NBA 2020 Playoff Plays

[RBD]

I have some data accumulated during the season that I will use in the playoffs.
I tracked and charted approximately 20 situational spots to play; some I post, some I don't.
The reason for not posting most is because they grade out near .500, so there's no value in them.
You have to go through a lot of rocks to hopefully find one or two gold nuggets.

This post-season, I'm going to rely on 3-4 situational spots (I hate the word "system", as I think I noted in my reg season thread.) The Q1 work has paid off nicely on sides, at 12-4 (Favs 2-1, Dogs 10-3).
Totals have been better as Fades at 8-14 (Ov 2-6, Un 6-8).
Also, team totals Over is at 21-11 so I'll be using some of those.

There are two unknown variables here:
1 - the standard, "Will this trend level out now?" question.
2 - Will post season play in the bubble replicate what we've seen in the regular season, scoring-wise?

I think, based on the #'s I see, side and total, there's an expectation that defenses will step up a bit in the playoffs, and the free-balling, gym-not-crowded-arena-style of loose play will end.

Let's look at some bubble numbers:

What was the record for Over/Unders in the bubble restart?

The Over was 51-37 (58%).

(Note - lines of 230 or higher were a solid investment on the Under at 13-9, 59%. Lines of 235 or higher were even better at 5-2, 71%. Keep this in mind if you see any bloated totals posted in the postseason.)

Did the books make adjustments for the lean to the Overs during the restart?

The average total during the first week was 224'.
The average total during the last week was 226'.
A slight adjustment that failed to level out the trend to the Over.

Did the books make adjustments for the playoffs?

The average total for the opening round is 222'.

Overall, an insignificant adjustment that shows books expect to see slightly better defense during the playoffs.

Have any playoff contenders faced each other in the bubble, and what were the totals and results?

Miami played Indy twice.
Both games stayed under
The totals were 221 (206 scored).
and 221' (201 scored).
Tuesday's total is 216', 10 points above
their highest scoring game in the restart.

Utah and Denver played once.
The total was 221.
The game went over, but in OT.
The score at the end of regulation was 210.
The total in Monday's opener is 217'.


A lot of info, I know. Not your typical "I like LA -3 today" type of post.
I should call this the Be a Better Bettor Newsletter, since it's more of a daily letter than a post, and it's geared towards those who are seeking help.

Anyway . . .
Here are the spots that qualify as plays today. Not going to buy them all, but posting in case anyone is looking for an opinion on a game to agree or disagree with.

Q1 spots - all four Dogs qualify. Usually on a card with four or five games I get one or two of these plays graded as active. All four games AND all Dogs, forced me to double check my math - it was correct.
Also have two totals, Utah/Den Ov, Brk/Tor Ov.

Not sure what I'm going to buy, still have work to do on full games.
And keep this in mind if you're not aware of it - EVERY game stayed Under the total in the opening two days of last year's playoffs AND by an avg of 16 pts!!!

Smart thing to do may be to keep buys to a minimum in the first games of each matchup, and try to get a feel for if the playoffs will be like last year, or a continuation of the high scoring bubble games we've seen thus far.

Q1 sides have been good, so until they begin to trend the other way I'm going to ride them, starting with Utah. They're at +1' right now. I'll buy that # if I have to, but it seems like everyone is on Denver and the opening -3' is up to -5 now. With 45 minutes left to game time it makes sense to wait to see if the Q1 number gets to +2.

Buys:
Utah +1' Q1

Update: Done 'capping full game stats. And it's ugly. I'll stop by with the rest, but I wanted to get the early game stuff charted here now. Both teams qualify as a tm total Under, Utah Un 105, Den Un 214'.
This data usually kicks out Overs, an noted above (21-11.) Unders are rare, and 0-3.
I don't have time to go into what these numbers derive from (not #'s I make, just #'s I use), but it's obvious some people are making a vast adjustment for lower scoring games now that we're in the playoffs.
No play on either of these for me, not even a fade at 0-3. Back with the rest, shortly.

Update: Here are the rest, and like I said, it's ugly.
Philly (106), Bos (112), Brk (106) and Tor (115') all qualify as plays on the team total Under.
With tracking dating back to 8/6, a total of 52 games, there have only been 3 spots that qualify as an Under.
Now that we're in the playoffs, 6 of 8 teams qualify?
Something looks off; better to take a wait and see attitude.

Also, from the only other play I am using, the Temperature Play, Phil/Bos Un 218' and LAC -6.

For now, just the one buy for me, Utah Q1.

