ESPN #NBARANK Individual Player Rankings 2016-17

[Scraptor]

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

[Demographic Shift]

Going to bet DD winds up better than 46...

[The Great One]

Al Jefferson is #169? WHAT?

[hotfuzz]

Why do the Cuntics have better odds than us at winning the championship?

[Barolt]

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.

[rocwell]

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.

[rocwell]

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.

[Barolt]

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.

[rocwell]

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.

[Demographic Shift]

Celtics 26/1 = 3.7% probability.
Raptors 30/1 = 3.23% probability.

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/

[rocwell]

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.

[rocwell]

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.

[Demographic Shift]

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.

[rocwell]

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

[3inthekeon]

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.