Bill Simmons/Sports Guy Containment Thread

[True North]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Proffett

I'm not too familiar with Chad Millman's gambling stories/contacts/exploits (or lack thereof according to you guys), but he's written/co-written some pretty good books: 'The Ones Who Hit The Hardest', talks about the Steelers/Cowboys rivalry in the 70's and their cultural differences; 'Invincible', the Vince Papale story that Marky Mark acted in; the Baba Booey book (haven't read it yet, should be entertaining)

Everything he does around gambling now is an offshoot of this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Odds-Season-Th.../dp/0306811561

which is actually really good. You'd think, though, that spending a season around Alan Boston would make him a little more knowledgeable about sports betting. Or maybe it's a case of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing.

[Pwn_Master]

Originally Posted by 72off

that's pretty good. i also liked the one from the other day, i think it was from the Millman discussion, where they were guessing lines for different SB matchups depending on who wins this weekend.

Simmons: what do you think the line would be for that one?
Other Dude (in case it wasn't actually Millman, and i'm running him down for no reason): hmm, i'd say like 4 points.
Simmons: really? i think it'd be more like 6.
Other Dude: yeah...well...somewhere between 4-6, yeah.

reminds me of:

"What time you got?"
"Oh, no. I don't wear a watch."
"What do you do?"
"Well, I tell time by the sun."
"How close do you get?"
"Well, I can guess within an hour."
"Tsk. Well, I can guess within the hour, and I don't even have to look at the sun."
"Yeah."
"Well, what about at night? What do you do then?"
"Well, night's tougher but it's only a couple of hours."

Seems you are missing the point, but think you are knowledgable about gambling, so don't know if it is intentional and I'm just missing the joke or not. He said the points between 4 and 6 are dead numbers therefore they really have pretty similar opinions about the game. The difference between 4 and 6 is actually slightly less than the difference between 3 and 3 1/2 (at least for the two games this week). I think Millman is a clown too, but when I heard this exchange, I thought nothing of it. If someone was guessing the line and said they think it would be either 3 or 3.5, I don't know if I would call that precise, but would seem pretty reasonable to me considering its just a freaking guess.

[loosekanen]

Originally Posted by Pwn_Master

Seems you are missing the point, but think you are knowledgable about gambling, so don't know if it is intentional and I'm just missing the joke or not. He said the points between 4 and 6 are dead numbers therefore they really have pretty similar opinions about the game. The difference between 4 and 6 is actually slightly less than the difference between 3 and 3 1/2 (at least for the two games this week). I think Millman is a clown too, but when I heard this exchange, I thought nothing of it. If someone was guessing the line and said they think it would be either 3 or 3.5, I don't know if I would call that precise, but would seem pretty reasonable to me considering its just a freaking guess.

fwiw I agree with you, but Millman is such a dbag that it's hard to take him seriously and give him the benefit of the doubt.

[BobboFitos]

Originally Posted by True North

Everything he does around gambling now is an offshoot of this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Odds-Season-Th.../dp/0306811561

which is actually really good. You'd think, though, that spending a season around Alan Boston would make him a little more knowledgeable about sports betting. Or maybe it's a case of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing.

Read that book. Was a very good read.

[Parlay Slow]

Originally Posted by Dids

Right, those are the valid reasons to hate on FO. (and just in general some of the people there are giant droolers the minute you hear them talk about anything that isn't hard numbers football) I just don't get hating on a stathead for hedging on a pick or something.

I'm hating on them for their downright misleading and shameless promotion of their "advanced metrics".

[agdci981]

From "The Sports Guys'" recent chat:

Bill Simmons
(4:19 PM)


8. If I'm a Pitt fan, I'm looking at our recent stretch of playoff games and noticing an ongoing theme - getting lucky at the right time over and over again. Pitt-Indy in 2005, Pitt-Balt last week, Pitt-Balt in 2008, Zona-Pitt in 2008... since 2004, only their 2007 Jags game was one of those "Everything's going wrong in this game" playoff games. They're overdue. Specifically, Roethlisberger/Tomlin is overdue. The NFL is too equal these days, you can't keep expecting the breaks to go your way like that. Eventually, it turns. Just ask the Patriots.

I mean this really isn't even arguable it is so LOLbad. It is like a bad Riverman post which, up until this point, I thought was nearly impossible to get worse than.

[72off]

Originally Posted by Pwn_Master

...but think you are knowledgable about gambling...

what ever gave you that indication?

yes, i failed to realize that the difference between 4 and 6 was so meaningless, but now that you explained it, and i've actually given it some thought it certainly makes sense. a million apologies.

[nath]

Originally Posted by agdci981

From "The Sports Guys'" recent chat:

I mean this really isn't even arguable it is so LOLbad. It is like a bad Riverman post which, up until this point, I thought was nearly impossible to get worse than.

It sounds like he's saying "variance can be high in the playoffs, and the Steelers have been on the positive side of that variance since 2004," which is a pretty reasonable statement.

[72off]

yeah, but then i guess he's basically saying that the coin has gone heads several times in a row...SO IT'S GOTTA BE TAILS THIS TIME!!!

[TheNoodleMan]

I'm sure Troy P would disagree that they got all the lucky breaks in the Indy game.

[nath]

Originally Posted by 72off

yeah, but then i guess he's basically saying that the coin has gone heads several times in a row...SO IT'S GOTTA BE TAILS THIS TIME!!!

Right, the "overdue" part is stupid, but if you're going to try to predict an outcome, you have to be able to differentiate between what's repeatable and what's variance.

[agdci981]

Originally Posted by nath

It sounds like he's saying "variance can be high in the playoffs, and the Steelers have been on the positive side of that variance since 2004," which is a pretty reasonable statement.

But I don't see variance in any of those games. I mean don't you think the Steelers were on the wrong side of variance when Polamalu had what was a pretty clear INT overturned and then Bettis fumbles when they are running out the clock against Indy? Also, not sure what "The Sports Guy" was watching last week because when you are on the team that givves up 1.9 yards per rush and 2.6 yards per pass play I am pretty sure you didn't rely on "luck."

[Victor]

ravens very easily coulda won that game. how repeatable is boldin dropping a near clinching td? how repeatable is roeth and crew converting a 3rd and 19?

ofc, ravens had their share of luck to be in such a position considering how poor their offense played.

[agdci981]

Originally Posted by Victor

ravens very easily coulda won that game. how repeatable is boldin dropping a near clinching td? how repeatable is roeth and crew converting a 3rd and 19?

ofc, ravens had their share of luck to be in such a position considering how poor their offense played.

LOL...look at the numbers from that game.

Main point in posting that: "The NFL is too equal these days, you can't keep expecting the breaks to go your way like that. Eventually, it turns."

[Dids]

Seems like all he's saying is "Pitt has rode variance to a potentially undeserved reputation and they're not that much better and will eventually lose one of these close games".

You can find him saying stupider things.