NBA Finals

H

handy

Pretty much a regular
Anyone with a half a brain would know matchbook's number of +145 on the Celtics to win the Finals is an absolute joke.

Folks, the Celtics are going to be favored to win this series. If they're not I will be shocked. Home court and they have to be favored in every home game. All these morons out there buying up the Lakers at a chalk price to win the Finals??? Why? Perhaps you may think the Lakers are going to win but why on earth would anyone buy them at -160?

Anyways, I believe the Celtics are going to be 3 to 4.5 pt. favorites in game 1.

I strongly believe you could buy the C's at matchbook at +145 for a lot of $$ and then buy LA at +$$ to win series when the real line emerges and make money for clicking a few buttons.

Good luck everyone but this wise guy believes the C's are a great bet at plus money to win the Finals. I'm not predicting they win it all but you have to take them as a dog with home court.
 
handy said:
Anyone with a half a brain would know matchbook's number of +145 on the Celtics to win the Finals is an absolute joke.

Folks, the Celtics are going to be favored to win this series. If they're not I will be shocked. Home court and they have to be favored in every home game. All these morons out there buying up the Lakers at a chalk price to win the Finals??? Why? Perhaps you may think the Lakers are going to win but why on earth would anyone buy them at -160?

Anyways, I believe the Celtics are going to be 3 to 4.5 pt. favorites in game 1.

I strongly believe you could buy the C's at matchbook at +145 for a lot of $$ and then buy LA at +$$ to win series when the real line emerges and make money for clicking a few buttons.

Good luck everyone but this wise guy believes the C's are a great bet at plus money to win the Finals. I'm not predicting they win it all but you have to take them as a dog with home court.
Click to expand...

lol
 
The Finals at 2-3-2 and there is no reason on earth why the Lakers should be favored to win this series.

If you can't figure that out you shouldn't be betting.
 
Plus, if you like the Lakers to win the series as chalk you're better off betting them on the +ML in game 1 rather than buying them on the series line. If they lose game 1 you will be holding a bad number but if they win you get paid immediately.

If LA isn't getting at least +130 there is no reason to bet them to win the series. They will be getting that price in any game in Boston.

C'mon folks use your head other than a hat rack
 
Throwback,

I'll bet you didn't know that only one time since the NBA went to the 2-3-2 finals format has the three middle games been won by the home team. It happened a couple years ago when the Mavs gave away game 3 to the Heat.


All I'm saying is people should expect both teams to win a game or two on the road. Chances are this series goes at least 6.
 
handy said:
Plus, if you like the Lakers to win the series as chalk you're better off betting them on the +ML in game 1 rather than buying them on the series line. If they lose game 1 you will be holding a bad number but if they win you get paid immediately.

If LA isn't getting at least +130 there is no reason to bet them to win the series. They will be getting that price in any game in Boston.

C'mon folks use your head other than a hat rack
Click to expand...

thats what im doing.

IMHO i think they win game 1
 
JOEYCRAWFORD.jpg
 
Yup, needless to say I'm shocked and all I will say is that line is flat our wrong.

How is that line even possible?
 
series ?

b4 game 5 for lakers line to win the ship they were -200 after that they were -260 to win it all on most books
 
throwback,

Do you know how to calculate true parlay odds? The Lakers were -3000 to win the series prior to game 5 and now -165 to win it all. Do the math on that 2 team parlay and tell me what you get?

My math tells me a $100 bet pays around $65 not $50. The numbers are just inflated and way out of whack on LA. I'm not telling you they're going to lose. I haven't a clue but how can you lay that kind of chalk on a team which doesn't have home court? Plus, are you really convinced they're the better team? I'm not.
 
My gut tells me Boston wins this series in 7. LA has the better coach, best player but Boston likely wins a game at Staples Center which likely forces LA to win 2 in Boston. I just think this series is a lot closer than the avg. joe thinks.

If the C's show up and play in LA like they did in game 3 and 6 in Detroit there is little doubt in my mind they will get a game out there.

I don't care who wins as long as I make $$. I do have a rooting interest but that doesn't get in the way of my agenda of making $$.
 
