Celtics/Pacers Saturday night

Celtics/Pacers Saturday night The opening line on this is Indiana -3.5 and I really wonder how many points are in this line out of respect for the Celtics and what they've accomplished. I think the way out line for this game is Indiana -8 but NO NO I don't think they should put that up but I am surprised it isn't -5. But I think any power ratings of this game has to be Indiana being favoured at the moment. They won last week vs. Boston in Boston. The Celtics are clearly struggling. The Pacers have a physical team and quite honestly are better than the Celtics through for first 3 weeks of the season by a large margin. It is not that much of a surprise as the Pacers were picked by many to do well this year. Obviously Boston's struggles are surprising but maybe not shocking. Both teams are on a back to back and that would just seem to favour Indiana I would think along with home court. The line is at -3.5 so that would make these teams equal at the moment. from a power ratings perspective I think the Hollinger ratings have Indiana about 8 points higher than the Celtics. I also understand that Garnett may be questionable for the game. I don't really have an opinion on this game and we all know the Celtics are quite capable of drilling Indiana but this line is way too short IMO. It just can't be a total accident that Indiana Dallas and Chicago have beaten Boston this year in Boston. The Celtics might be in a great situation for revenge here from last week's loss but I don't see how one can bet it at +3.5. I laid this at an offshore book and would like to think I could get at least +5 on this game and just shoot for the middle if I decide I really don't want Indiana as a bet. Anyone want to defend -3.5 as the correct line for this game?

[QUOTE=Skeeter;50007] Anyone want to defend -3.5 as the correct line for this game?[/QUOTE] I'll stick my neck out: The Celtics are off a bad loss to the Bulls on national TV. Paul Pierce was 3-of-12 from the field and recorded ONE rebound in 35 minutes of action. The Celtics dropped to 4-6 on the season as a result of the loss. The Pacers, on the other hand, are off a come-from-behind win over the Raptors in which Danny Granger was 1-of-8 from the field. The win got the Pacers to 8-3 on the season. Boston is a perfect 15-0 ATS since the start of the 2004 season on the road after a loss in which Pierce played for less than 38 minutes and shot less than 33% from the field. The SDQL text is: team=Celtics and A and p:L and Paul Pierce:p:FGP=2004 In addition, Boston is 10-0 ATS (+11.6 ppg) as a road dog with no rest after a game in which they had an assist to turnover ratio of at least two, 6-0 ATS (+7.8 ppg) as a road dog after a home loss in which they scored less than 15% of their points from the free throw line, and 7-0 ATS (+6.9 ppg) on the road with at most one day of rest off a loss in which they never led. The evidence for a play against the Pacers in this spot is strong. First of all, we have a league-wide, multi-season system that states, “The League is 0-11 ATS (-15.4 ppg) as a home favorite off a win as an away favorite in which they trailed by 15+ points.” As a team, the Pacers are 0-7 ATS (-11.1 ppg) as a home favorite after a game on the road in which they had more turnovers than assists, 0-6 ATS (-10.8 ppg) with no rest after a win in which they scored more than 25% of their points from the free throw line and 0-7 ATS (-8.0 ppg) with no rest after a win in which Danny Granger was not the Pacers' high scorer. Prof M.

Supporting the other side... I'll stick my neck out: The Celtics are off a bad loss to the Bulls on national TV. Paul Pierce was 3-of-12 from the field and recorded ONE rebound in 35 minutes of action. The Celtics dropped to 4-6 on the season as a result of the loss. The Pacers, on the other hand, are off a come-from-behind win over the Raptors in which Danny Granger was 1-of-8 from the field. The win got the Pacers to 8-3 on the season. Boston is a perfect 15-0 ATS since the start of the 2004 season on the road after a loss in which Pierce played for less than 38 minutes and shot less than 33% from the field. The SDQL text is: team=Celtics and A and p:L and Paul Pierce:p:FGP=2004 In addition, Boston is 10-0 ATS (+11.6 ppg) as a road dog with no rest after a game in which they had an assist to turnover ratio of at least two, 6-0 ATS (+7.8 ppg) as a road dog after a home loss in which they scored less than 15% of their points from the free throw line, and 7-0 ATS (+6.9 ppg) on the road with at most one day of rest off a loss in which they never led. The evidence for a play against the Pacers in this spot is strong. First of all, we have a league-wide, multi-season system that states, “The League is 0-11 ATS (-15.4 ppg) as a home favorite off a win as an away favorite in which they trailed by 15+ points.” As a team, the Pacers are 0-7 ATS (-11.1 ppg) as a home favorite after a game on the road in which they had more turnovers than assists, 0-6 ATS (-10.8 ppg) with no rest after a win in which they scored more than 25% of their points from the free throw line and 0-7 ATS (-8.0 ppg) with no rest after a win in which Danny Granger was not the Pacers' high scorer. Prof M.

Thanks for chiming in Prof. No doubt about it there was money on the Celtics tonight. The line went to -3 and might have got back to -3.5 at post. It is actually a spot I would have usually looked to bet a team like Boston on a bounce back. I have not read a review of the game as yet. If the line had gone upward to 5 I probably would have just gone for the middle on the game and been done with it. Since that never materialized I just kept my bet. Although I won the bet I have to ask myself what I missed in that the line should have only been 3 to 3.5 as that is where the betting world felt it should be. The devilish part of me wants to say "nothing I have no idea why the rest of the world thought this line should be -3. I won and I'm tired and I have to get up tomorrow". I have two handicappers who provide me NBA selections and they didn't say a word. The line went against me. I don't want this to happen too often but it will when originating selections. I do like the league wide angle you quote above and it does resonate with me in that to come back from a 15+ point deficit likely required an expenditure of energy that could tax the team the next evening. It sounds good but the Pacers might not admit it but it might not be so taxing coming back against Toronto. Of course all the little details of games matter in interpreting things. You mention Granger was 1 for 8 but he was also tossed from the Raptor game for a double technical. Not good for the Raptor game but it did keep his legs fresh. He wasn't the Pacers highest scorer but should this result be lumped with the other 7 games where Granger wasn't the high scorer and they were unrested? We're both very verbal. The truth is Boston sucks. Indiana doesn't and that is why I took Indiana. But I can get lucky 50% of the time.