Value of half point in spreads/totals NBA vs NCAABK

**sharpcat** · 11-15-10, 06:13 PM

Push frequencies in the half point calculator are derived from a historical database and do not take game totals into consideration. They are figured by using a sample of games which were within a half point range of the spread (3.5/4/4.5) and finding how often those games landed on 4.

Since the scoring distributions in the NBA are basically the same as in the NCAA and you are not taking game totals into consideration it makes perfect sense that the push frequencies would be similar.

Although Euro ball is probably very similar it obviously would be beneficial to construct your own push frequencies rather than just assume they are the same as the NBA, it also would not hurt to have your own push frequencies for the NBA and taking game totals into consideration.

**donjuan** · 11-15-10, 08:27 PM

Sharpcat,

His point is that totals in CBB are significantly lower than NBA overall so the overall half points should be worth more even if you don't take the individual game totals into account. If you look at the HPC you'll see CBB points are worth slightly more, particularly the 1. However I think that CBB points are worth less than you'd expect compared to NBA is because there is much more turnover in players from year to year. Think about why that would change the distribution and there's your answer for why college football and NFL games with the same total have significantly different distributions as well.

**sharpcat** · 11-15-10, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by donjuan

Sharpcat,

His point is that totals in CBB are significantly lower than NBA overall so the overall half points should be worth more even if you don't take the individual game totals into account. If you look at the HPC you'll see CBB points are worth slightly more, particularly the 1. However I think that CBB points are worth less than you'd expect compared to NBA is because there is much more turnover in players from year to year. Think about why that would change the distribution and there's your answer for why college football and NFL games with the same total have significantly different distributions as well.

Are NCAA game totals really significantly lower or are the games just shorter?

Push frequencies differ between professional sports and college sports because you have big time conference schools with top recruits playing against small conference schools with mid-grade recruits which results in a much wider distribution of possible outcomes in college sports.

There really are not any major key numbers in basketball as compared to football, the slight fluctuations you see in the push frequencies between NBA and NCAA basketball is likely due to variance.

**PRC** · 11-16-10, 12:17 AM

So much mythology when it comes to buying points in basketball. The "2" the "3" and the "7" aren't worth much more than the others.

**donjuan** · 11-16-10, 05:48 AM

Originally posted by sharpcat

Are NCAA game totals really significantly lower or are the games just shorter?

Push frequencies differ between professional sports and college sports because you have big time conference schools with top recruits playing against small conference schools with mid-grade recruits which results in a much wider distribution of possible outcomes in college sports.

There really are not any major key numbers in basketball as compared to football, the slight fluctuations you see in the push frequencies between NBA and NCAA basketball is likely due to variance.

Uh, both? First halves in NBA are shorter than full games and they also have lower totals than full games. Half points are also worth more for first halves than games regardless of the individual total. What a shocker.

Your second paragraph is laughable and has nothing to do with anything related to sports betting. You completely missed the point.

Third paragraph also loltastic. There are no key numbers but that doesn't mean they aren't different.

You really are a faux-sharp. You occasionally get something right and assume that by being loquacious that you always have something to contribute.

**noyb** · 11-16-10, 06:42 AM

donjuan, couldn't a much wider difference in quality between the ncaa teams in comparison to the nba teams be a logical explaination why the score distribution is pretty much the same (and therefore different relative to total points) even though there's a much smaller number points to divide between the two teams in ncaa? i tried to follow your point with regards to a higher turnover of players in ncaa but all I could come up with is basically the point sharpcat made in his next post with regards to bigger quality differences resulting in a wider score distribution, which you don't agree with.
another possible reason i could think of is ncaa spreads might not be as accurate as nba spreads (f.e. because it's harder for books to determine team's strength, also because of high player turnover?), therefore it's more of a random number and will push roughly not more, but just as often as it would in nba, unlike what you'd expect considering the lower totals. i'm just speculating here though: considering i'm not from the us, i don't know anything about ncaa, not even they apparently play shorter periods, other than observering the games are euro-like low in scoring.

btw, i agree it would be better just getting my own eurobasket-data instead of having to draw conclusions based on possibly very league-specific data, but considering the total lack of data with regards to historical euro spreads this isn't going to happen unless i do it myself for many years. simply extrapolating from nba to eurobasket might be a bit of a stretch, but it's the only option for now.

**Peregrine Stoop** · 11-16-10, 11:42 AM

pinnacle's drop downs has the answers you seek

**sharpcat** · 11-16-10, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by donjuan

Uh, both? First halves in NBA are shorter than full games and they also have lower totals than full games. Half points are also worth more for first halves than games regardless of the individual total. What a shocker.

Your second paragraph is laughable and has nothing to do with anything related to sports betting. You completely missed the point.

Third paragraph also loltastic. There are no key numbers but that doesn't mean they aren't different.

You really are a faux-sharp. You occasionally get something right and assume that by being loquacious that you always have something to contribute.

I think you missed my point!! If you were to look at points scored per minute played in the NCAA and NBA you would find that they are very similar.

You dismiss my "second paragraph" but yet you make an almost identical claim when you say that you think player turnover in the NCAA effects the value of points.

Next I say there are really not any key numbers in basketball and you find that "loltastic" (not too sure I can take anyone who says loltastic seriously) but than you go on to agree that there are no key numbers

And when have you ever contributed anything to this forum???

All you do is troll the board looking for opportunities to tell people that you are more intelligent than they are

Mr. big shot 21 year old who just graduated from college. Nothing wrong with being young but please stop acting like you are some big shot who has been gambling for 20 years.

