G37 2016-17: KINGS AT OILERS

It seems like a mighty long time since Connor McDavid thrilled the home crowd, but the good lord willing and the creek don’t rise, that will happen again tonight. If a rest was what was needed, and it did look like it, we should see some smoke on the water tonight.

HOPE SPRINGS ETERNAL, YEAR OVER YEAR

  • Oilers in October 2015: 4-8-0, goal differential -7
  • Oilers in October 2016: 7-2-0, goal differential +10
  • Oilers in November 2015: 4-7-2, goal differential -6
  • Oilers in November 2016: 5-8-2 goal differential -3
  • Oilers in December 2015: 7-6-1, goal differential -9
  • Oilers in December 2016: 6-2-4, goal differential +1
  • Oilers after 36, 2015: 15-18-3, goal differential -18
  • Oilers after 36, 2016: 18-12-6, goal differential +8

Edmonton roared through (work with me here) the first 36 games posting an 18-18 record with six Bettman points, and landed on 42 points (improvement of nine points from last season). Edmonton is +26 in goal differential year over year and (as we have discussed) the numbers are heading in a good direction pretty much across the board. G37 a year ago was a 5-3 loss to Calgary.

CONCERN

We talked about balance being an issue at the beginning of the year and it remains a major one. The best way to express it?

  • Connor McCavid with Cam Talbot: 3.38GF-1.81GA/60 (65.1 percent GF percentage 5×5)
  • Cam Talbot without Connor McDavid: 1.86GF-2.27GA/60 (44.9 percent GF percentage 5×5)
  • Source

I think that is the big item for the Oilers. You will read about Cam Talbot being less than splendid, and there may come a day when Edmonton has to upgrade at the position. The power play and penalty kill have been challenges from time to time this season and injury is an issue in some areas, too.

That without number on the 5×5 is the big one, the Moby Dick. The Corsi for 5×5 without McDavid (49.2) is respectable, need that scoring number to move closer to 50 percent of all scoring results without 97. That is the nut.

KRIS RUSSELL

  • Jim Matheson: And Kris Russell, who will never win over the analytics crowd but will get offered a new contract after Jan. 1, no matter what the naysayers gripe. Source

I don’t see Russell as being an especially divisive player for the analytics crowd, beyond the fact he is playing on the wrong side and too far up the depth chart. The lefty-righty study said it costs six Corsi points (and a get out of jail free card) to play on the wrong side, but let’s say it is only three. Russell is currently 45.4 Corsi for 5×5, so three points moves him to 48.4, and you can put that player on third pair LH side and make it work.

The problem? Darnell Nurse is 53.2 Corsi for 5×5 in that role, and he is younger and can carry the puck more productively. I think you can fairly tax Nurse based on inexperience, but even then Nurse won’t cost as much as Kris Russell next season. I think the Russell signing, should it come, would signal a trade—possibly a LHD for a righty blue.

October 5, 2013: The Oklahoma City Barons play the Charlotte Checkers in an American Hockey League game at the Cox Convention Center in Oklahoma City. Photo by Rob Ferguson, all rights reserved.

OSCAR KLEFBOM AND MATT BENNING

  • Todd McLellan: “I think sometimes Klef gets unfairly put up with the elite, but he’s only played 140 games, but he probably was elite on our team, but he needs more time and experience. On many other teams everyone would be happy with him coming in and where he is at. I don’t see much difference in Benning and Klefbom, except Benning gets to come in at a much better time for the organization and expectations on him are lower.” Source

This is a fascinating quote, somewhat similar to the Nuge avail McLellan had one year ago. Oscar has struggled this season, but is also the defender (I believe) with the farthest outer marker. The injury, added to lack of experience, probably give Klefbom lower trade value than he will have at any time since arriving in Edmonton. Peter Chiarelli’s two biggest trade assets at this time—as I see them—are Oscar Klefbom and Ryan Nugent-Hopkins. Both men have low value currently, and the play here is to keep your powder dry.

CALEB JONES

Our man for Team USA went 0-1-1 in 20:09, leading all skaters in the contest. I spoke to Steve Kournianos of The Draft Analyst on the Lowdown yesterday, he commented on Jones speed and passing ability. I think Jones stays in the minors exactly as long as it takes to learn the coverage game at the higher level, and to cut back on the sorties a little. His skating is already there. Hannah Stuart has some interesting thoughts on the team here. I think Caleb Jones fits in with here high risk, high reward commentary on the entire USA blue.