 

[MadJack]

Good stuff, thanks for sharing. Good luck in the playoffs.

 

[Coach Woody]

RBD

I want to make sure I understand you are buying Denver not Utah at +2...

I have been following your 1q stuff.

Thanks again for all the great write ups....I have been refocusing my capping around some of your posts

 

[RBD]

Coach, I posted Den Q1 by mistake, thanks for picking me up on my error; it's Utah +1'.
As noted in the post, all four Dogs qualify today.

Here's how I arrive at these spots.
I make my own number for each team (experience as an oddsmakers in Vegas helps here), based on their season # for Q1 pts scored and a # weighted for recent Q1 play.
If there is a differential of 3 or > between my # and the books #, INCLUDING the spread, side or total,
it qualifies as a play.
My # and the books is usually close, or within 3. When it's not, the difference is usually only a point or two.
Today's games came in at 7.6 for Utah, 7.2 for Philly, Brk at 6.9 and Dal at 5.7, another reason why I double checked my #'s today; they are out of the norm.

Here'a an example.
My #'s:
Utah 31.9
Den 25.8
The diff is 6.1; the line is Den -1', so add 1 1/2 pts to Utah and their # is now 33.4.
Subtract Den's 25.8 from Utah's 33.4 and you get a differential of 7.6.
So, as anything over 3 pts qualifies, Utah +1' is the play.

The two totals combined equals 57.7. The Q1 total offered by the books is 53'.
The differential is 4.2 so, as anything over a 3 pt differential qualifies as a play, this gives me a play on the Over.

MadJack - thanks for stopping in. And you're welcome, and good luck to you also.

 

[Coach Woody]

RBD

Thank you for sharing that..... I like what you do and very interesting. Do you do that for all games also? You were spot on with that total 1Q Number at 52.5 you had 57.7 hits way over at 56. I like that total play and then you confirmed my thinking.

Lets keep it rolling today...

 

[RBD]

Short on time, adding Tor Ov 116

 

[RBD]

Yes Coach, I do it for every game. Just Q1 though.
Here are the other games:

Brk 32.8
Tor 29.4

Phil 30.7
Bos 25.5

Dal 29.4
LAC 26.2

Missed with my first play Utah +1' but, though it's just one game, I think we may have an answer to the question: Will the playoffs see better D or will the gym-type pace and scoring continue?
Look like the scoring will continue.

The Q1 play that lost is now 10-4, but off a loss I wasn't going to try the next one, Brooklyn.
Good move as they got blown out.
If I was to play the other two, I'd fade and lay the points off the two morning losses in that situational play.
But that's not necessary, there's a stronger play to be had.
I noted that the team total spot only had three games all year (and it was 0-3) but six spots to play today???
BOTH team totals went Over easily in the first game, no OT needed. That made the play 0-5 now.

An 0-5 spot is is valuable as a 5-0 spot, you just play AGAINST it, instead of ON it.
With that in mind, and thinking there was an over-correction on points scored in the numbers I use to get those plays, I looked at the rest of the card and circled the Toronto Un 116 spot to fade, and make my next recommended buy here. We all know not to count chickens, but with 73 scored at the half, I like my position.
And as poorly as they've been shooting, Brooklyn has a chance to go Over their team total, too.

Two spots left in that team total play, Phil Under and Bos Under.
If you're looking at those games, take a hard look at Overs, especially if both Brook and Tor go Over, which would make it an 0-7 spot on the Under.

It's a lot of stats, info, #'s etc; I know. If anyone has any questions don't hesitate to ask.

Buys:
Utah Q1 +1' L
Tor team total Ov 116 (still open)

 

[ldabdou]

Nice call on Tor over.

So next plays are team total play, Phil Under and Bos Under?

 

[RBD]

Idab - Thanks for stopping in for a visit, and for the kudos on Toronto.

As for the other games, I have no buy recommendations on them,
just giving some tips for those who may be looking for stats or opinions.

And the plays would be Over, not Under. Here's what I posted:

"The record on Unders was 0-3 coming in to today's games."

"Both teams qualify as a tm total Under, Utah Un 105, Den Un 214'."

Both team totals Utah and Den went Over in the first game, 0-5 now.

Philly (106), Bos (112), Brk (106) and Tor (115') all qualify as plays on the team total Under.

Next up was Brook Under and Tor Under.
I liked Tor as the stronger of the two, and posted a buy recommendation on it.