Well I watched the 2 games this year and the Celtics kicked the lakers ass twice with Bynum but no Gasol. Lakers looked like shit in both games they.

but since the playoffs Boston has regressed and Lakers have progressed imo.
 
I'm not sure the Celtics have regressed? I think they regressed and then progressed. I don't see why so many think LA wins this so easy. They might win it all but it's not going to be a cakewalk.
 
KG gunning for his 1st vs Bryant gunning for his 1st without Shaq Daddy. Hmmm ...
 
Not winning a title is a failure on the year for both teams... this series is a toss-up. I think it's better to play it game by game.
 
Handy is right, they have regressed THEN progressed (the Celtics). I still think the Lakers are the better team but this line is way off. I'm better off betting this situationally and in game than anything else.

Could you really blame people drinking the Lakers kool aid right now, Handy?

Swept Denver (who are not much of a team despite solid roster but emphasis on swept)

Beat Utah who are very tough to play against

Beat SA (they were battered and bruised however, even though I'm not making excuses they did beat them 4:1 and I didn't really have the feeling Spurs will win game 5 despite being up by 17 (took Lakers at half))


On the flip side, you have Boston. Struggled v Atlanta on the road, struggled with Cleveland on the road, almost lost to them at home once, then came Detroit and this is where the progression happens.

This Celtics team STEPPED UP. The Pistons had some injury woes but it wasn't because of that the Celtics beat them. Flip is a horrible coach, but the Celtics just stepped up on the road, even though they weren't in a good position after two games.

Going to Motown tied at 1 with 0 road wins so far (0-6 ATS) was not a good omen.

They win series in 6?

I have to say I was impressed. Flip should be fired for letting this happen, but Boston just stepped up.

I would think Lakers can win in Boston, but this series price is definitely not spot on. Thinking Lakers split the first two in Boston then win 2 out of 3 at home.

As I said, betting games individually and live, no way I'm taking this series price.
 
BeLIEve811 said:
Not winning a title is a failure on the year for both teams... this series is a toss-up. I think it's better to play it game by game.
Click to expand...

depends how you look at it.

The Lakers are deep, talented and age is not an issue (unlike with SA), if they don't win it here they probably will in the next 3 years.

+ Bynum will be healthy.

Boston's first season with the big three, I thought they played very well, and I was the one saying how Detroit will go through, thinking Boston can't get up from being punched in the face on the road continuously by Atlanta and Cleveland.

Thinking both teams can be happy with this. On the other hand, yeah, whoever loses will be disappointed big time.
 
The series line is based on public perception. Simple as that in my eyes.

I remember about a month ago on ESPN radio they were interviewing someone from LVSC and he was asked what the line would be if Boston and LA made it to the finals. He specificly stated that even tho he believed Boston should be the favorite to win, that LA would be a slight favorite due to public perception. Granted this was either before or during the early playoff rounds, but I wasn't surprized at all with this line. LVSC knows what they are doing and this is just a reminder of why.

Value lies in the Celtics. IMHO.
 
This is one of the most crooked series prices I've ever seen. In other words if LA had home court they would be about -400 to beat Boston????

I can see why many believe the Lakers are the better team and will win it all but that doesn't mean it will happen. In all liklihood they're going to have to wrap this series up on the road. If they must win in Boston you will be able to get them in a close out game as a dog not chalk. This line is just wrong. I truly can't believe Boston isn't a -130 favorite to win this series.
 
LAKESHOW wins 1 in BOSTON - BOSTON wins 1 in LAKESHOW -
they will wind up in BOSTON for game 6 with the LAKERS up (3-2)
[who knows whats gonna happen at that point]
 
handy said:
Boston will be favored to win 4 of the 7 games but not to win the series???
Click to expand...

Pinnacle currently give 1.56 to lakers backers and 2.68 to Celtics backers. I'm a Lakers fan and believe in them, but as far as gambling goes, it just crazy. Boston got the home court advantage and like you said will be favorite in 4 out of 7, but got great line for the series. If I was Boston fan who believed in their team, I would pound on the Celtics. Win in game 1 and they will be able to sell their bet with decent profit. I can't support Celtics in game 1, so I will stay clear of such dumb line for the series. By the way, this is why 95% of gamblers lose at the end. They take bets based on god knows what. Lakers were the best team in the playoff so far, but 1.56 VS. 2.68? That just nuts!
 