OILERS FORWARDS (SCORING)

  • This is each Oiler forward, their ranking among NHL forwards, along with some notes.
  • McDavid has an 11-point gap between himself and Leon Draisaitl. Those worried about the gap between 97 and Leon would be shocked at the final stats from 1980-81, where Gretzky bested Jari Kurri by 89 points. Lordy. The following year, the gap was more than 100.
  • A more rational comparison of McDavid-Nuge is probably Weight-Zdeno Ciger in 1996.
  • Pleased for Leon Draisaitl, who is having a fine year, with power-play numbers pushing those boxcars. He is also improving his 5×5 scoring as well.
  • Milan Lucic has good boxcars, they are coming mostly on the power play. All good, but he needs to post better 5×5 numbers (2.00 last season). Whatever the hitch in the 5×5 giddyup, important to get the big train moving.
  • Jordan Eberle scored 28 points per 37 games in his career entering 2016-17, so he is behind his career levels by five points. A concern, but one hot streak will take care of it.
  • Ryan Nugent-Hopkins is off by 10 points compared to career, and that is a concern. Dave Keon talked about cheating for defense too much after his career was over, felt he had become so immersed in playing the checking role that he stopped pushing as hard as he could on the other side. Todd McLellan may have a similar player here.
  • Jesse Puljujarvi’s point total after his first 24 games doesn’t look impressive, but Taylor Hall went 24gp, 6-6-12 at the beginning of his career, on about 17 minutes a night. JP has just eight points, but is playing 11:39 per evening.
  • If all things were equal across the NHL, Edmonton would have three forwards in the top 90 scorers (they have four) and nine inside the top 270 forwards (they have nine). I know there is plenty of heat on Milan Lucic and Jordan Eberle, and with merit (5×5 needs to be better). The scoring past the top 4F above is abysmal, and has to turn around.

OILERS DEFENSE (DFF AND SCORING)

  • This is sorted by minutes against elites, I think that is the best way to rank No. 1 through No. 6 on defense. There are still issues (injuries, etc) but little doubt in my mind this fits with reality.
  • Andrej Sekera is inside the NHL’s top 30 scoring defenders and plays the most minutes against elites. What’s more, his success rate (DFF) is better than the other three big minutes blue.
  • Adam Larsson ranks No. 2 in minutes against elites, and has the best DFF Rel among the big minutes blue. I like Rel for defensemen, always have (as you will see in a bit) and even though these numbers are still small sample sizes, I think we can say with some authority that Larsson is the best available RH defensive option on the team.
  • Oscar Klefbom has struggled against the tough opposition, but his numbers are not so out of line as to suggest he be replaced on the top 4D. I do wonder if Brandon Davidson slides up the depth chart at some point, though.
  • Matt Benning and Darnell Nurse play less against the elites, but when they do both youngsters have been effective. Full Stop. Edmonton’s defense is getting better, brick by brick.
  • Thanks to G Money and Woodguy for sharing DFF and DFF Rel with us again today.

DAVID STAPLES

I do not know who Ryan McWawa is, but his article yesterday struck a nerve (or a chord) because several of you DM’d and emailed it to me. I rarely comment on this, for several reasons, the most important of which should be obvious if you use your head for more than a hat rack. Also, analytics is not my field of expertise—plus, the venom over these things becomes toxic and honestly I am too old to fight online battles with ghosts and broken links.

I believe you are smart enough to figure this out for yourself, and if you cannot, there is nothing I can do for you. I will re-publish what I wrote in 2010 (!!!) about an earlier version of David’s work. It still stands as how I feel about it today.

  • The mistakes David refers to are “errors” which he measures on each goal. I think we’re going to have to decide which of the measures we’re going to use from here on out. Kind of a modern “VHS versus Beta” discussion. I believe counting only the events that surround goals misses most of the game and in fact punishes those who play against the best opposition too severely. I’ve always used relCorsi run through toughness of opposition, as it’s easily explained, understood and reflective of reality.
  • I think David Staples is a fine person and a great writer. My interaction with him has always been positive and I wish him no ill will. I don’t think “errors” moves the conversation forward in a rational way. What am I missing?
  • Source

It is not for me to tell you what to think, nor is it for me to tell David Staples what to publish. If you believe his work has merit, then you should state that, you should defend it. If you do not, then I invite you to join the church home of your own—be it Corsi, WoodMoney or any number of interesting metrics out in the ether.