Why don't you contribute something worthwhile to this forum for a change I think everybody has witnessed you rant about how smart you are but I have never seen you offer any information which has not been mentioned on this board. If you are as sharp as you claim to be please let us see it because I am sure we are all getting tired of you telling us.

**donjuan** · 11-16-10, 02:25 PM

I think you missed my point!! If you were to look at points scored per minute played in the NCAA and NBA you would find that they are very similar.

No, you wouldn't find that because that's pretty blatantly wrong. But even if that were true, it would be completely irrelevant to the OP.

You dismiss my "second paragraph" but yet you make an almost identical claim when you say that you think player turnover in the NCAA effects the value of points.

No I didn't. It has nothing to do with highly recruited players playing mid-majors. It has everything to do with having less information to start with about how good the players/teams are due to constant turnover. When you have less info, you're going to have a flatter distribution.

Next I say there are really not any key numbers in basketball and you find that "loltastic" (not too sure I can take anyone who says loltastic seriously) but than you go on to agree that there are no key numbers

Yes, there are no key numbers but, again, that's completely irrelevant to the OP or much of anything in the thread. And that wasn't the absurd part. It was the claim that differences in push percentages between NBA and NCAA are due to variance that was hilarious.

**sharpcat** · 11-16-10, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by donjuan

No, you wouldn't find that because that's pretty blatantly wrong. But even if that were true, it would be completely irrelevant to the OP.

No I didn't. It has nothing to do with highly recruited players playing mid-majors. It has everything to do with having less information to start with about how good the players/teams are due to constant turnover. When you have less info, you're going to have a flatter distribution.

Yes, there are no key numbers but, again, that's completely irrelevant to the OP or much of anything in the thread. And that wasn't the absurd part. It was the claim that differences in push percentages between NBA and NCAA are due to variance that was hilarious.

NCAAB / NBA

1- 3.47%/2.27%
2- 3.91%/4.03%
3- 4.67%/3.83%
4- 4.16%/3.48%
5- 3.95%/4.37%
6- 3.57%/4.16%
7- 4.03%/4.11%
8- 3.97%/4.20%
9- 4.17%/4.76%
10- 4.35%/4.16%

Outside of pointspreads above 20 (which is due to a lack of 20+ pointspreads in the NBA) the push frequency for every point is within 1% except for the 1 which is a difference of 1.20%. Are you seriously telling me that you feel that these numbers are dead accurate predictors of the true push frequency with 100% confidence???

However I think that CBB points are worth less than you'd expect compared to NBA is because there is much more turnover in players from year to year. Think about why that would change the distribution and there's your answer for why college football and NFL games with the same total have significantly different distributions as well.

Secondly are you telling me that push frequencies in NCAAF differ from the NFL mainly in points that are multiples of 3 because of "player turnover"???
I guess it has nothing to do with the way the game is played in the 2 leagues and the difference in player mismatches that results in a higher frequency of TD's being scored in the NCAA and less FG's.

I guess "First Score" prop prices vary greatly between the NFL and the NCAA all season long because of "player turnover"

NCAAB is much more similar to the NBA than NCAAF is to the NFL. Why do you think players have such a hard transition coming from NCAAF to the NFL but kids coming from high school basketball barely have trouble transitioning to the NBA. I can't believe you would even consider comparing the two!! Do you even know anything about sports or are you just strictly a math guy?

**sharpcat** · 11-16-10, 03:58 PM

My only point is that push frequencies in a game like basketball are going to be pretty similar unless the style of play or scoring distribution are drastically different between the 2 leagues.

Outside of that I am not going to play into your trolling any longer from a dispute you had with me 2 weeks ago!!

**donjuan** · 11-16-10, 04:43 PM

Outside of pointspreads above 20 (which is due to a lack of 20+ pointspreads in the NBA) the push frequency for every point is within 1% except for the 1 which is a difference of 1.20%. Are you seriously telling me that you feel that these numbers are dead accurate predictors of the true push frequency with 100% confidence???

Where did I say that? Please actually read what I write. I simply said that attributing it to variance is a fallacy. The games are played differently. College teams tend to get into longer foulfests at the end of the game when NBA players basically give up.

Secondly are you telling me that push frequencies in NCAAF differ from the NFL mainly in points that are multiples of 3 because of "player turnover"???

No, I'm not. Once again, please read what I wrote. Higher totals are the main reason for that, along with inferior kickers. However, in games with similar totals, that is a large part of the reason for the difference in push percentages between the NFL and NCAA.

I guess "First Score" prop prices vary greatly between the NFL and the NCAA all season long because of "player turnover"

Once again, your answer lies largely in the total.

NCAAB is much more similar to the NBA than NCAAF is to the NFL. Why do you think players have such a hard transition coming from NCAAF to the NFL but kids coming from high school basketball barely have trouble transitioning to the NBA. I can't believe you would even consider comparing the two!! Do you even know anything about sports or are you just strictly a math guy?

Indeed it is. Although there are some major differences between NCAAB and NBA. Shot clocks, 3 pt line, way more zone defense, etc. change the dynamics of the game.

**wrongturn** · 11-16-10, 05:04 PM

Sharpcat, do you think those push frequency are higher for 1H and 2H game lines?

**sharpcat** · 11-16-10, 06:05 PM

Originally posted by wrongturn

Sharpcat, do you think those push frequency are higher for 1H and 2H game lines?

I do not have data for first and second half closing lines but I would assume that they would be similar although that is just an assumption so I would not put any value to that.

Pinnacle seems to suggest that the first half should be slightly more expensive (roughly about .01 cent or in the range of less than 1/2 of a % obviously dependent on the number) and DonJuan seems to confirm this.

I personally don't hold too much weight on such a tiny difference I usually prefer to round down for safe measures when calculating my edge.