Then, with the Tor game looking like a sure winner, I posted:
"Two spots left in that team total play, Phil Under and Bos Under.
If you're looking at those games, take a hard look at Overs, especially if both Brook and Tor go Over, which would make it an 0-7 spot on the Under."

Both teams did go Over, Brooklyn by 4 pts and Tor by 18.
The play is now 0-7 on the Under, so IF you're looking for an opinion or play,
Fade them (bet the opposite) and take Overs.

(Yes, it might be easier if I just posted what to play, but some people like to see the thought process behind it.
And I like to show bettors you don't have to always look for a winning trend. A losing one is just as valuable; 0-5 is as valuable as 5-0, just fade it.)

 

[RBD]

First, I want to thank everyone who stopped by and contributed to the dialogue here yesterday.
Much appreciated.

Recap: Missed with the Q1 spot, but a nice comeback choosing Toronto from the team total spots that were left available as they went Over by 18 pts. Playoff record 1-1. (I'll have a full season accounting after the final game. I didn't bet the first part of the season, too busy doing work on college football. I started handicapping NBA during the restart.)

Let's start by looking at some basic #'s from yesterday's results:
Favs 4-0
Ov/Un 2-2
For a YTY (Year to Year) comparison . . .
Last year, in the first game of round one, ALL 8 games stayed Under and Favs were 5-3.

Next, some look at stats for the various plays I chart and posted yesterday:
The Q1 play on sides went 2-2. That record is now 14-6; 2-1 on Favs, 12-5 on Dogs.
The Q1 play on totals went 2-0. That record is now 10-14; 4-6 Ov, 6-8 Un.

The team total plays went 4-2; Overs are 21-11, Unders 2-7.

The plays I labeled "Temperature Plays" went 2-0 ("Temperature" because the Ov/Un spot is based on a situation incorporating a set of stats I use that calls for playing the opposite of a teams recent play on totals. In other words, if a team is hot on Overs, I mark it as an Under, anticipating the line has been adjusted for their recent play and the trend is due to reverse.) Not a lot of these plays qualify, the record is just 3-1; Ov 0-1, Un 3-0. The "Temp" play on the sides is something new, handicapped differently than the totals, but at 4-0, 1-0 on Favs and 3-0 on Dogs, I have added it to my charts.

And before I get to today's possible plays, I want to say "Thank you" to Coach Woody.
His question on my Q1 totals yesterday gave me an idea. To qualify as a play, there has to be a differential of 3 or > between my # and what the books offer. But after answering the Coach's question, I went back and looked at my Q1 stats to see if there was anything of value we could use. Here's what I found:

On totals, when my number is higher than the books (meaning you would bet the Over) the record is 6-7.
No value there.
But . . . when my number is lower, meaning bet the Under, the record is 9-17.
This means that fading it would produce a 17-9 record, a very nice win % of 65%!!!
Just something to keep in mind when doing your handicapping/looking for a play, another club in your bag, or tool on your belt if you're not a golfer.
If you're not a golfer or handyman, I have no analogy for you.

A note on Win percentages - it's not commonly acknowledged, but MOST bettors lose.
A sad fact that very few want to admit (especially on the internet.)
I base this on first hand experience from years in the sports book, access to others in my position and their experience, and access to years of player data in the computer.
So anything above 53% is winning, and a good year/season.
The Grail for me is 67%, but anything in the upper 50's to lower 60's is rock solid.

Since I mentioned Q1 stats, instead of just posting any plays that qualify, I'll post the actual #'s:

Orl 27.1
Mil 27.2
Books #'s: Milw -4'; 56'

Mia 27.7
Indy 25.8
Books #'s: Mia -1'; 54'

OKC 28.1
Hou 28.7
Books #'s: OKC -1/2; 57

Port 31.4
LAL 30.4
Books #'s: LAL -2'; 59

None of those totals have a differential of 3 or >, so no plays on the totals for that situational spot.
Two sides have a diff of 3 or more (factoring in the spread) - Orl (diff of 4.4 )and Port (diff of 3.5) so each would qualify as a play.

I'll stop back in after I do the team total work.
One buy thus far, based on the work I did on overall #'s on my Q1 totals after getting Coach's question.

Update: Here are the other plays that qualify, no buys for me yet other than the one posted below.
Team Totals: Orl Un, Milw Un, LAL Ov (Note - Ov is 21-11, Un is 6-9 on these.)
Temp plays: Port + 6'


Buys:
Orl/Milw Ov 56'

 

[Coach Woody]

RBD. I am glad I could help with thoughts. I like that about this site when people use it to help others win.