If people are willing to share their ideas, and publish their findings for all to see, then we should be able to meet them halfway, hear them out, and make our decisions. If they do not, intellectual honesty compels you to shun the metric until such time as all required information reaches the offices of public domain.

There should be no rage here, only conclusions made by each of us based on the math, the logic and the reason. Every moment spent mocking, chiding, belittling or cajoling takes away from the important question at play here.

My point about VHS and Beta remains: Which one will you choose? After that, we can resume our flight, put our trays down, recline our seats and move on to the next topic of conversation. If you turn this into a war, you have lost in that instant. This is not a difficult equation, and if you make it personal then you are deliberately muddying the waters and stoking the fires of your own downfall.

This right here is what we call a big fly. I want to write that line out in full, as an adult learner it helps me to retain the information. Ahem. Uncontrolled zone exits leads to a controlled entry only 5.5 percent of the time. 55.5 percent of the time it comes right back in to the Oiler zone.

If you put $55.50 on the counter every 90 seconds and received no goods or service but were left with $5.50, how often would you do it before you started to use the brain God gave you? Of course, this is different, because there are times in a game when an uncontrolled exit or an icing are the best option available. That said, Wheat’s number is shocking, an absolutely miserable piece of math heading for the batter’s head at 102 miles an hour. You don’t fix that, not a helluva lot else that matters.

LOWDOWN WITH LOWETIDE

A fun show today as we careen toward New Year’s Eve. 10 this morning, TSN 1260 and scheduled to appear:

  • Darcy McLeod, Because Oilers. Who should play with 97, why isn’t Benning playing, and the best way to measure power-play success.
  • Guy Flaming, The Pipeline Show. Changes to the Pipeline show, Oil Kings a team with a story, WJ reaction.
  • Frank Seravalli, TSN. The Metro Division stomps the guts out of the rest of the NHL, while the Pac-7 is rowing a boat with only one oar.

10-1260 text, @Lowetide on twitter. Talk soon!

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

269 Responses to "G37 2016-17: KINGS AT OILERS"

« Older Comments
  1. Lowetide says:

    You know, Gryba has NO offense at all, but he made a very intelligent decision on the goal. No real point beyond acknowledging a defensive defender showing some offense. Don Awrey would be proud.

  2. Lowetide says:

    Eberle hot garbage on that shift. Holy lord.

  3. Centre of attention says:

    I have not un-clenched for the last 5 minutes.

  4. Pescador says:

    square_wheels:
    Pescador,

    Hmmmmm. Curious. Got to think on that. Love Gallagher, but not sure trading Nuge is the right move.

    Eberle would be my choice.

    I’m not trading Nuge, my comment was pure crass.
    I’m a crassy guy

  5. John Chambers says:

    Benning with some crucial defending there.

  6. Ice Sage says:

    Gonna need good Talbot here. Oilers regressing

  7. Pescador says:

    Pou having a decent game, forever impressed by Benning

  8. square_wheels says:

    No Call – WTF ????

    I hate Doughty now.

  9. VOR says:

    By the way Woodguy. We always have a algorithm line. And we never, ever share it with the public. It isn’t just Dallas, great example of egregious mark to market, but we always distort. Always! And we always know what the smartest analysts and best algorithms say the real odds are. In the trade we say we can’t sell you a skunk if we don’t know what a cat looks like.

  10. Lowetide says:

    How in Christ is that no hooking on Doughty?

  11. square_wheels says:

    Don’t give Doughty any space. Maul him.

  12. Centre of attention says:

    Centre of attention:
    I have not un-clenched for the last 5 minutes.

    I may poop if I un-clench

  13. pocession charge says:

    Looch with an ugly turnover. Yikes that was bad.

  14. Centre of attention says:

    Cam Talbot is our lord and savior.

  15. Professor Q says:

    For a small guy, Caggiula really knows how to play big.

    I do like him with Puljujärvi; Jesse is so good in the defencive zone.

    Also: Dustin Brown is an idiot.

