mellow, love reading your posts. I always manage to pick up a few nuggets from reading them. just a couple of things jump out at me and would love to hear your thoughts:
Den/Mil are # 2/3 in pace, respectively are 25/28 in Defensive Rebound Rate and are 2/11 in Offensive Rebound Rate
This tells me that there might be little wasted time on missed shots due to a sizable amount of offensive boards, creating 2nd chance points, which is scary for the under backers
Great points jsaptny.
The pace is incorporated into the total pretty well, imo. I am definitely worried about volume shooting, but hoping for some spells of poor shooting from both squads, which is reasonable, in my estimation, looking at their season stats.
As far as less defensive rebounding and more offensive boards, yes there will, no doubt, be opportunities for 2nd chance points. However, I would add that these are prolific shot blocking teams. McGee and Sanders are two of the longest players in the league and can alter virtually any shot on the interior. Dalembert will get likely get more minutes and he is no slouch in terms of altering shots either. Also, Udoh and Mbah a Moute are capable defenders.
For Denver, Koufos and Faried average about 2.5 blocks per game combined.
One more thing that is important, both teams are bottom 10 in FT %. Denver is actually dead last at 68.7%.
It will be close, imo, but I think there is value in the under. We shall see.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jsaptny:
mellow, love reading your posts. I always manage to pick up a few nuggets from reading them. just a couple of things jump out at me and would love to hear your thoughts:
Den/Mil are # 2/3 in pace, respectively are 25/28 in Defensive Rebound Rate and are 2/11 in Offensive Rebound Rate
This tells me that there might be little wasted time on missed shots due to a sizable amount of offensive boards, creating 2nd chance points, which is scary for the under backers
Great points jsaptny.
The pace is incorporated into the total pretty well, imo. I am definitely worried about volume shooting, but hoping for some spells of poor shooting from both squads, which is reasonable, in my estimation, looking at their season stats.
As far as less defensive rebounding and more offensive boards, yes there will, no doubt, be opportunities for 2nd chance points. However, I would add that these are prolific shot blocking teams. McGee and Sanders are two of the longest players in the league and can alter virtually any shot on the interior. Dalembert will get likely get more minutes and he is no slouch in terms of altering shots either. Also, Udoh and Mbah a Moute are capable defenders.
For Denver, Koufos and Faried average about 2.5 blocks per game combined.
One more thing that is important, both teams are bottom 10 in FT %. Denver is actually dead last at 68.7%.
It will be close, imo, but I think there is value in the under. We shall see.
mw...The Bucks are a hard team for me to play when it comes to totals. They always seem to score when I don't want them too. But, as always your on the right side of this play.
GL...
I am hoping for only one of these two fast paced games to go over tonight. May we both win. GL on your over Rockets/Warriors play phat.
0
Quote Originally Posted by phat03:
mw...The Bucks are a hard team for me to play when it comes to totals. They always seem to score when I don't want them too. But, as always your on the right side of this play.
GL...
I am hoping for only one of these two fast paced games to go over tonight. May we both win. GL on your over Rockets/Warriors play phat.
So, in your opinion, the Bucks total should only be 0.5 points higher than the last game Denver played, which was against New Orleans? The Pelicans are 29th in pace and the Bucks are 4th. Not really seeing your reasoning here.
My reason is this line seems so high as to where I would normally see a Milwaukee Bucks line. And IMO, when vegas sets lines that swayed from the norm it's usually for a reason. GL tho man we shall see.
0
Quote Originally Posted by mellow_wolf:
So, in your opinion, the Bucks total should only be 0.5 points higher than the last game Denver played, which was against New Orleans? The Pelicans are 29th in pace and the Bucks are 4th. Not really seeing your reasoning here.
My reason is this line seems so high as to where I would normally see a Milwaukee Bucks line. And IMO, when vegas sets lines that swayed from the norm it's usually for a reason. GL tho man we shall see.
I love your capping. I tried to tell you this morning the problem with the refs. Denver shot 37 free throws....That is A LOT....Better luck tomorrow.
you're a fukkkking idiot. 37 free throws from denver, dalembert has the best game of his LIFE and the game goes over by 1 pt at the very fukkkking end of the game?
Yeah what a lock the over was, fukk you're an idiot!!!!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Narco:
Hi Narco,
I love your capping. I tried to tell you this morning the problem with the refs. Denver shot 37 free throws....That is A LOT....Better luck tomorrow.
you're a fukkkking idiot. 37 free throws from denver, dalembert has the best game of his LIFE and the game goes over by 1 pt at the very fukkkking end of the game?
Yeah what a lock the over was, fukk you're an idiot!!!!
[Quote: Originally Posted by austintx11] you're a fukkkking idiot. 37 free throws from denver, dalembert has the best game of his LIFE and the game goes over by 1 pt at the very fukkkking end of the game?
Yeah what a lock the over was, fukk you're an idiot!!!! [/Quot
Sir,
The game was set up for the over. The refs cannot make the free throws. the under in this game was never in contention. The refs on this game are shady. That's all I was saying. 48 shooting fouls were called.
