Ten Sample NBA Trends

The key is you have to explain to me WHY the trend works..... Absent an explanation, I file it the random brilliant mind folder.....

[QUOTE=Prof Meyer;30677]I have three NBA Futures plays that I will post Sunday evening the 24th. To check out the complete history of MTi's NBA Futures, go to this URL: [url]https://killersports.com/nba_futures.pdf[/url] MTi's NBA Futures are 48-27-2 their history and 6-0 in the past two seasons. In each of the past two seasons, the plays were all winners before April. A complete write-up of these selections are given in the document. The three 2010-11 Futures look at least as good. Prof Meyer[/QUOTE] Looking forward to this! We getting close?

[QUOTE=flipper;30761]Jim, how bout yourself? :D[/QUOTE] I will be posting plays the day after they go off. My record is better on those plays.

[QUOTE=Fezzik;30786]Absent an explanation, I file it the random brilliant mind folder.....[/QUOTE] Let me play Devil’s Advocate here for a minute. I used to love the Mike Orkin programs, which strangely were infinitely better on DOS than Windows. I do love systems (league wide stats), but not trends (team specific). I also consider something “statistically significant” if it had a z-score of 4.5 or higher or as I use Foxsheets, 80 units or higher. I too demanded a system had to “make sense”. But after observing that high scoring angles with seemingly arbitrary data mining parameters held up, I rationed the ones that were easiest to explain were also ones easy for oddsmakers to adjust: such as MNF home underdogs; going against NFL teams playing three straight road games (which no longer happens), etc. Perhaps statistically significant (as I defined) angles that “appear” to be arbitrary are the ones that will sneak under the oddsmakers’ radar.

long term trends? But Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe do not play for the Knicks anymore. another words....... Rosters Change

Rosters change... [QUOTE=MrTop;30947]But Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe do not play for the Knicks anymore. another words....... Rosters Change[/QUOTE] I apologize in advance if this seems rude, but I can't let this one go. Your comment is insulting, condescending and irrelevant. It's as if a group of PhD physicists were discuss quantum electrodynamics and you butted in with, "yeah, but like charges repel each other." We KNOW rosters change. We are not advocating using Knicks' trends involving Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe. Are any of the players in the trends I quoted retired? We are having a serious discussion about team and player-based trends in the NBA in an effort to figure out how to get an edge over the linesmakers. Your comment adds nothing. The point it that an NBA player is a human being, not a machine. We can certainly imagine that if a player shoots 8-of-11 from the field he might approach his next game differently than if he shot 2-of-11. Or if he played more than 45 minutes in his previous game, or if he committed at least five turnovers, missed five free throws, etc. Of course, it is possible that some players approach every game with exactly the same attitude, irrespective of their performance in their last game(s). It is also possible that the same player will change as he matures from a rookie in the league to a veteran. What I'm going to to is to investigate all the possibilities and see what I can uncover. I will look for logical trends that make good handicapping sense. I didn't think I would have to explicitly state that I will not be, for example, using trends involving Bill Russell to attempt to forecast the Celtics' results this season. Prof Meyer

sorry if you disagree Prof Meyer but I think roster changes over night...just like the Miami heat for example... I think there is value if rosters are rated the same and within so much time.....otherwise I think it is worthless.... I was using Walt frazier and Earl Monroe as players no longer on a team ....if you felt I was insulting....I did not mean it on purpose....... I think everything you say on the forum is done quite well But I do not agree with the trend stuff.... that is all.

[QUOTE=MrTop;31006]sorry if you disagree Prof Meyer but I think roster changes over night...just like the Miami heat for example... I think there is value if rosters are rated the same and within so much time.....otherwise I think it is worthless.... I was using Walt frazier and Earl Monroe as players no longer on a team ....if you felt I was insulting....I did not mean it on purpose....... I think everything you say on the forum is done quite well But I do not agree with the trend stuff.... that is all.[/QUOTE] Yes, rosters change, and when they do, we know not to use the trends from the past. We are not a slave to the trends. We are the master of the trends. We use our brains and our experience to decide whether to go with the trend or to dismiss the trend. We ignore a vast majority of the trends as random fluctuations or trends that are no longer valid because of roster or coaching changes. An inexperienced handicapper that blindly follows trends will lose money faster than a bad blackjack player. An experienced handicapper that does not use trends at all will do better than a inexperienced handicapper that only uses trends. However, and this is my key point, the combination of handicapping savvy with a powerful, fast and efficient trend database is the best combination of all. When you say, "I do not agree with the trend stuff," it seems that you are dismissing ALL trends in past performance as useless. If that's where you stand, fine by me. However, in my opinion[B] looking at what has happened in the past in an effort to predict the future is a good idea.[/B] I respect your position and again, I apologize if I over-reacted previously. Please feel free to comment in my threads this season. I will be posting a lot of trends. :D Prof M.

I think trends like leaving the colorado air in baseball and the texas triangle, 4 games in 5 nights, back to back in the NBA.....etc They had value in the past betting them...LVSC factors that stuff in today.... the oddsmakers move slow to adjust to new trends like that......but they do catch up to them. I feel the trends that you posted ...example the knicks 9-0....since april 2003 have no value... that is what happened in the past with that indivdual team and the roster they had.......it would not hold up in the future... I know for sure , in the late 70's I tried all that stuff....lost my shirt. LOL. The other stuff you post is very good... and you are one of the reasons why I come to this site. The overall work you do, gets an A+ in my opinion.

Player specific angles in basketball make a lot of sense. The effect of one weak/strong performing player can have a significantly greater impact in hoops vs sports like baseball and football. Also, team specific and situation specific trends will be eventually accounted for in the line. The player stuff requires a lot more work to ferret out and just don't think the oddsmakers are up for it nor interested in going down that path.