What sources are you using for good NCAAB analysis?

[Capybara]

Curious how folks gather their data, and whose breakdown/analysis podcasts you listen to.

I know the Three Man Weave guys are pretty good. And some guys at Action Network.

What or who else have you found?

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Capy:

*It's a good post. Props to you.

My view is a little different. To cash tickets, I think we need to think differently than the masses.

As it relates to Coll Bask, let's start with one undeniable fact. The books now line EVERY d1 team. That's too many teams for the books to monitor.

With that idea in mind, I believe we're much more likely to identify value in the small conferences. A few possibilities:
1) Monitoring injuries in conferences which are Mid-Major or low-major.
2) Small conf Value where you just don't think the market line is correct.

Easier said than done but that would be my angle. I really the PODCASTS are mostly terrible.

One basic reason I think that. Talking doesn't process information quickly enough. It's mostly hot-air.

[jackpot269]

Chucky a little off topic but do you have a favorite for the tournament or favorites, or maybe someone you like to make a deep run a lower seed? I know this is tough before bracket comes out any thoughts?
Maybe we revisit it next week.

[johnnyvegas13]

Chucky a little off topic but do you have a favorite for the tournament or favorites, or maybe someone you like to make a deep run a lower seed? I know this is tough before bracket comes out any thoughts?
Maybe we revisit it next week.

revisit in one week ...

[DrunkHorseplayer]

You should not listen to anyone on a podcast, TV show, radio, etc. Most of their sports IQ is low and even if they give you relevant info, it's most surely baked into the line.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

Chucky a little off topic but do you have a favorite for the tournament or favorites, or maybe someone you like to make a deep run a lower seed? I know this is tough before bracket comes out any thoughts?
Maybe we revisit it next week.

Jack, I tried a run on the NCAABB sub-forum. I couldn't quite get to break-even.

So, I have to admit that I don't have an opinion for this post-season. I could give some leans. For example:

*I expect Gonzaga have a good chance to out-play their seed.

They led for 39:00 at St Mary's before falling. And I think Few will have them ready, if you find them in an underdog role.

[ChuckyTheGoat]

You should not listen to anyone on a podcast, TV show, radio, etc. Most of their sports IQ is low and even if they give you relevant info, it's most surely baked into the line.

Yes. It's somewhere between Bad and Even Worse.

The part I hate is that they view it as a logic problem. As if you can talk your way into the winner's circle.

[Snowball]

I typically use 3 main sources and they are raw, because I have my own approach.
1) sports-reference.com is my data
2) covers is where I look for injuries, sometimes I'll look at matchup info
3) individual team websites often worth checking out in college (not pro)

The only pick biz source I sometimes take into consideration is BetMGM The Daily Tip, which is on BetQL Network.
BetQL has a full service operation. I came across this by accident because a local sports AM Radio station that I listen to has the show on.
If you have a Westwood One sports radio affiliate in your listening area you can pick it up, it is 3 hours M-F. Just this one I like. Especially Chelsa Messinger. She's married to ex-MLB pitcher Jake Buchanan. She and her co-host Jenks just happen to be on when I'm drinking the morning coffee. So I hear them because I'm an AM radio dinosaur. See these links and you don't need to find them on radio. I've been listening to her for months now and I can tell you she is SHARP! Jenks isn't bad either but Chelsa has that female intuition.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-daily-tip/id1572904428

https://twitter.com/DailyTipMGM

[Capybara]

You should not listen to anyone on a podcast, TV show, radio, etc. Most of their sports IQ is low and even if they give you relevant info, it's most surely baked into the line.

I hear you but I don't entirely agree. Most of what I listen to (or try to listen to) is guys who are either using statistical models that ideally go beyond what gets baked into the line, and/or guys looking at deeper stats, shit like "expected" percentages vs the real ones, looking at tempo, looking at good or bad "spots," looking at trending, etc. I'm pretty sure Vegas's lines are just based on the overall basic data of the two opponents for any given matchup.

[Emily_Haines]

You should not listen to anyone on a podcast, TV show, radio, etc. Most of their sports IQ is low and even if they give you relevant info, it's most surely baked into the line.

Those guys that know all the players and all the angles are among the worst when it comes to gambling.

[Nate rasta]

What's data?