  16. Lowetide says:

    Nuge scores!

  17. square_wheels says:

    Benning ? That a boy Nuge. We never doubted you 😮

  18. pocession charge says:

    Kevin Quinn just blew the call.

  19. Ice Sage says:

    Important W

  20. BeerMe says:

    That was a big boy game by the Oil.

  21. jp says:

    Well that was just excellent.

    I only caught the last ~25 min of the game, but the Oil looked good. And 2 pts in a big division game! Nice to see!

  22. Ice Sage says:

    Centre of attention: I may poop if I un-clench

    Get thee to a toilet

  23. Gerta Rauss says:

    Ryan Lochte with the empty netter

  24. square_wheels says:

    Pescador,

    I’m not either but the cap is going to eventually put us in a tough spot.

    Nice to see him scoring one tonight, looks to be coming on a bit lately. Thought he carried the puck well in the neutral, and Drai and Maroon love to cycle.

    Carly Shoulders – WOOOOOOTn

  25. Pescador says:

    December to remember, if we win on Saturday I won’t know what to do with myself

  26. Gerta Rauss says:

    That’s a solid win against a good team

    Full marks for those 2 points

  27. frjohnk says:

    Huge win. A loss and we would have been 2 points ahead of the Jings.
    With the win, we are 6 points ahead.

  28. Chachi says:

    Lowetide:
    You know, Gryba has NO offense at all, but he made a very intelligent decision on the goal. No real point beyond acknowledging a defensive defender showing some offense. Don Awrey would be proud.

    As I was saying earlier, I fully trust Gryba’s hockey sense at all times.

  29. Centre of attention says:

    Talbot doesn’t get a star tonight. Budaj gets second star though after taking the L.

    Like come the fuck on.

  30. Zelepukin says:

    Lucic made a great play on the game winner and Ebs had some looks throughout the night, but holy hell, we need some wingers who can get the puck to McD more often. It’s amazing he is still at the top of the league given how infrequently he handles the puck or how few clean breakout passes he ever receives.

    I’ve watched the last 3 Pens games and I’d wager that Crosby handles the puck probably 3x as much as McD in a game.

  31. JDï™ says:

    Centre of attention: Like come the fuck on.

    I thought the Remenda narrated piece about the Miracle on Manchester was the low point in the broadcast, but I was wrong.

  32. Zelepukin says:

    Centre of attention:
    Talbot doesn’t get a star tonight. Budaj gets second star though after taking the L.

    Like come the fuck on.

    Remenda picks the 3 stars and he gets $100 gift certificate to The Keg for every non-Oiler he picks.

  33. Crazy Pedestrian says:

    Oil win, fLames lose (to the Ducks, but rather Anaheim win than Calgary)
    Great night!

    GO OILERS GO!!!

  34. MrEd says:

    We won. Holy.
    Marooon.

  35. dustrock says:

    Get Eberle off that line.

    The 19-93-29 line outplayed the Kopitar line! Holy cow. Full credit for the win, how often can we say that against LA? Think Draisaitl was my player of the game.

    And without Sekera!

    Also Remenda is just unbearable this entire season. Quinn is a tool but he’s mostly harmless, and if Debrusk was there, it would be fine.

  36. LadiesloveSmid says:

    Very entertaining win. 2 points taken from a division rival, I usually count games against LA as automatic losses.

    97 really cold it seems. I like Pulju just about every game, just needs at bats (and to play with 97 imo)

  37. Centre of attention says:

    dustrock,

    Eberle had a 2 point night tonight?

    Why the angst?

  38. dustrock says:

    Centre of attention:
    dustrock,

    Eberle had a 2 point night tonight?

    Why the angst?

    PP yeah, but he has 2 whacks at the net and it takes Gryba sacrifice bunt to score on his other “assist”. I find he has exactly ZERO chemistry with McDavid and that line is not producing 5v5.

    Not going to gripe too much after a great win, but 2 points tonight doesn’t change that he’s not good for McDavid.

  39. Pescador says:

    Centre of attention:
    Talbot doesn’t get a star tonight. Budaj gets second star though after taking the L.

    Like come the fuck on.

    Meh, apart from the fact you’re right
    Grubby got the GwG the 1st star & the 2 points, I’ll take it
    He also challenged Nolan to a fight after he took a run at Pully,
    Too enjoyable of a win even for Remenda to ruin.

