Think Lower and Lower

The 2006 NBA playoffs are in their early stages. And since they're the only men's hoops action going, they're certain to draw their usual heavy action in Nevada and offshore sportsbooks. Game-by-game and series-by-series analysis is impossible on these pages because of the magazine's required lead time for publication and distribution (the last few days of games of the regular season are being played as this is being written, with several playoff berths and positions undecided).



However, we do have the opportunity to take a look from a broader perspective, which is usually quite revealing, if not necessarily helpful for any individual contest. And, quite often in the playoffs – because of all of the tight pointspreads and revenge games that each series entails – I find that wagering on the over/under outcome to be more predictable.



As always, every game must be analyzed as an entity in and of itself. The pointspread winner and the over/under winner will be determined by how the players on the floor perform in that game on that one day. But it's always good to keep the overall picture in mind if you intend to win in the long run. And when it comes to totals trends, the overall picture over a period of years is quite interesting – and promising.



Generally speaking, the percentage of "overs" diminishes with each subsequent round of the playoffs. Specifically, beginning in 1997, there have been 162 "overs" and 161 "unders" in round one of the playoffs (I'll omit any totals "pushes" here for the sake of simplicity), 95 overs versus 99 unders in round two, 43 overs versus 57 unders in round three, and only 20 overs versus 29 unders in the finals. In terms of percentages, the number of overs falls from 50.2 percent in round one to 48.0 percent in round two, to 43.0 percent in round three, to 40.8 percent in the finals.



To me, this makes a good deal of sense. In the first round, with eight participants in both the Eastern and Western conferences of the NBA, there are many teams with considerable scoring power but not such good defenses. There are usually several blowouts in this round. When the field is narrowed after round one, most weaker teams have been eliminated, the series tension goes up a notch, and easy baskets are less frequent and more difficult to come by. By the semifinals and finals, only the best teams are left, and you tend to get more grind-'em-out, defensive-oriented contests in which each possession seems to be precious.



From a handicapping perspective, at least two conclusions can be drawn from the foregoing. First, it's important not to overemphasize any team's over/under record in the first two rounds once it gets to the later rounds. Second, since the oddsmakers tend to lower the overall totals on games as the playoffs progress, it's important not to get sucked into wagering a lot of overs in the later rounds just because the posted over/under totals are lower than they were in the first or second round. The improved quality of the opposition and the greater number of tightly contested games usually mean the total points scored in most late-round games will be fewer.



As usual, there are plenty of curiosities when it comes to over/under trends. For example, in last year's finals, matching Detroit against San Antonio (two strong defensive teams), there were five overs and only two unders. In the 2004 Detroit-L.A. Lakers series, it was 2-2-1. In the infamous, laborious San Antonio-New Jersey finals of 2003, it was 1-5. In the 2002 New Jersey-L.A. Lakers finals, it was 3-1.



Sometimes, a clearer picture can be seen when viewing over/under results from a team-by-team profile, with special emphasis on home games versus away games. For example, over the last nine years, postseason powerhouse San Antonio has a 49-61 over/under record. But a closer look reveals that the defensive-minded Spurs are 19-36 over/under at home, but 30-25 on the road! (San Antonio was 13-10 over/under in last year's playoffs overall, but a somewhat true-to-form 5-7 at home and much better 8-3 on the road.)



Detroit, another team with a defensive emphasis, is the opposite of the Spurs, with a 22-23-1 over/under mark at home, but only 13-29 on the road! (How many times in recent years have we seen the Pistons' offense fail them in road playoff games, only to improve noticeably once Detroit is back at home?)



Phoenix, usually one of the NBA's top offensive teams, usually can push the tempo at home, where the Suns are 15-7 over/under in the past nine years. On the road, with fewer shots falling and the home crowd exhorting its opponent, the Phoenix over/under mark falls to 10-13-1.



As this is being written, Utah in the West is making a late charge for a playoff berth after residing among the also-rans for several weeks. I'm rooting for the Jazz to make it.



Utah, due largely to the presence of John Stockton and Karl Malone – but also because of head coach Jerry Sloan's preference for a controlled, half-court style – has been one of the biggest "under" teams in the NBA playoffs. The Jazz failed to make the playoffs the last two years, but they had a 21-51-3 over/under mark the previous seven seasons, including a moneymaking 9-26 on the road!

Chuck Sippl is the senior editor of The Gold Sheet, the first word in sports handicapping for 49 years. The amazingly compact Gold Sheet features analysis of every football and basketball game, exclusive insider reports, widely followed Power Ratings, and a Special Ticker of key injuries and team chemistry. Look for the 2006 Gold Sheet Football Annual in late spring. If you would like to peruse a complimentary copy of The Gold Sheet, just call (800) 798-GOLD (4653), and be sure to mention you read about it in Card Player. You can look up The Gold Sheet on the web at http://www.goldsheet.com/.