NBA Champions

[Schneids]

From WSEX:
[ QUOTE ]
PROBASKETBALL-2004 LOS ANGELES L 23723 47 52
PROBASKETBALL-2004 INDIANA 23731 28 33
PROBASKETBALL-2004 DETROIT 23728 27 32
PROBASKETBALL-2004 SACRAMENTO 23725 17 22
PROBASKETBALL-2004 SAN ANTONIO 23724 16 20
PROBASKETBALL-2004 NEW JERSEY 23727 13 16
PROBASKETBALL-2004 MINNESOTA 23729 11 14

[/ QUOTE ]

I am thinking of putting 140 on MN, 220 on Sacramento, and 390 on LAL.

So then, from this, if MN or SAC were to win it all, I'd be +250, total. If LAL won it all, I'd be even. I follow the NBA pretty closely and personally consider it likely that one of these three teams will win it all. Do you think I am risking an insanely large amount of money to either break even or make a 33%ROI, or does this bet seem pretty safe?

[jerome baker]

why not put put 200 on la and 200 on sa.? actually given these numbers, sa might be the best play.

[Schneids]

I assume by 'sa' you mean Sactown? I agree about that being some ridiculously good odds for the Kings.

If you mean the Spurs, then I disagree. Duncan is no better than last year, the Spurs are a worse team than last year, Rasho is not DRob, and the rest of the West has improved and are hungry to end the Spurs reign. It's going to be extremely hard for them to 3-peat.

The Wolves today are down to 13. Regardless of whether I decide to play money on the Lakers as a safety net, I am pretty sure I'm gonna lay some on the Kings and Wolves.

[mikelow]

I think the Finals will be between the Spurs and Pacers (Pistons might get there with their defense).

The Lakers aren't deep enough (bench injuries and age) and have trouble with quick guards. The Spurs and Pacers are better defensively also. I really think the Spurs can repeat.

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
and the rest of the West has improved and are hungry to end the Spurs reign. It's going to be extremely hard for them to 3-peat

[/ QUOTE ]

Check my math, but I'm pretty sure that they have to repeat before they 3 peat.

[SackUp]

The Spurs have not repeated yet and never will. Calling the Lakers old and sluggish was a rather interesting remark considering they big 4 is running around like 20 years olds right now. The only good bet is the Lakers since they will coast to the championship. The Wolves had a good regular season but don't come to play in the playoffs. The Kings just like to lose to the Lakers and the Spurs didn't improve their team enough to win again. To recap, bet on the Lakers only, unless you like losing money.

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]
From WSEX:
[ QUOTE ]
PROBASKETBALL-2004 LOS ANGELES L 23723 47 52
PROBASKETBALL-2004 INDIANA 23731 28 33
PROBASKETBALL-2004 DETROIT 23728 27 32
PROBASKETBALL-2004 SACRAMENTO 23725 17 22
PROBASKETBALL-2004 SAN ANTONIO 23724 16 20
PROBASKETBALL-2004 NEW JERSEY 23727 13 16
PROBASKETBALL-2004 MINNESOTA 23729 11 14

[/ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

I have never seen a betting format like this. I cannot figure it out. Can somebody please explain how this works...I use another S.B. so if you can show how this correlates to +250, for example, I would much appreciate it.

[Homer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
From WSEX:
[ QUOTE ]
PROBASKETBALL-2004 LOS ANGELES L 23723 47 52
PROBASKETBALL-2004 INDIANA 23731 28 33
PROBASKETBALL-2004 DETROIT 23728 27 32
PROBASKETBALL-2004 SACRAMENTO 23725 17 22
PROBASKETBALL-2004 SAN ANTONIO 23724 16 20
PROBASKETBALL-2004 NEW JERSEY 23727 13 16
PROBASKETBALL-2004 MINNESOTA 23729 11 14

[/ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]

I have never seen a betting format like this. I cannot figure it out. Can somebody please explain how this works...I use another S.B. so if you can show how this correlates to +250, for example, I would much appreciate it.

[/ QUOTE ]

P = Price (or whatever it's called)

I think if you take 100*[(100-P)/P], it converts to the American (+X/-X) format.

For example, if you are betting on Indiana, the asking price is 33. So, the odds are 100*[(100-33)/33] = +203.

-- Homer

[Oski]

[Wildbill]

Nice run Lakers made here to get to the top of the West and then they look mediocre letting a team like Portland come into their house and handle them easily after a weak effort against the champs at home? I just don't trust the intensity nor the teamwork of this squad. Kobe is still going to hog the ball and come playoff time I think the squad did better with a lot of role players and the two stars. Fisher came up with a lot of huge games when the team needed it most. Shaw, Horry, Fox...those guys would always come out of nowhere to help them win games. They don't have that kind of chemistry now and I don't know if they can just find it when the West is so ridiculously loaded. While it certainly isn't a must, this game on Sunday feels like a must win for the Lakers to get a better spot. I would hate to have to play a first round match with the Mavs and then probably face the Kings before the Spurs/Wolves. Not that they couldn't do it, but I don't know if a team has ever faced a road to a championship tougher than that in history. If they win it, more power to them...