.5 to -6.5 was based on analytics that I use. I'm sorry that the data I provided from OddsShark showed Ole Miss open at -5, my apologies to everyone.
It's great having you back after your "hiatus" JayBee.
Dish
Am I correct in assuming that when the offshore opening lines have a significant difference from Pomeroy’s projected line (say Ole Miss - 5.5) the big players jump on MU anticipating a line of 2.5 to 3.5 when the onshore books (who value/rely on Pomeroy) open? Assuming Pomeroy is the gold standard the opportunities to get a big edge or “middle” games are there. Does this happen frequently?
-
What’s the line?
Well played. I literally laughed out loud. The fact that your post was the first post on a new page -- a happy accident -- just made it better.
-
Sorry to digress to basketball, but we need to have the shooting come around. They play a zone and play it well. Also, we'll have to rebound like we did the last 8 minutes vs. Illinois. Doable.
-
1-3-1 zones require a different scheme than do 2-3 zones. I am looking forward to Coach Smart's adjustments. Better hit some 3s.
-
1-3-1 zones require a different scheme than do 2-3 zones. I am looking forward to Coach Smart's adjustments. Better hit some 3s.
It's time to shred some nets Tower. Rise and fire with confidence with crisp ball movement and high percentage looks.
-
Sorry to digress to basketball, but we need to have the shooting come around. They play a zone and play it well. Also, we'll have to rebound like we did the last 8 minutes vs. Illinois. Doable.
I predict Shaka has a better plan to attack the zone than did Wojo. He may not have the shooters he needs, however, but the scheme will be much more sound.
-
Basketball talk? I thought this was a gambling message board?
-
Basketball talk? I thought this was a gambling message board?
I wouldn't bet on that!
-
Dish
Am I correct in assuming that when the offshore opening lines have a significant difference from Pomeroy’s projected line (say Ole Miss - 5.5) the big players jump on MU anticipating a line of 2.5 to 3.5 when the onshore books (who value/rely on Pomeroy) open? Assuming Pomeroy is the gold standard the opportunities to get a big edge or “middle” games are there. Does this happen frequently?
Nope...no CLV in Pom's numbers for years minus some 1 half over/unders...
Also not so cut and dry as to why lines move. There is always going to be more public money going to a team like the Cowboys with such a large fan base. Naturally if the intent of the books was to split bets 50/50 on each side sharp money would win out as Dallas' line would be inflated. The casino's essentially bet on teams at times...and that's when things get interesting.
-
As far as actual game results are concerned:
This is a very traditional letdown spot. Going on the road after a huge, emotional win. However - I agree with the premise of what 82, Muggsy, and others have said, we should be locking in and treating this game as a must-win for legitimacy sake.
This game is the hump we could never quite make it over with Voldechowski. No excuses - we can win it. We will win it. No reason we can’t be a tourney team this year. It’ll be another close one though. I think we get hot from 3 and bring it home.
BUMP I GET ZERO CREDIT ON THIS BOARD
-
I give you credit sir for your…
(https://c.tenor.com/2cEA_Bg9EfYAAAAC/word-salad.gif)
-
I give you credit sir for your…
(https://c.tenor.com/2cEA_Bg9EfYAAAAC/word-salad.gif)
Now I'm gonna go hump the fridge
-
BUMP I GET ZERO CREDIT ON THIS BOARD
Even I’d give you a huge high five right now.
-
Huge win for out tournament resume.
-
Wow! Exciting team to watch in all ways ….. whew!
-
Even I’d give you a huge high five right now.
+1 degen
We’re on the same team. Hope you hopped on the plus money.
-
This was really a great win in terms of schedule.
We've now beaten a good BIG14 & decent SEC team and are guaranteed a game against a decent B12 team and either a decent ACC team or a ranked mid-major.
6 games into the season and we'll have had games against either 4 of the 5 (non-BE) P6, or 3 of the 5 with a ranked mid-major. And with UCLA we'll have the sweep in non-con (plus another BIG14 & B12).
What a really great job scheduling (I know some of it goes back a while). I absolutely love testing this team by fire rather than fattening up on cupcakes. Not going to be any danceless 20 or 21 win seasons in the Shaka era.