  40. Durag says:

    Shit, boys. Playoffs a-comin’.

  41. dcsj says:

    Couldn’t watch the game (at work), but wondering if McDavid had a shadow on him the whole game?

  42. Georges says:

    VOR:
    Georges,

    What I was trying to explain to Godot was that we remain uncertain how to rate any single “possession metric data point” never mind the conclusions drawn from it for accuracy and relevance so the fact that a tracking stat measuring something similar leads to a different conclusion in no way invalidates the tracking stat supported conclusion. They may both be right and we may all be blind men examining an elephant, they may both be wrong for the same or different reasons, or one or the other may be true and its compatriot completely false but we have no way of knowing which is which. The actual relationship if any between the stats never mind the conclusions is made utterly indecipherable because of the entire black box thing.

    Hi VOR. We can use very simple statistical methods (like you said in your post the other day) to examine the relationship between team possession metrics and something we care about: winning. We can quantify this relationship and see how it changes over time. The basic methods we learned in our intro stats course tell us that the relationship between possession metrics and winning is statistically significant for every season we look at. The same can be said, even more so, for PDO metrics at the team level. We can also see that the two types of metrics (possession and PDO) are uncorrelated; they measure distinct things. Taken together, they explain almost all of the variance in winning. So, at the team level, I’m not sure there’s uncertainty on which metrics to use and how to value them: shots for and against and shooting and save percentages.

    Using these same metrics for players is uncertain because we need to somehow separate an individual’s performance from the performance of his teammates and his opponents. Lots of work to do there, it seems. I agree we should be open to anything that can provide value. The problem I think is what godot and you mention, how can we evaluate something new (a tracking stat) if we’re not given the data to evaluate it ourselves?

  43. dustrock says:

    Should mention I thought Larsson was making better decisions and more passes out there tonight.

  44. dangilitis says:

    dustrock:
    Get Eberle off that line.

    The 19-93-29 line outplayed the Kopitar line!Holy cow.Full credit for the win, how often can we say that against LA?Think Draisaitl was my player of the game.

    And without Sekera!

    Also Remenda is just unbearable this entire season.Quinn is a tool but he’s mostly harmless, and if Debrusk was there, it would be fine.

    My favourite part of the broadcast was after showing the miracle in Manchester, which was a classless piece to run at this particular time of the game in this particular season, Remenda then proceeds to name drop his buddy who scored the GWG.

    Also can they please stop showing records against strong opponents over the past 5 years? Are there any records over that time that are not depressing?

    Full value for the win tonight, great game to watch. Watching Doughty getting stripped of the puck twice on the same shift in the last minutes of a game was far better than seeing him get leveled.

  45. LadiesloveSmid says:

    Sutter with some really nice words about the oil

  46. Georges says:

    VOR:
    Georges and Woodguy,

    I want to start off by saying I don’t gamble. But if you really want to know how odds are set it works like this:

    Complicated ever changing algorithms predict the event. An odds line is developed. The public never sees that line. Saints preserve us, we never give a sucker an even break.

    The first decision is how much we can distort the line and still get the mooks to give us their money. The average is 3.5 to 4%. If I know people like to vote on the Patriots I can give them lousier odds and still get their money.

    Next betting begins. Now my job is to make sure my book is even and I am not as we say, naked. That means adjusting the lines constantly to make sure the mook betting is equal on both sides of the bet and we kill it on the vigorish. This is known as arbing to vig. But if the volume rises on both sides of the book, I may start stripping. If I know something the mooks don’t I may start carrying some exposure, my book may go asymmetrical. Big risk, big gain. I am goosing the pig.

    But I am also watching the other houses. We no longer shoot our competition and bury them in the desert, so we need to out compete them on our odds and oh yes, on our vig. You, you poor sucker are lucky if the vig is only 10% and only on a losing bet. But for the whales, particularly serial whales I am negotiating downward as the volume of the bet goes up. When it gets really bad I will say the better is fat and cheap. Which is a way of saying I need to be sure the line is frigging right and Tom Brady didn’t just break his arm in practice. I might actually give back money, pay the whale to make the bet or unsettle the odds.