I love your write up and appreciate you giving out your numbers.

Keep up the awesome work and lets keep this ball rolling.

 

[RBD]

Thanks, Coach W.
My posted play today, Orl/Mil Q1 Ov 56', a play based on #'s I looked at after reading your post, was a lousy beat, lost by a hook AND I got a bad # as 56 was available and I could have had a Push.
But the other game that qualified today, Mia/Indy Over 54' landed on 60 and I had it in my pocket.
No other game fits today as my # and the books are about the same on OKC/Hou, and on the Port/LAL game my # is higher, but the split today makes that stat 18-10 playing the Over on games where my # is lower than the books, and I am sure as hell going to use it tomorrow if any games qualify.

Added buy:
Heat/Indy 2nd half Ov 107

 

[RBD]

A half point loss, a one point loss, AND my favorite pizza joint just went out of business due to the lockdown.

Like I always say:
If you lose your job, your wife leaves you, your dog get's killed by a car, and you find a message on your answering machine from your doctor that says, "I got your test results back, umm, we need to schedule you for another appointment right away, Call me ASAP!" it is NOT the kind of day you want to say, "Hmmm, I think I'll lay a dime on the NY Giants -3 today."

Sometimes, ya just gotta take a step back, take the night off, and regroup. Don't press, don't chase.
No big deal, I'll hit 'em tomorrow. A lot of winning left between now and the finals.

 

[RBD]

Or . . .
You can say, "I've been coming close, I'm not going to quit."

I make these numbers and I stand by them. There are two spots left to choose from on my card:
Port Q1 (13-6 after this morning's W with Orl)
and LAL team total Over (25-19.)

Buys:
Port Q1 +2'
LAL Ov 120
And not a play from one of my situations, but Port/LAL Ov 233'

 

[RBD]

Be a Better Bettor Newsletter 8/19/2020


Hey, Bookie Boy,

Okay, you got the best of me yesterday.

You mocked me with a 1/2 pt loss on my first game, then a 1 pt loss on my second play. You bitch.

I came back and said "I believe in my numbers, and I'm playing the only two games I have left circled on my card," plus a play on LAL Over that wasn't from one of my "systems." (Yes, I hate that word.) But I actually had three spots left, I forgot the "Temperature" play I listed, Portland, and they won SU, and I missed a win.

So, yeah, I went 1-4 and I'm 2-5 overall in the playoffs now.
But that's because I screwed up; here are the plays I posted from the first two days:

Monday: "Q1 spots - all four Dogs qualify." Utah Q1 +1' L, Phil Q1 +2 W, Brk Q1 +3 L, Dal Q1 +2 W.
"Also have two totals, Utah/Den Ov, Brk/Tor Ov." Both won.

Team totals: In the early game - "Both teams qualify as a tm total Under, Utah Un 105, Den Un 214'." That is an 0-3 play so obviously a fade was recommended on a losing record. Both games went Over and won as fades.
Then . . .
"Philly (106), Bos (112), Brk (106) and Tor (115') all qualify as plays on the team total Under."
That was a split on the fade at 2-2.

Finally - "From the only other play I am using, the Temperature Play, Phil/Bos Un 218' and LAC -6."
BOTH won.

That's a 10-4 day. And I went 1-1. Mistake. Big mistake.


Tue: Q1 spots - "Two sides have a diff of 3 or more (factoring in the spread) - Orl (diff of 4.4 )and Port (diff of 3.5) so each would qualify as a play." Both won.

Adding the newset play I gave a record on and will add to my play chart, the one I thanked Coach for, a play on the Over when my Q1 total is less than your number, the play went 1-1.

Then - Team Totals: "Orl Un, Milw Un, LAL Ov (Note - Ov is 21-11, Un is 6-9 on these.)"
At 6-9 Unders were a fade to play AGAINST, at 21-11 Overs are a play ON.
Orl fade W, Milw fade L, LAL Ov L.

Finally, the Temperature play: Port + 6'. W

Tuesday record on plays shared was 5-3. I went 1-4 on buys.

For the first two days, my systems have kicked out a 15-7 (68%) record.
And I'm at 2-5. WTF??!!

See your problem?
I see mine.
No more picking spots, I'm playing all spots that qualify as a play.
The records may level out now, but that's the hill I choose to make a stand on.
I believe in my numbers, I know the amount of work I put in, eliminating systems that are near break even, isolating systems that have a high or low percentage, to play ON or AGAINST.

I'm coming for you, bitch.