Last edited:
i think that an other reason why the celtics are dogs for this serie is that they have played 20 games in the playoffs which is 5 games more than the lakers.
but comon man, celtics are not old like SA and they have a few days to rest their players, they have the home court. Fatigue Factor has been overrated by joe public and the books and books have just overadjusted this.
i think the public wants LA to win but it doesn't mean that they are the favorite. if only LA had the home court i would say ok for 1,6 vs 2,54 but that's not the case here.
 
Sorry if I strike a nerve but 99% of gamblers are idiots. They don't understand mathematics, how the house sets lines and makes $$. If the books truly believed the Lakers were the favorite in this series LA would be favored to win games in Boston. They won't be favored in any game in Boston. In fact, if Boston loses game 1 they're likely favored by 5 in game 2 simply because of the situation.

I believe worse case scenario Boston is down 3-2 but more likely up 3-2 and win it in 6.

All these yahoos out there thinking the Lakers can't and won't lose a game at home are just kidding themselves. The C's wouldn't have blown to 17 point leads at Staples Center like the Spurs just did. No way!!

Just remember a few years ago when LA was -800 to beat the Pistons in the Finals.

I don't care who wins as long as I make $$ on what ever I play. I just believe the C's at +150 on the series line is too good to pass on.
 
Handy i just wanted to say I really enjoy reading your thoughts, i admire your thought process and discipline to know when NOT to try and force a play and just kick back and wait on your spot....as you say 99% of sports gamblers are idiots which is why it is so refreshing to read your thoughts and feel the need to give you this compliment:shake:
 
C's nearly blew a 15+ point lead to the pistons at home yet there is no way they'd do the same on the road vs. a much better team in the lakers?
 
Nearly blowing a lead and blowing a lead aren't the same thing. The C's would've seized the moment in LA just like they did in game 3 at Detroit. I just don't know what you people are watching thinking the Lakers blow away the Celtics. They might win the series but I keep hearing all these talking heads predicting Lakers in 5!! c'mon!!

The better team may not even be favored
 
Handy, you're not exactly right. If Lakers were favorite to win the series against the Spurs, that doesn't mean they will be favorite to win in Texas as well. The absurd thing here is of course the home court advantage by the Celtics, that means that in 7 games scenario, we will get 4 games with Celts as favored. That is wierd.
Another question is this, is it a good move to take Celtics win the series and Lakers win Game 1? If Lakers will win, by how much will the line move and if Celtics win the series, by how much the line will move.
Anyone remembers what was the line for the series between Celtics and Detroit before Game 1, after Game 1 and after Game 2?
 
divol,

I don't know what you're talking about? All I tried to tell you was if you buy LA to win series at a chalk price, you better hope they win it at home. Otherwise you're going to own them in close out games as chalk instead of simply being able to buy them to win a game as a dog.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE SERIES PRICE IS FLAT OUT WRONG.

I haven't a clue as to who wins, but I like Boston's chances.

Good luck everyone.

Life is dandy when you're capping the series price with Handy!!
 
I'm sorry but...

handy said:
Sorry if I strike a nerve but 99% of gamblers are idiots. They don't understand mathematics, how the house sets lines and makes $$. If the books truly believed the Lakers were the favorite in this series LA would be favored to win games in Boston. They won't be favored in any game in Boston. In fact, if Boston loses game 1 they're likely favored by 5 in game 2 simply because of the situation.

I believe worse case scenario Boston is down 3-2 but more likely up 3-2 and win it in 6.
Click to expand...
handy said:
The reason why the Lakers are inflated to win the series is that the books strongly feel the Lakers will close the deal and are trying to entice Boston bets with the plus money. If it was a PK as IMHO it should be then all the $$$$ would float in on L.A. and the books would get hammered when it happens. Even if you feel the line is off the C's still have to beat L.A. 4 of 7 for you to cash the ticket...(yes I know you can cover if the C's win game 1 but what if they don't???)

I agree it is likely to be 3-2 L.A. after 5? And yes the C's will be favored in 6 and 7 but by how much? My guess is 2 or 2.5. That means odds are pretty good they split the final 2 just like they will split the first two. If you don't believe the C's will win 2 to start the series shy will they win 2 to close it out? Give me Phil and Kobe needing just 1 of 2 with that kind of pressure anytime...