    Just so you know, every reader who bets here, on big enough bets there are both preferred odds and neg vig. If you bet more than $400,000 a year you will start seeing the vig narrow and the odds moving to the original algorithm value. Though if the action is heavy, particularly if I am sitting on the ground (the action is heavy on the same side of the bet you want me to book) you won’t find me at all friendly. I may even treat you like all the other mooks and try to comp you into submission.

    Meanwhile, I am taking side bets, note please: this is illegal in Las Vegas, both for the book and the bettor. These are those oddball bets like what color is the Gatorade or my all time favourite, which member of the Super Bowl winning team is going to be the first to go to jail. Try figuring the odds for that one.

    And that ladies and gentlemen is a gross simplification of a multi-billion dollar business that exists solely because we all think we are special, we can beat the house. And every day millions of people win bets and nearly every one of them gets screwed somehow. Which is why I don’t gamble. Even when you win you lose.

    This is brilliant. How much of the market is smart money? I’m assuming not all whales are smart. Also, insiders must have an edge, right? How do the books detect when they should take a position and when to just take the vig? And how do you know this if you don’t gamble? Is this your first life or your second life? I know we all have the expectation of anonymity here if we choose. Feel free to tell me nothing more at all but thank you for sharing this.

  47. dustrock says:

    SayItAin’tSo, Gretz, SayItAin’tSo!,

    What the what? My comments were overwhelmingly positive except for Eberle and Remenda.

    Too many hard root beers maybe.

  48. Georges says:

    What was nice about this game (besides Eric Gryba all-star) is that we won’t have to pick apart all of the little mistakes in the goal we gave up or debate how much of the blame goes to the players involved. It’s really, really nice to have a team that picks itself up and plays the full 60 minutes. And it’s also very considerate of the gods to spare us the bad bounces against the Kings that will make us doubt everything. Now, I believe we play that team again, we beat that team again.

  49. Centre of attention says:

    (((Corey Pronman))) ‏@coreypronman 7m7 minutes ago
    TOI leaders

    FIN
    F Rasanen-EDM 18:41
    D Heiskanen-2017 23:07

    SWE
    F Asplund-BUF 20:04
    D Carlsson-CBJ 20:53

    Rasanen leading the Fins in TOI for forwards. Good to see.

  50. Mr. D. says:

    This was a very important game. We keep within striking distance of the divisional lead.

  51. gogliano says:

    98 looked good out there and Lucic-McDavid-Eberle is underperforming. I’d like to see them swap Puljujarvi and Eberle.

  52. VOR says:

    I am tempted to say the only smart money in gambling is the money that doesn’t gamble but the truth is there are professional gamblers. Quite a few of them actually. And it can be a good living. The two most common ways are counting cards and playing poker. Counting cards used to get you knee capped and abandoned in the desert. Poker on the other hand the house doesn’t care who wins. They take a “service fee.” If you can consistently read people and pick tables with players who aren’t as good as you are you can make good money. It is all about reading people, the higher the level the more it’s human beings and less about odds.

    But you probably want to know about sports betting in particular. The professionals actually make up way more of the volume than you would think. It is 11 to 12% and it is mostly big pools that gets great rates. Low vig and good odds. You make it. up on the volume. So I am clear, there are a few really big smart players, quite a few moderate sized pools, and tons of people trying to break in.

    Books get to know the pros. Hell we track them down and try to sell them on betting with us exclusively. Partly because smart money is actually smart. If all the pros are on one side of the book it is a possible tell that you may want to take on some risk on that side of the book. Conversely, if they are all on one side of your book your odds making may have failed. It was actually a pro gambler who taught me the close games rule. Want to know which team is most likely to surprise in the NFL this year, check who had the most close losses last year. Add that into your algorithm and maybe not all the smart money is on one side of your book.

    Mostly, you use weighted moving averages in the betting data to determine when you take a position, or when the odds fail to balance your book. Every book worries if the odds become to extreme that they are looking disaster in the face.