Buys:
Utah Q1 +1'
Dal Q1 +2
Utah/Den Un 217'
Dal/LAC Ov 230
LAC -6

Update: No tm totals qualify as plays today.
Adding Phil/Bos Ov 215 (corrected @ 215; not from any system posted)
May add some second half plays later . . .

Updated record on systems:

Q1 Sides: 16-6 (Fav 2-1, Dog 14-5) Utah & Dal today
Q1 Totals: 10-14 (Ov 4-6, Un 6-8) not much value in these, both near .500 now; staying off.

Q1 Coach Woody play: 16-25 (Ov 6-7, Un 10-18) will fade those Unders when I get one; none today

Tm totals: 24-20 (Ov 21-12, Un 3-8 Play ON Ov, AGAINST Un; no spots today)

Temperature Plays: Sides 5-0 (Fav 1-0, Dogs 4-0) Totals 3-1 (Ov 0-1, Un 3-0) LAC, Utah/Den Un, Dal/LAC Ov

 

[Coach Woody]

RBD,

Lets get it back today....I had a horrible day yesterday.

Lost both plays I posted and lost a few others. 3 by a half point. 2 I watched the ball go in and out on the last shot to give me the over.

Thats how it works sometimes..... Time for redemption today.

Like your plays and hope you roll it today

 

[RBD]

Thanks, Coach.

Be a Better Bettor Newsletter 8/20/2020

Yesterday I was going to ask anyone who was interested to take a pen and paper and chart my plays from day one and two of the playoffs. Then put a W next to wins, and an L next to losses, to verify my record, all plays shared here. But then I decided to make it easier - I listed all the plays in yesterday's newsletter so no one would have to look in the other posts.
The plays were 15-7. I then said, "I'm not going to pick my spots, I'm just going to ride all the systems I use because they're at 68%." And that's what I did yesterday. Recap/results? 4-2, 67%.
Will it hit at that level again today?
Hell if I know, I'm not a fortune teller. I don't make predictions. But I'm sure as hell going to find out.

Record: 6-7.

The Fault in Chasing Trends

You see it all the time, a pundit, poster, prognosticator, handicapper, scamdicapper will say something like:

"The Seattle Seahawks are 8-2 ATS on Monday nights!"
or . . .
"The Mets are 9-3 on the Under when playing a day game after a night game!"
(Both records are made up numbers for example purposes. I have no idea of any Met trends, baseball bores the crap out of me, and since I'm not in need of a laxative I don't follow it. Except for one system play. It was active yesterday and posted in MLB here, winner with Twins Under 4' +115.)

They proudly declare these trends as if they have discovered gold, and are imparting words of wisdom to you, rather than just repeating numbers anyone can find with a little time spent at any sports site.

But here's the thing of it - the value in that Seahawk record ISN'T after it's already established.
You need to know that record 4-5 game ago, that's when it still had value.

Does this mean fade it (bet the opposite way)?
No.
But over time all trends level out. If you have been riding it and already made some bank, stay with it.
But being Johnny-Come-Lately, and jumping on an already established streak, is usually a losing position. (though granted, Johnny-Come-Lately is better than Johnny-Never-Comes-At-All.)

Thus endeth the lesson.


For a real life example, let's look at the Q1 Dog play I've been posting.
It was 14-5 as noted in yesterday's newsletter.
It went 2-0 Wednesday, with Utah and Dallas, and is now 16-5 (76%.)
So, does it fit the situation I noted above with the Seahawks or Mets?
Is it time to back off and not buy the next play?
Not if you've been riding it. Because it was first shared here back on August 11, when I pointed out it was 7-2.
That makes it 9-3 since then.
If you've already banked a few units on it, ride that Bronco until it bucks ya.

Back with today's spots as soon as I get some Yogi Green Tea in me and finish my work.


Update: All work is complete.

Q1 Sides: OKC +1/2, Orl +5, Port +2'

Coach's Q1 play: OKC/Hou Ov 57', Orl/Milw Ov 56'
(these are Unders, faded, played Over due to losing record on Unders)

Team Totals: Port Ov 111, LAL Ov 117', OKC Ov 114, Orl Ov 107, Milw Ov 120 (the OKC, Orl & Milw spots are fades, played Over due to the losing record on Unders)

Temperature Plays: Orl/Milw Un 227, Port +6'

WB plays: OKC/Hou Over 225', Orl/Milw Over 227.