Sorry Handy but I believe that you are doing exactly what the books want you to do - grabbing the bait on an inflated line that will never cash - that my friend is how Vegas makes $$$$$....

(side note: - notice how just about everyone posting how the C's are the smart play have something green in their avater? things that make you go hmmmm....)

and for the record I'm a Bucks fan - no jokes please - it's been rough enough since the disbanding of the big 3 ;)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
handy said:
divol,

I don't know what you're talking about? All I tried to tell you was if you buy LA to win series at a chalk price, you better hope they win it at home. Otherwise you're going to own them in close out games as chalk instead of simply being able to buy them to win a game as a dog.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE SERIES PRICE IS FLAT OUT WRONG.

I haven't a clue as to who wins, but I like Boston's chances.

Good luck everyone.

Life is dandy when you're capping the series price with Handy!!
Click to expand...

I'm saying, I agree with you, but what is next?
As it stands right now, Lakers are 1.5 to win the series, but 2.2 to win the first game. Boston are between between 2.6 and 2.8 to win the series, but 1.70 - 1.75 to win Game 1.
Now there are two possible results to Game 1 of course, Lakers will win or Boston. What will happen to the series line on both results in your opinion. Does a bet on Lakers to win the game and Boston to win the series got value, is it the other way around. I think that both lines are inflated, but the series is dead wrong, but if you put your money just on Boston to win the series and than Lakers win the first game, you can find yourself with a price that had value, but not anymore.

P.S. That's all based on assumption that I don't want to make a choice on who wins at the end, but I'm looking for a profit regardless...
 
handy said:
divol,

I don't know what you're talking about? All I tried to tell you was if you buy LA to win series at a chalk price, you better hope they win it at home. Otherwise you're going to own them in close out games as chalk instead of simply being able to buy them to win a game as a dog.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE SERIES PRICE IS FLAT OUT WRONG.

I haven't a clue as to who wins, but I like Boston's chances.

Good luck everyone.

Life is dandy when you're capping the series price with Handy!!
Click to expand...

WELL SAID .
 
This one goes out to handy...

Dude, before you say that the price is flat out wrong I would like to ask you one thing - how many series prices have you set when are being paid salary to do so?

I have been doing this stuff for quite some time now (working for European bookie). Even though I think that value is on Celts there is no way in the world that this price is "FLAT OUT WRONG". No way in this world. As many people already mentioned here - public perception is what drives market a lot. Do bookies care what smart guys think - sure they do. Do bookies care what fishes think? Hell yeah! There are about 5% of smart punters out there in general. Then there are around 10-15% of guys who are mostly living on a bubble. And rest are just bookies cash cows. Believe it or not, but purple and gold these days has way more appeal to bet for fishes than green of Celts. Bookies are happy with these prices since it will even their risk out easily.

The bottom line is - there is some value on Celts for sure (at least I think so), but there is no way in hell that it is a wrong line because it is set in a way that it is best for bookie. Simple as that.
 
imo, despite being a Celtics fan, home court should be -120 even if this team has a small chance at winning. I think HCA has been the most important part of the NBA playoffs, and i've had to pinch myself to see +150 on the Celtics at this point.

My plan is to take the Celts to win the series and then hope for them to take a 2-0 lead, when that happens i'll take the Lakers to win the series (at + money i'm almost sure) and then insure a profit.

If you're planning to follow this, all that is truly needed is for the Celtics to win game 1 because that will reduce the juice on the Lakers for the series to probably +100, and I may hedge at that point and just root for the Celts.

...sorry if i repeated anything cuz i didn't have much time to read it all.

handy:shake:
 
We'll see just how UNDERRATED the Eastern Conference was this season. The Celtics destroyed the West by being able to score against weaker defenses and bringing ugly, east-coast oriented ball to the West teams which want no part of it.

Utah is one of the worst teams in the NBA defensively.

Spurs really slowed down LAL, and went M-I-A on offense for minutes and minutes. Partly because Barry, Finley, Bowen couldn't hit a shot.