    Imagine this, Kentucky Derby Day dawns but it is hard to tell. It is raining that hard. The track is a swamp, but with live TV the race must go on. There are a few really good horses near co-favourites. The rest of the field is poor to terrible to “what the hell is this horse doing here?” Nobody is betting on the non favourites. So all morning the odds on the lesser horses is jacked up and up. It gets ridiculous. Much of the field as post approaches are over 100 to 1. And betting on these lesser horses really picks up. Too fast. Odds are adjusted down but someone forgets the one long shot nobody has bet on. A few seconds before betting closes somebody puts down a $1,000 on the horse with no race record, purely on the strength of its name. There is no item to adjust the odds. All the horrified book could do was pray. Of course little Dust Commander turned out to love the mud. At a 1,000 to 1.

    The total bet was $4,000,000, the vig was 14%. A loss of $440,000. And given another several minutes the book would have bet on Dust Commander with another book. So when really long odds start happening and nobody bets you take a position to protect yourself from last minute run ups.
    As to how I know this, I have a very odd background, which is putting it mildly.

  53. NYCOIL "Gentleman Backpacker" says:

    Pardon my lack of knowledge, but what on Earth does “full b_ Obama” mean?

    That was a huge win. A 4 pter in the true sense of the word. No Bettman points. Kings come off the break and drop two to the Nucks and Oil. That has to hurt! Fuck Dustin Brown and the Kings.

    Playoff hockey is coming back to Edmonton. Hey, it may be a wild card in the end, but I think Oilers will more likely be 2nd or 3rd in the Division. This is a flawed team but it is a playoff team nonetheless. Strong December to remember. Would be great to cap it off with one more win.

    As for 05/06 Oilers comparison, no way. That team once it got Roloson, Samsonov, Tarnstrom and Spacek had balance. It also had prime CFP.

  54. Lowetide says:

    NYCOIL "Gentleman Backpacker":
    Pardon my lack of knowledge, but what on Earth does “full b__ Obama” mean?

    Full Barack Obama is what I took it to mean, and have changed it to that in the post above.

  55. NYCOIL "Gentleman Backpacker" says:

    Lowetide,

    Cheers. I assume it was Rogers Beer fingers!

  56. Lowetide says:

    NYCOIL “Gentleman Backpacker”:
    Lowetide,

    Cheers. I assume it was Rogers Beer fingers!

    Haha, me too. That was a fun game, Oilers played a rugged game against a tough and sometimes dirty (spelled Dustin Brown) club and came out the other side. A nice result for long suffering fans.

  57. OilClog says:

    Reading the coaches comments about Eberle needing to find a way to create in the teams systems.. whats his return going to be? Brooks Orpik? Lol

    Rogers needs to fuck off, only thing worse would be the return of John Garrett. Straight trolling Oiler fans, Or maybe they could hire Pierre and we can get a fill of “Sidney Crosby no wait sorry Gord, Connor Mcdavid gobble gobble”

    Louie should walk down between the benches, jersey Remenda, grab the headset and make the lands right again.

  58. delooper says:

    Guys, I’m getting nervous. I’m not certain what to have a panic attack over with these Oilers. They’re winning. So I’m nervious about not knowing what to be anxious about.

  59. Oliver says:

    VOR,

    Henry Van Egteren by chance?

  60. GMB3 says:

    nice to beat a divisional rival on their second game of a back to back.

  61. GMB3 says:

    One thing that isn’t touched upon or cared about by most people, but it’s pretty cool that Slovenia’s first NHL player is Anze Kopitar and he is a legitimate stud. (I may be wrong, but I’m pretty sure he was the first Slovenian to play in the NHL)

  62. Woodguy says:

    Georges: Ah, anecdotes. This is looking back at the results, right? No one noticed the mispricing while it was available?

    No, people bet the mis-price and the bookies left the line there until they have even money on both sides.

  63. Woodguy says:

    Georges: Ah, anecdotes. This is looking back at the results, right? No one noticed the mispricing while it was available?

    Here’s a good piece on it.

    Setting the game odds, is not the same as setting the betting line:

    http://www.thespread.com/sports-betting-articles/091107-pointspreads-explained-how-bookmakers-set-the-betting-line

    This is important to understand, because it leads me to the biggest misconception in sports wagering. The pointspread is not the handicapper’s predicted margin-of-victory, but it is in fact the handicapper’s prediction of what number will be required to split the wagering evenly on both teams. Understanding that little tid-bit is the first step towards taking advantage of the numbers.

