Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ESPN #NBARANK Individual Player Rankings 2016-17

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ESPN #NBARANK Individual Player Rankings 2016-17

    Three Raps place between 151-200. Anyone care to guess where the rest of our guys wind up?

    http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page...layers-151-200

    186. Jared Sullinger
    164. Terrence Ross
    161. Norman Powell
    150. Cory Joseph
    121. Patrick Patterson
    77. DeMarre Carroll
    53. Jonas Valanciunas
    30. DeMar DeRozan
    18. Kyle Lowry



    ______________________________

    I'll try to keep this updated as the rankings are revealed. For reference, this is how we fared in the 2015-16 rankings:

    TORONTO RAPTORS

    34. Kyle Lowry
    52. DeMar DeRozan
    57. Jonas Valanciunas
    61. DeMarre Carroll
    157. Patrick Patterson
    169. Terrence Ross
    200. Cory Joseph
    215. Luis Scola
    254. James Johnson
    257. Bismack Biyombo
    263. Anthony Bennett
    314. Delon Wright
    400. Lucas Nogueira
    Last edited by Scraptor; Fri Nov 11, 2016, 12:12 PM.

  • #2
    Going to bet DD winds up better than 46...
    I don't normally like a tank. But when I do I prefer a #TampaTank.

    Comment


    • #3
      Al Jefferson is #169? WHAT?
      Mamba Mentality

      Comment


      • #4
        Why do the Cuntics have better odds than us at winning the championship?
        "Stay steamy"

        - Kobe

        Comment


        • #5
          hotfuzz wrote: View Post
          Why do the Cuntics have better odds than us at winning the championship?
          Because Vegas odds aren't about likelihood to win, they're about luring gamblers into making bad bets.
          twitter.com/anthonysmdoyle

          Comment


          • #6
            hotfuzz wrote: View Post
            Why do the Cuntics have better odds than us at winning the championship?
            They're dangerous but their defence hasn't lived up to bookmakers' hopes.. at least for now. Marcus Smart is injured.

            Comment


            • #7
              Barolt wrote: View Post
              Because Vegas odds aren't about likelihood to win, they're about luring gamblers into making bad bets.
              Celtics 26/1 = 3.7% probability.
              Raptors 30/1 = 3.23% probability.

              Comment


              • #8
                rocwell wrote: View Post
                Celtics 26/1 = 3.7% probability.
                Yeah, but Boston has a lot of rabid fans, and giving them better odds than the Raptors might lure a lot of Boston gamblers into making that bet, despite how unlikely them winning a 'chip is.
                twitter.com/anthonysmdoyle

                Comment


                • #9
                  Barolt wrote: View Post
                  Yeah, but Boston has a lot of rabid fans, and giving them better odds than the Raptors might lure a lot of Boston gamblers into making that bet, despite how unlikely them winning a 'chip is.
                  Not in this case mate. The public just plays the game. Fans always bet with their heart on win props.

                  And so far, every bookmaking algorithm gives Boston better chance than 4% to win the league. Raptors stand at 3.4%. I wouldn't take this too seriously though as it's a cat and mouse game until All Star break.
                  Last edited by rocwell; Tue Nov 1, 2016, 11:03 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    rocwell wrote: View Post
                    Celtics 26/1 = 3.7% probability.
                    Raptors 30/1 = 3.23% probability.
                    Barolt wrote: View Post
                    Because Vegas odds aren't about likelihood to win, they're about luring gamblers into making bad bets.
                    Don't know for certain but think the Raps don't generate much in the way of total bets so the longer the odds the better as the sports book hopes they can get the guy who is willing to plunk down a 100 on a 60 to 1 shot.

                    For certain its the strategy for the sports book to get some prettty easy money out of the rabid .. but not so smart.... fans of the fabled NY Knickerbockers... who have apparently attracted the most action in total betting even at 100 to 1.

                    The Pistons are on the board at 150 to 1 and are to most NBA fans/analysts/media types a much better team than the Knicks.

                    A futures betting line is more the sales guys in the book trying to attract action rather than what the books analysts would bet the bank on.
                    http://www.vegasinsider.com/nba/odds/futures/
                    I don't normally like a tank. But when I do I prefer a #TampaTank.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Demographic Shift wrote: View Post
                      Don't know for certain but think the Raps don't generate much in the way of total bets so the longer the odds the better as the sports book hopes they can get the guy who is willing to plunk down a 100 on a 60 to 1 shot.

                      For certain its the strategy for the sports book to get some prettty easy money out of the rabid .. but not so smart.... fans of the fabled NY Knickerbockers... who have apparently attracted the most action in total betting even at 100 to 1.

                      The Pistons are on the board at 150 to 1 and are to most NBA fans/analysts/media types a much better team than the Knicks.

                      A futures betting line is more the sales guys in the book trying to attract action rather than what the books analysts would bet the bank on.
                      http://www.vegasinsider.com/nba/odds/futures/
                      Bookies hate this market. It's too small for 'em to make good profit as it doesn't attract a lot of punters who don't usually bet on basketball. Only those guys who bet with their heart.

                      I always check odds at opening and I can confirm that opening lines were set correctly at most bookies. Celtics had better chance to win the league than us from the start.
                      Last edited by rocwell; Tue Nov 1, 2016, 11:16 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Demographic Shift wrote: View Post
                        who have apparently attracted the most action in total betting even at 100 to 1.



                        [/url]
                        This is actually wrong. Warriors attracted most public action... even big money bettors(sharps) jumped in (July 10-27), which is quite unusual tbh for this market.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          rocwell wrote: View Post
                          This is actually wrong. Warriors attracted most public action... even big money bettors(sharps) jumped in (July 10-27), which is quite unusual tbh for this market.
                          Not what I read... it was the bumbling Knicks that attracted the most money... and it was not because of big money bets... just a shit-ton of small bets ....at a 100:1.
                          No one in Vegas goes broke underestimating the gullibility of sports bettor.

                          http://www.espn.com/chalk/story/_/id...a-championship

                          How accurate this is.. outta ESPN.. is anyones guess.. Not sure where to find what the total handle on the knicks was from anyone of the books.
                          Last edited by Demographic Shift; Tue Nov 1, 2016, 11:34 PM.
                          I don't normally like a tank. But when I do I prefer a #TampaTank.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Demographic Shift wrote: View Post
                            Not what I read... it was the bumbling Knicks that attracted the most money... and it was not because of big money bets... just a shit-ton of small bets ....
                            When you look at strange line changes, always keep in mind that educated guesses/bets > than "shit-ton" of small bets

                            By the looks of it, Knicks attracted "shit-ton" of small bets, but the only sharp action you can find is on the Warriors line

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I think both of you are correct. At one book for sure, Knicks attracted the most bets, but the big money was bet on the Warriors. Read this a few weeks back.
                              If we knew half as much about coaching an NBA team as we think, we"d know twice as much as we do.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X