0
[Quote: Originally Posted by austintx11] you're a fukkkking idiot. 37 free throws from denver, dalembert has the best game of his LIFE and the game goes over by 1 pt at the very fukkkking end of the game?
Yeah what a lock the over was, fukk you're an idiot!!!! [/Quot
Sir,
The game was set up for the over. The refs cannot make the free throws. the under in this game was never in contention. The refs on this game are shady. That's all I was saying. 48 shooting fouls were called.
Austin Show some respect. This man is by far one of the better cappers on this forum. You should be tailing his picks.
narco?
im saying mellow shouldve won!
for this game to go over, dalembert had to have the game of his life and 48 fukkkin free throw attempts. All that happened and the game still went over by 1 point.
mellow shouldve won, this fukin clown narc boy, is full of garbage if he thinks the under never had a shot.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SuperSlapem:
Austin Show some respect. This man is by far one of the better cappers on this forum. You should be tailing his picks.
narco?
im saying mellow shouldve won!
for this game to go over, dalembert had to have the game of his life and 48 fukkkin free throw attempts. All that happened and the game still went over by 1 point.
mellow shouldve won, this fukin clown narc boy, is full of garbage if he thinks the under never had a shot.
I know you're upset. But, referees can only set the stage for an over to happen. They can't make the free throws for the players. Whether it went over by one point or 16 doesn't matter. That under never had a chance had the nuggets hit their free throws in the end. Go back and read the play by play of the game. You have to know this: it's hard to hit an under when they score 110 or higher in the half. It was set up by the refs, it's up to the players to perform. 48 free throws is A LOT.
0
Austin,
I know you're upset. But, referees can only set the stage for an over to happen. They can't make the free throws for the players. Whether it went over by one point or 16 doesn't matter. That under never had a chance had the nuggets hit their free throws in the end. Go back and read the play by play of the game. You have to know this: it's hard to hit an under when they score 110 or higher in the half. It was set up by the refs, it's up to the players to perform. 48 free throws is A LOT.
I know you're upset. But, referees can only set the stage for an over to happen. They can't make the free throws for the players. Whether it went over by one point or 16 doesn't matter. That under never had a chance had the nuggets hit their free throws in the end. Go back and read the play by play of the game. You have to know this: it's hard to hit an under when they score 110 or higher in the half. It was set up by the refs, it's up to the players to perform. 48 free throws is A LOT.
yeah im fukkkin pissed. this fukk dalembert should have his fukkin throat slit.
but you also prove my point.
refs "set up" the over, meaning fix.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Narco:
Austin,
I know you're upset. But, referees can only set the stage for an over to happen. They can't make the free throws for the players. Whether it went over by one point or 16 doesn't matter. That under never had a chance had the nuggets hit their free throws in the end. Go back and read the play by play of the game. You have to know this: it's hard to hit an under when they score 110 or higher in the half. It was set up by the refs, it's up to the players to perform. 48 free throws is A LOT.
yeah im fukkkin pissed. this fukk dalembert should have his fukkin throat slit.
FYI: the article you linked to was about a game played a year ago, in Feb. 2012.
No problem mellow. Win or lose I'll always have good words for fellow bettors. I knew the article was from a year ago. Just was pointing out that Scott Foster was one of the officials for this game and I try to avoid his games. Not saying the officials had anything to do with your loss but they sure as hell can if they wanted to. Tough break. You'll get 'em back today though.
0
Quote Originally Posted by mellow_wolf:
Thanks for the kind words VegasBorn.
FYI: the article you linked to was about a game played a year ago, in Feb. 2012.
No problem mellow. Win or lose I'll always have good words for fellow bettors. I knew the article was from a year ago. Just was pointing out that Scott Foster was one of the officials for this game and I try to avoid his games. Not saying the officials had anything to do with your loss but they sure as hell can if they wanted to. Tough break. You'll get 'em back today though.
for this game to go over, dalembert had to have the game of his life and 48 fukkkin free throw attempts. All that happened and the game still went over by 1 point.
mellow shouldve won, this fukin clown narc boy, is full of garbage if he thinks the under never had a shot.
In the avg Denver game teams avg shooting 46 free throw,so 48 combined is not unusual at all....
0
Quote Originally Posted by austintx11:
narco?
im saying mellow shouldve won!
for this game to go over, dalembert had to have the game of his life and 48 fukkkin free throw attempts. All that happened and the game still went over by 1 point.
mellow shouldve won, this fukin clown narc boy, is full of garbage if he thinks the under never had a shot.
In the avg Denver game teams avg shooting 46 free throw,so 48 combined is not unusual at all....
MW, that was a tough one. I was on the under too. That was a very bad luck. Pace was crazy with no set up positions. I'm sure you'll get it tonight. BOL
0
MW, that was a tough one. I was on the under too. That was a very bad luck. Pace was crazy with no set up positions. I'm sure you'll get it tonight. BOL
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.