Are you seriously using the "due" angle here? Are you not going to talk about the 2 players of the 2nd unit being traded...a new backup PG playing for NO tonight...Sac's ability to outrebound the Hornets tonight giving them more 2nd chance opportunities. How about these
Home team is 15-5 ATS in the last 20 meetings.
Underdog is 8-1 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
Hornets are 1-11-1 ATS in the last 13 meetings in Sacramento.
Hornets are 0-9 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
...none of that huh? Just that they are due not to cover?
Okay I think the Hornets are due to cover against the Kings tonight. So Im taking some of that NO -4.5.
0
Are you seriously using the "due" angle here? Are you not going to talk about the 2 players of the 2nd unit being traded...a new backup PG playing for NO tonight...Sac's ability to outrebound the Hornets tonight giving them more 2nd chance opportunities. How about these
Home team is 15-5 ATS in the last 20 meetings.
Underdog is 8-1 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
Hornets are 1-11-1 ATS in the last 13 meetings in Sacramento.
Hornets are 0-9 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
...none of that huh? Just that they are due not to cover?
Okay I think the Hornets are due to cover against the Kings tonight. So Im taking some of that NO -4.5.
Are you seriously using the "due" angle here? Are you not going to talk about the 2 players of the 2nd unit being traded...a new backup PG playing for NO tonight...Sac's ability to outrebound the Hornets tonight giving them more 2nd chance opportunities. How about these
Home team is 15-5 ATS in the last 20 meetings.
Underdog is 8-1 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
Hornets are 1-11-1 ATS in the last 13 meetings in Sacramento.
Hornets are 0-9 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
...none of that huh? Just that they are due not to cover?
Okay I think the Hornets are due to cover against the Kings tonight. So Im taking some of that NO -4.5.
LOL. Funny. I'm not going to talk about that, nor elaborate what's going on etc etc....
Because what you stated above is no secret...
They are aware of that, and i am aware of that Stats, Trends, And the Trade.
Besides i did not chose SAC Tonight Because TRENDS STATS TRADE,
I Chose Them Because THEY are "DUE" Yes When I Did Said DUE Maybe It Misinterpret You a little Bit.
I Hate To Say This That's Why i don't want to emphasize it, but for you I will....
They are due to shave Points, Or Refs Will rigg it, or Whoever is in charge To let SAC Cover The Spread. Now They Know You Happy? LOL. A,gainst the weaker team, More of the line is yummy for You to Take The NOH.
So I don't want to indicate what you want me to talk about because i did not play this pick because of that STATS.
OKAY!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Smoke_O:
Are you seriously using the "due" angle here? Are you not going to talk about the 2 players of the 2nd unit being traded...a new backup PG playing for NO tonight...Sac's ability to outrebound the Hornets tonight giving them more 2nd chance opportunities. How about these
Home team is 15-5 ATS in the last 20 meetings.
Underdog is 8-1 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
Hornets are 1-11-1 ATS in the last 13 meetings in Sacramento.
Hornets are 0-9 ATS in the last 9 meetings.
...none of that huh? Just that they are due not to cover?
Okay I think the Hornets are due to cover against the Kings tonight. So Im taking some of that NO -4.5.
LOL. Funny. I'm not going to talk about that, nor elaborate what's going on etc etc....
Because what you stated above is no secret...
They are aware of that, and i am aware of that Stats, Trends, And the Trade.
Besides i did not chose SAC Tonight Because TRENDS STATS TRADE,
I Chose Them Because THEY are "DUE" Yes When I Did Said DUE Maybe It Misinterpret You a little Bit.
I Hate To Say This That's Why i don't want to emphasize it, but for you I will....
They are due to shave Points, Or Refs Will rigg it, or Whoever is in charge To let SAC Cover The Spread. Now They Know You Happy? LOL. A,gainst the weaker team, More of the line is yummy for You to Take The NOH.
So I don't want to indicate what you want me to talk about because i did not play this pick because of that STATS.
Nothing against you Smoke_O, but reading into the stats that way is no way to look at it - I would never make a bet based on the statistics of a game that doesn't account for human error. Not to mention all those "invisible statistics" that don't get recorded.
