Sportsbook has posted Final Four odds for 25 teams (H/T: Rob). Before the brackets come out, it is very difficult to handicap this kind of thing, because a team's chances are so dependent on both their seed and their draw. That is not going to stop me from trying, obviously.
The first column is the team's projected seed. These are mostly just taken from Parrish, but I made a few slight adjustments. That is followed by the team name, and their odds at Sportsbook. The last two columns are what I think their true chance of making the F4 is, along with what their odds should be in that case.
Odds I consider to be very good wagers are in green. Good wagers are in blue, and terrible wagers are in red. The black odds range from neutral to poor. Here is the first half:
Memphis being +200 really surprised me. They are almost certainly going to be a 1 seed, meaning they have a pretty easy path to the S16 (giving them about an 80% chance of making it that far). They will then be significant favorites against the 4/5 seed they will likely play, and again favorites in the Elite 8. Clearly Sportsbook has UCLA, UNC and Kansas as the top 3 teams in the country, and I don't disagree with that assessment. But I don't think Memphis is that far behind, and they will likely have seeding on their side.
Seeding plays an very big role in this. I know they don't have the reputation of Duke or Texas, but Xavier is just as good as those teams, and they will likely all be 2 seeds- there should not be such a large discrepancy in their odds.
Stanford is in a similar situation, except it is likely that they will have a 3 seed rather than a 2. That makes them not quite as attractive as Xavier, but at +650, it's still worth considering.
No 3 seed should be +300. You know I must feel that way if I have Louisville at +344. The four games you have to win are just too difficult. Assuming you get past the 14, you still have to beat a 6, a 2, and a 1, in theory. Except for the elite teams in the nation, nobody has better than a 25% chance of doing that. And Georgetown does not fall under the category of "elite team" this year.
UConn, a likely 4/5 seed, at +400 is even worse. They will play a 4/5 in the second round, and then the top two seeds after that. A 20% chance of winning those three games? Not even close.
On to the longshots:
Most of these are terrible. The Arizona and Kansas St. odds are particularly brutal. These are teams that will likely end up in 8-9 games, where their chances are barely better than a toss-up. Then, in the second round, they face a top seed. Kansas St. should be about +800 to reach the Sweet 16, not the F4.
Wisconsin at +800 is intriguing. They are a 3 seed, and a legit one at that. Barring a huge upset, they are going to finish 16-2 in the Big Ten. I know the B10 isn't very good this year, but unless you think it is really atrocious, the conference's best team at 8:1 to reach the F4 seems pretty good.
The odds for Marquette and Purdue are probably about right, but stick out because the others are so bad. I do not think Sportsbook gave seeding enough weight in their analysis. It is completely unreasonable for an 8 seed to have better odds than a 3, unless that 8 seed is about 15 points better, which is certainly not the case with Arizona and Purdue. It is highly unlikely that the Boilermakers lose their first round game against a 14. Taking that into account, you are getting about 18:1 that they will beat a 6 seed that is probably equally talented, and then two teams that are better than them. It's unlikely, but +2200 is not bad for them.
P.S.- 15 of you have voted on the Indians' under? I hope you guys aren't betting on this stuff, because you *clearly* don't know what you are talking about.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Final Four Odds
Posted by Vegas Watch at 3:46 PM
Labels: 2008 NCAA Tournament, Arizona, Final Four, Georgetown, Kansas St., Marquette, Memphis, Odds, Sportsbook, UConn, Wisconsin, Xavier
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe in a reader
5 comments:
I have it on good authority that C.C. Sabathia and Fausto Carmona will be kidnapped and hidden in a warehouse for the bulk of the season.
I'm just curious why you think UConn will be a 5 seed. They are ranked 13 right now, which means at worse they are a 4 seed, and potentially a 3 seed if they play well in the Big East Tournament. There is no way they are a 5 seed, they are one of the hottest teams in the country in one of the toughest conferences. I agree those odds aren't good if they are in fact a 5 seed, but I don't see that being the case. I think it's actually a pretty good bet if they end up being a 3 seed, which is more likely than them ending up a 5 seed.
Don't look at the polls. Seriously. Ignore them entirely.
Lunardi has them as a 4, and Parrish has them as a 5. The way I figured these numbers, there's really not much of a difference between those two. They have played well in the BE, but they did *nothing* in November/December. It obviously depends on how they play over the next two weeks, but I don't think they're even close to 20% to make the F4.
That being said, my little paragraph on them did not make sense, and I have changed it.
Two points, one on-, one off-topic:
First, in looking at these numbers, I agree that Sportsbook did not really make any assumptions regarding seed. In fact, I think these odds are simple extensions of their odds to win the title. For example, UCLA and UNC are the prohibitive favorites and are 5:1 and 11:2 to win the title, respectively; those same teams are 11:10 and 6:5 to reach the Final Four.
Now take a team like Memphis, whose 2:1 odds surprised you and appear to be a good bet (I agree). Now look at their championship odds, which are a surprising 9:1 (not saying I'd bet that, but considering their record and hype, that's pretty high).
Without going down the line, it appears to me that there's a simple correlation between the odds to win the championship and the odds to reach the Final Four. Simply, it looks like they are dividing the odds of winning the title by a factor between 4.5 and 5.
In the end, I think your analysis in projected seedings, and who these teams may face, is where you can find some value in these wagers before the brackets come out.
On to my second, quicker point: I'm a Cleveland man, born and bred for 28 years, and a die-hard Tribe fan, even moreso than the Browns. I voted under on their wins, but I think that number's dead-on. To get over 91, I think everything (health, luck, regressions, expectations, etc.) will have to go their way. I'm concerned about Fausto entering his 2nd straight year of a heavy workload, and I'm not as high on the ceiling of Asdrubal as most are. That being said, I'm also highly critical of the entire Tigers pitching staff, and would rather bet on the Indians to win the Division rather than the over on season wins.
I had not noticed the clear correlation between F4 and NC odds. I'm not surprised by it, but that is dumb. The relationship is not linear.
Purdue is 100:1 (0.99%) to win it all, and 22:1 (4.35%) to make the F4. That gives them a 22.8% chance of winning it all if they reach the F4.
Kansas' numbers are 6:1 (14.29%) and +130 (43.49%); that puts them at 32.36% to win it all if they reach San Antonio. Their ratio is probably about right; Purdue's however, is not even close. If the Boilermakers reach the F4, they will be HUGE underdogs in both games. Giving them a 30% chance of winning each game is probably generous, and even that would only put them at 9% to win it all. Purdue's F4 odds are much, much better than their NC odds. Better teams should have a smaller discrepancy between their F4 and NC odds, since they are *better* and are more likely to win against that level of competition.
The Indians to win the division (I got it at +220) is definitely better than their win total. I think the 91 number is pretty much dead on also, but I went with the over. I find myself to be more optimistic than most Cleveland fans, which is almost definitely caused by my relatively young age.
Post a Comment