Lakers-Spurs revisited...

[dolphin]

Spurs are sort of like a neural-net program which keeps learning, adjusting algorithims or Stepford athletes which do and say just enough to seem human, like missing FTs...ok, they aren't quite that disturbing.

They do NOT take their momentary deficiencies lightly, even off of wins...

I looked at the past two years, Feb. on, with Duncan in for the whole game and where they needed the game. Four categories of note: yielding 46% FGs, having 7 or fewer rebounds, being -6 or worse "points in the paint" and for this season + last year's playoffs, being outscored in the second half by 6+ points. The Spurs are 18-1 against the spread after at least one of those categories has shown up. Only FOUR of those were off losses! This is the first time ALL FOUR of them appear in their previous game during that time.

 

[ATX]

and count how many times in the last year SA has been a dog of 5.

also worth noting how many of those they won su.

LA has to win this game, but I'm going to make them prove it, and I have a 5 point cushion.

frankly, I dont give a damn about a whole lot other than the number should be no more than -2.5, end of story. best of luck to ya.

 

[picasso]

For what it's worth, there seems to be a lot of parallels between this year's Lakers/Spurs series and last year's.

Last year, Game 1 was Spurs and under 87-82. Game 2 was Spurs and over 114-95. This year, it's also been Spurs/under followed by Spurs/over.

Last year, the Lakers were a 5 point favorite for Game 3 and won 110-95. They were a 4.5 point favorite for Game 4, winning 99-95, but not covering. Game 5 was the much-mentioned big comeback/Horry missed 3-ptr at end game. The Spurs won 96-94. The Lakers fell apart/gave up in Game 6 as the Spurs won 110-82.

 

[ATX]

I dont see as many similarities to this year's Spurs/Lakers series as others do. It's the same teams playing, but the personell is different, as is the performance. The Lakers are, if anything can sum up my take, simply in decline. The Spurs are better than last year, and more experienced. Part of the reason I feel this way is b/c the teams in the West improved as a whole this year, there were not a whole lot of easy road games for anyone. Last year the Spurs had to prove a lot in getting past the Lakers, for some oddball reason they were dogs to win the title. LA has been a strong home team all year and if you look at median numbers over 90 games, yeah it's a fair number. I think the most relevant playoff numbers are from recent performance and going back over the last dozen or so games for each, I see absolutely no reason the Lakers are favored by more than their home court. And with a strong road team like the Spurs, NO playoff home court is worth more than the deuce. What this line brings up in the psychology of bettors is the 'bounce-back' question. The problem is that the matchups this year have lacked the parity to have many of the teams even come close. That will almost always favor the favorite in a playoff subset, just too many bs fouls and missed 3's
for the losing team at the end to cover. Does La have a chance to cover? Yeah, it's the nba and I'm not going moneyline here. The Spurs are just one of those teams that are often undervalued b/c they lack flash. They are just good, and they are good at a lot of things, and they suck at free throws and often turn the ball over, but still win convincingly somehow, and it's 75% b/c Tim Duncan is one of the best players ever, maybe top 5 easy by the end of his career. This is a spot that SA is due for a letdown in. It's only the Lakers, and they respect Chef Triangle. IMO, it's just too much to give +5 to a team that has beaten it's opponent recently by 10, 10, and 6 in games that mattered, especially when there were only 7 times all year they were road dogs of that number. Another note: SA was +6 at LA in the last reg season matchup, they won su. Now going back to that game, LA was the best team in the league at that time, SA was only getting 6 then. Fast forward to now...what's changed? current form has reversed, SA has to be 'due' for a letdown to get this number. Another note: I've made so much of SA since last year that it's real hard not to take them.

 

[FairWarning]

I'm not sure if the Lakers believe they can win. Parker is the biggest difference in this series and the Lakers have noone to stop him. I'm sure the Lakers are getting grilled in the press out there.

I might take a flier on the Lakers for the 1st qtr only.

 

[picasso]

Game 3 holds form relative to last year. So far:

2003
----
Game 1: Spurs/under
Game 2: Spurs/over
Game 3: Lakers/over
Game 4: Spurs/over (side may have been a push for some, but I show a closing line of +4.5 with a 99-95 final)
Game 5: Lakers/under
Game 6: Spurs/push (depending on closing total used of course, but I show 192)

2004
----
Game 1: Spurs/under
Game 2: Spurs/over
Game 3: Lakers/over
Game 4: Olympic opens it at LA -4.5 and 180