Celtics will have mismatches all over the floor with whoever Vlad Mon is guarding... or whoever tries to guard KG. They will be freed from the two best defensive teams besides themselves in Detroit and Cavs... and will score and make stops.



This line is a JOKE. It's because they just beat the defending, hobbled, champs 4-1 but could have easily been down 3-2 just as easily. It's also because LA is a huge market and Kobe is all over the news. Also, every "expert" on the Lakers. Ha
 
Basketbolists said:
This one goes out to handy...

Dude, before you say that the price is flat out wrong I would like to ask you one thing - how many series prices have you set when are being paid salary to do so?

I have been doing this stuff for quite some time now (working for European bookie). Even though I think that value is on Celts there is no way in the world that this price is "FLAT OUT WRONG". No way in this world. As many people already mentioned here - public perception is what drives market a lot. Do bookies care what smart guys think - sure they do. Do bookies care what fishes think? Hell yeah! There are about 5% of smart punters out there in general. Then there are around 10-15% of guys who are mostly living on a bubble. And rest are just bookies cash cows. Believe it or not, but purple and gold these days has way more appeal to bet for fishes than green of Celts. Bookies are happy with these prices since it will even their risk out easily.

The bottom line is - there is some value on Celts for sure (at least I think so), but there is no way in hell that it is a wrong line because it is set in a way that it is best for bookie. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

I think you are Handy are talking about two different things here. From a bookmaker standing point, this line is set spot on. For the mere reason of luring most bettors on pounding the Lakers, since they really look like the better team right now, dismissing the Nuggets, Jazz and Spurs on their way to the NBA finals.

From a realistic capper standpoint, it is wrong. If not for anything else, then for the fact that says: in order for the Lakers to actually WIN THE SERIES, they will have to win on the road. Winning one road game AT LEAST. And that's only if we assume they will win 3 at home, whereas historically, not many teams have went on winning the three middle home games in a 2-3-2 system.

The penultimate question is: how many games do you think Lakers will be favored in Boston?

I'd say zero.

And this is where this series price loses its battle with logic.

But you are very right when you say this line was expected to be set this way. You definitely have an idea of how much money will they have riding on the Lakers to win series, losing their money the second they place that bet. Even if the Lakers win, they lost money, by pounding on a bad price.


Handy says: this is a horrid bet to make (Lakers to win series)

You say: the line is correct from a bookie standpoint.

I agree with both statements.
 
Satyr said:
I think you are Handy are talking about two different things here. From a bookmaker standing point, this line is set spot on. For the mere reason of luring most bettors on pounding the Lakers, since they really look like the better team right now, dismissing the Nuggets, Jazz and Spurs on their way to the NBA finals.

From a realistic capper standpoint, it is wrong. If not for anything else, then for the fact that says: in order for the Lakers to actually WIN THE SERIES, they will have to win on the road. Winning one road game AT LEAST. And that's only if we assume they will win 3 at home, whereas historically, not many teams have went on winning the three middle home games in a 2-3-2 system.

The penultimate question is: how many games do you think Lakers will be favored in Boston?

I'd say zero.

And this is where this series price loses its battle with logic.

But you are very right when you say this line was expected to be set this way. You definitely have an idea of how much money will they have riding on the Lakers to win series, losing their money the second they place that bet. Even if the Lakers win, they lost money, by pounding on a bad price.


Handy says: this is a horrid bet to make (Lakers to win series)

You say: the line is correct from a bookie standpoint.

I agree with both statements.
Click to expand...


For those of you haven't read any of this thread Sat summed it up for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

skanless13
Celtics vs Pacers.
Replies
12
Views
314
B.A.R.
B.A.R.
VirginiaCavs
Game 5 Mavericks vs. Celtics Preview Article
Replies
11
Views
351
Stew Baker
Stew Baker
VirginiaCavs
Game 1 Mavericks vs. Celtics Preview Article
Replies
5
Views
253
Stew Baker
Stew Baker
B.A.R.
*** The 2024 NBA Finals -- Boston vs Dallas -- Discussion ***
2 3
Replies
102
Views
2K
B.A.R.
B.A.R.
P
Friday NBA
Replies
3
Views
291
PirateAlew
P
Back
Top