If you use logical principles are you will find yourself enticed by the Kings - If you like numbers, you will surely like the Hornets.
Betting the NBA is not about betting the best team (otherwise wouldn't the Heat have won last night right?)
Leon Wood and Ron Garretson on this game tell me enough
0
Take the Kings
Nothing against you Smoke_O, but reading into the stats that way is no way to look at it - I would never make a bet based on the statistics of a game that doesn't account for human error. Not to mention all those "invisible statistics" that don't get recorded.
If you use logical principles are you will find yourself enticed by the Kings - If you like numbers, you will surely like the Hornets.
Betting the NBA is not about betting the best team (otherwise wouldn't the Heat have won last night right?)
Leon Wood and Ron Garretson on this game tell me enough
Nothing against you Smoke_O, but reading into the stats that way is no way to look at it - I would never make a bet based on the statistics of a game that doesn't account for human error. Not to mention all those "invisible statistics" that don't get recorded.
If you use logical principles are you will find yourself enticed by the Kings - If you like numbers, you will surely like the Hornets.
Betting the NBA is not about betting the best team (otherwise wouldn't the Heat have won last night right?)
Leon Wood and Ron Garretson on this game tell me enough
KINGS
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikado:
Take the Kings
Nothing against you Smoke_O, but reading into the stats that way is no way to look at it - I would never make a bet based on the statistics of a game that doesn't account for human error. Not to mention all those "invisible statistics" that don't get recorded.
If you use logical principles are you will find yourself enticed by the Kings - If you like numbers, you will surely like the Hornets.
Betting the NBA is not about betting the best team (otherwise wouldn't the Heat have won last night right?)
Leon Wood and Ron Garretson on this game tell me enough
Nothing against you Smoke_O, but reading into the stats that way is no way to look at it - I would never make a bet based on the statistics of a game that doesn't account for human error. Not to mention all those "invisible statistics" that don't get recorded.
If you use logical principles are you will find yourself enticed by the Kings - If you like numbers, you will surely like the Hornets.
Betting the NBA is not about betting the best team (otherwise wouldn't the Heat have won last night right?)
Leon Wood and Ron Garretson on this game tell me enough
Dude it was a counter to his "due" theory...he claimed the Hornets are due not to cover? My counter was they are due to cover against the Kings since they haven't in the last 9 tries. I stated reasons as to why someone WOULD and SHOULD TAKE the Kings. Everything I posted was backing a Kings cover. However I used HIS LOGIC and decided to take the Hornets, to show its ineptitude.
and ps who said the Heat were one of the best teams in the NBA? They are .500 on the road...they have only beaten 2 teams with a winning record, they are dead last in almost EVERY rebounding category, dead last in Offensive rebounds, dead last in 2nd chance points, dead last in defensive points in the paint. Statistics show this and any team with a CAPABLE Center or PF can demonstrate this and beat the Heat.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikado:
Take the Kings
Nothing against you Smoke_O, but reading into the stats that way is no way to look at it - I would never make a bet based on the statistics of a game that doesn't account for human error. Not to mention all those "invisible statistics" that don't get recorded.
If you use logical principles are you will find yourself enticed by the Kings - If you like numbers, you will surely like the Hornets.
Betting the NBA is not about betting the best team (otherwise wouldn't the Heat have won last night right?)
Leon Wood and Ron Garretson on this game tell me enough
Dude it was a counter to his "due" theory...he claimed the Hornets are due not to cover? My counter was they are due to cover against the Kings since they haven't in the last 9 tries. I stated reasons as to why someone WOULD and SHOULD TAKE the Kings. Everything I posted was backing a Kings cover. However I used HIS LOGIC and decided to take the Hornets, to show its ineptitude.
and ps who said the Heat were one of the best teams in the NBA? They are .500 on the road...they have only beaten 2 teams with a winning record, they are dead last in almost EVERY rebounding category, dead last in Offensive rebounds, dead last in 2nd chance points, dead last in defensive points in the paint. Statistics show this and any team with a CAPABLE Center or PF can demonstrate this and beat the Heat.
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.
to the other side.
and 
Hot Forum Topics