  64. Woodguy says:

    VOR:
    Georges and Woodguy,

    I want to start off by saying I don’t gamble. But if you really want to know how odds are set it works like this:

    Complicated ever changing algorithms predict the event. An odds line is developed. The public never sees that line. Saints preserve us, we never give a sucker an even break.

    The first decision is how much we can distort the line and still get the mooks to give us their money. The average is 3.5 to 4%. If I know people like to vote on the Patriots I can give them lousier odds and still get their money.

    Next betting begins. Now my job is to make sure my book is even and I am not as we say, naked. That means adjusting the lines constantly to make sure the mook betting is equal on both sides of the bet and we kill it on the vigorish. This is known as arbing to vig. But if the volume rises on both sides of the book, I may start stripping. If I know something the mooks don’t I may start carrying some exposure, my book may go asymmetrical. Big risk, big gain. I am goosing the pig.

    But I am also watching the other houses. We no longer shoot our competition and bury them in the desert, so we need to out compete them on our odds and oh yes, on our vig. You, you poor sucker are lucky if the vig is only 10% and only on a losing bet. But for the whales, particularly serial whales I am negotiating downward as the volume of the bet goes up. When it gets really bad I will say the better is fat and cheap. Which is a way of saying I need to be sure the line is frigging right and Tom Brady didn’t just break his arm in practice. I might actually give back money, pay the whale to make the bet or unsettle the odds.

    Just so you know, every reader who bets here, on big enough bets there are both preferred odds and neg vig. If you bet more than $400,000 a year you will start seeing the vig narrow and the odds moving to the original algorithm value. Though if the action is heavy, particularly if I am sitting on the ground (the action is heavy on the same side of the bet you want me to book) you won’t find me at all friendly. I may even treat you like all the other mooks and try to comp you into submission.

    Meanwhile, I am taking side bets, note please: this is illegal in Las Vegas, both for the book and the bettor. These are those oddball bets like what color is the Gatorade or my all time favourite, which member of the Super Bowl winning team is going to be the first to go to jail. Try figuring the odds for that one.

    And that ladies and gentlemen is a gross simplification of a multi-billion dollar business that exists solely because we all think we are special, we can beat the house. And every day millions of people win bets and nearly every one of them gets screwed somehow. Which is why I don’t gamble. Even when you win you lose.

    This is good.

    Beating the vig in sports betting is ridiculously tough.

  65. Woodguy says:

    VOR:
    By the way Woodguy. We always have a algorithm line. And we never, ever share it with the public. It isn’t just Dallas, great example of egregious mark to market, but we always distort. Always! And we always know what the smartest analysts and best algorithms say the real odds are. In the trade we say we can’t sell you a skunk if we don’t know what a cat looks like.

    You’re a bookie?

  66. hunter1909 says:

    NYCOIL "Gentleman Backpacker": As for 05/06 Oilers comparison, no way. That team once it got Roloson, Samsonov, Tarnstrom and Spacek had balance. It also had prime CFP.

    MacT perpetually learning how to NHL coach from behind the bench put an end to any balance on ice.

    MacT perpetually learning how to NHL coach from behind the bench put an end to any balance on ice.

  67. Jethro Tull says:

    VOR: And that ladies and gentlemen is a gross simplification of a multi-billion dollar business that exists solely because we all think we are special, we can beat the house. And every day millions of people win bets and nearly every one of them gets screwed somehow. Which is why I don’t gamble. Even when you win you lose.

    But I have what no one else has: A foolproof system!

  68. NYCOIL "Gentleman Backpacker" says:

    hunter1909: MacT perpetually learning how to NHL coach from behind the bench put an end to any balance on ice.

    MacT perpetually learning how to NHL coach from behind the bench put an end to any balance on ice.

    Well this is not true. In the 06 run MacT went left wing lock against the Red Wings and surprised them. He was a good coach. He was not putting Toby Petersen on the power play at this stage.

    P.S. every coach SHOULD be perpetually learning on the job. People should always be striving to be better at whatever it is they do.

    But you cannot fault MacT’s coaching in spring of 2006 surely.

    My point still stands. No way this team is set up better than the 06 spring team.

    I assume Say it Ain’t So was tipsy / giddy when he/she said that.

  69. TheGreatMutato says:

    Gerta Rauss:
    Ryan Lochte with the empty netter

    Brilliant 😉

« Older Comments

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!
© Copyright - Lowetide.ca