Updated record on systems:

Q1 Sides: 18-6 (Fav 2-1, Dog 16-5) OKC +1/2, Orl +5, Port +2' today.
Q1 Totals: 10-14 (Ov 5-7, Un 6-8) not much value in these, both near .500 now; staying off.

Q1 Coach Woody play: 16-25 (Ov 6-7, Un 10-18) OKC/Hou Ov 57', Orl/Milw Ov 56' today.
(Note - these are spots where my # is lower than the book; playing these Under is 10-18, so, fade material.)

Tm totals: 24-20 (Ov 21-12, Un 3-8 Play ON Ov, AGAINST Un): Port Ov 111, LAL Ov 117', OKC Ov 112 (corrected; had had Hou tm total of 114), Orl Ov 107, Milw Ov 120

Temperature Plays: Sides 5-1 (Fav 1-1, Dogs 4-0) Totals 4-2 (Ov 1-1, Un 3-1) Orl/Milw Un 227, Port +6'

NOTE - Conflict. The temperature play says take Orl/Milw Under, which is why I bought it.
Just finished team total work, and both Orl & Milw qualify as Unders, in a play with a record of 3-8, which means fade and play them Over.
Also, yesterday I added a play that I said was not from one of the systems I post here - the Phil/Bos gm Over, and it won. I'll add those plays here also (for tracking purposes I'll refer to them as WB plays; have to call them something to differentiate it from the other systems I track and share here.) Two today in that play, OKC/Hou Over and Orl/Milw Over (another reason I would have stayed off the Under in Orl/Milw.) Normally, when I get a conflict, where one system says Over and the other says take the Under, I lay off. But, I already bought the game Under so that's the only play I will make on it.

Buys:
Orl/Milw Un 227 (a few houses at 227', others 227, 226'; I bought now, it's dropping from the opening 227')

Update:
Yes, I said I was going to buy all plays that are active in the different systems I use.
But, I also said, "Keep a log book, use it to analyze your play."
There are three Q1 Dogs today. I chart games where there is a differential of 3 or > between the # I make, and the one offered by the books. There aren't a lot of these because our #'s are usually close. And when there is a difference, it's usually minimal, a point or two. But today's Orl game has a differential of over 6 pts. In the playoffs there have been three times where the difference was 6 or > and 2 of 3 lost.
No buy on Orl Q1 for me today.

Q1 play is profitable on Dogs, but OKC is only getting a 1/2 pt, not much of a Dog, no buy for me there either.

I am going to buy the OKC team total over, but as the line seems to be dropping, no need to buy it just yet, will wait to see if I can get better than 112.

I don't see Prt Q1 getting to +3, so I bought the +2'.

Buys:
Orl/Milw Un 227
OKC team total Over (waiting on the #)
Port Q1 +2'

Update: Grabbed the OKC team total at 112 as it started moving against me.
Also, the Port # isn't going to move in my favor, already missed out on the opening 111, bought the 112.

Buys:
Orl/Milw Un 227
Port Q1 +2'
OKC Ov 112
Port Ov 112
OKC/Hou Q1 Ov 57'

 

[Coach Woody]

RBD,

Great job yesterday and LOVE todays article on being a better bettor

I fell for that trend thing in my past. I think there is much value in trends but like you said when you are on the right side of them.

My horse I am riding right now is the NUGGETS OVER.....Ride til I Die attitude. Yes one over was cause of overtime but I take those....Lord knows I have lost many an under because of overtime.

I am riding the NUGGETS over until that horse dumps me on my ass. Might be next game or might next week. I know they will play under at some point or the books will adjust the line so much it will play under. But until it happens I Ride Ride Ride.

Lets roll them today..... I am looking myself at a couple of plays today but haven't finalized any.

Good LUCK AND LETS ROLL

 

[RBD]

Update: Sorry, forgot to add OKC/Hou Over 226 as a buy from the WB play.
Game just tipped off.
Have it in pocket, but won't count as a buy here; will count in the record for those plays, obviously.

 

[Coach Woody]

RBD,

WE buying the Blazers +6.5.... I say we cause I like the game and think Portland can hang with the Lakers.

Lakers are not playing like they will win a championship....I have no numbers or insight or who is playing or not, but I do have a basketball knowledge that the Lakers are not playing well and look sluggish. I think that Kuzman could be the difference maker for the Lakers. If he has a great game I could see the Lakers winning but if its just Lebron and Davis then Portland runs them again....Davis needs to start stroking the outside shot or stop shooting it.

Only a total gut pick for me.

Would love to hear your thoughts before I pull the trigger