Tweet
THIS IS OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS:
Playoff Seed Performance
Did you realize that heading into the 2006 playoffs, not a single team seeded 6th through 8th in the Western Conference had won a series in the prior nine years? That trend could go back even longer, but I chose to cut it off in conjunction with the dating of the ******* database. Think about that. The better seed was 27-0 straight up in series wagers during that time span. Even if youre laying 450 with a favorite on a bet like that, there would still be plenty of value. Well, the trend officially ended with the 6th seeded Clippers victory over the Nuggets, but in all rights, that wasnt an upset since Los Angeles held home court advantage for the series, so the pattern continues. There simply arent that many upsets in the NBA playoffs, particularly in the early rounds. In fact, typically, the only upsets youll find will either come from the 6th seed beating the #3 in the East, or from a series where there is just a one seed difference between the clubs. Truthfully, many of those occurrences arent even upsets as well, merely a case of a better team being seeded lower by circumstance.
Therefore, if youre waiting to see Dallas, Phoenix, or San Antonio fall in the first round, youll probably be waiting a long time!
Here some trends and records illustrating the series, straight up, and ATS records for the better and lower seeds by round. This should provide some insight as to the chance for upsets along the way. Among the highlights youll see that there is little to no statistical value to play blindly by seed against the spread. The one exception of this is to the 2nd seed in the West, who has converted 63.8% ATS vs. the #7 seed. However, the first two rounds in each conference have proven golden for money line bettors when backing the better seeds. Those teams are 65.1% straight up winners in games, and 79.2% winners of series.
- Lower seeded teams were 34-24 ATS in the 2006 NBA playoffs
- Higher seeded teams win 74.7% of the series, 62.0% of the games straight up, and 50.4% of the games ATS.
- The best spot to bet a lower seed against the spread has proven to be the Eastern Conference Finals, where they own a 32-24 ATS record, for 57.1%.
Here are the various scenarios with series, straight up, and ATS records:
Eastern Conference First Round
#1 vs. #8: The top seed is 9-1 in series, 33-12 SU, and 22-21 ATS vs. the #8 seed.
#2 vs. #7: The #2 seed is 9-1 in series, 33-13 SU, and 22-20 ATS vs. the #7 seed.
#3 vs. #6: The #3 seed is 5-5 in series, 25-21 SU, and 21-24 ATS vs. the #6 seed.
#4 vs. #5: The #4 seed is 7-3 in series, 30-22 SU, and 26-26 ATS vs. the #5 seed
Western Conference First Round
#1 vs. #8: The top seed is 10-0 in series, 34-12 SU, and 23-23 ATS vs. the #8 seed.
#2 vs. #7: The #2 seed is 10-0 in series, 34-13 SU, and 30-17 ATS vs. the #7 seed.
#3 vs. #6: The #3 seed is 9-1 in series, 31-14 SU, and 20-25 ATS vs. the #6 seed.
#4 vs. #5: The #4 seed is 5-5 in series, 26-20 SU, and 24-22 ATS vs. the #5 seed.
Eastern Conference Second Round
- The better seeds have combined to go 16-4 in series, 71-41 SU, and 57-53 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
Western Conference Second Round
- The better seeds have combined to go 15-5 in series, 71-42 SU, and 52-52 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
Eastern Conference Finals
- The better seeds have combined to go 5-5 in series, 29-31 SU, and 24-32 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
Western Conference Finals
- The better seeds have combined to go 6-4 in series, 30-26 SU, and 30-24 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
NBA Finals
- The better seeds have combined to go 3-3 in series, 14-17 SU, and 13-16 ATS vs. the lower seeds. Note, that in four NBA Finals Series', the teams shared the same seed number.
Playoff Seed Performance
Did you realize that heading into the 2006 playoffs, not a single team seeded 6th through 8th in the Western Conference had won a series in the prior nine years? That trend could go back even longer, but I chose to cut it off in conjunction with the dating of the ******* database. Think about that. The better seed was 27-0 straight up in series wagers during that time span. Even if youre laying 450 with a favorite on a bet like that, there would still be plenty of value. Well, the trend officially ended with the 6th seeded Clippers victory over the Nuggets, but in all rights, that wasnt an upset since Los Angeles held home court advantage for the series, so the pattern continues. There simply arent that many upsets in the NBA playoffs, particularly in the early rounds. In fact, typically, the only upsets youll find will either come from the 6th seed beating the #3 in the East, or from a series where there is just a one seed difference between the clubs. Truthfully, many of those occurrences arent even upsets as well, merely a case of a better team being seeded lower by circumstance.
Therefore, if youre waiting to see Dallas, Phoenix, or San Antonio fall in the first round, youll probably be waiting a long time!
Here some trends and records illustrating the series, straight up, and ATS records for the better and lower seeds by round. This should provide some insight as to the chance for upsets along the way. Among the highlights youll see that there is little to no statistical value to play blindly by seed against the spread. The one exception of this is to the 2nd seed in the West, who has converted 63.8% ATS vs. the #7 seed. However, the first two rounds in each conference have proven golden for money line bettors when backing the better seeds. Those teams are 65.1% straight up winners in games, and 79.2% winners of series.
- Lower seeded teams were 34-24 ATS in the 2006 NBA playoffs
- Higher seeded teams win 74.7% of the series, 62.0% of the games straight up, and 50.4% of the games ATS.
- The best spot to bet a lower seed against the spread has proven to be the Eastern Conference Finals, where they own a 32-24 ATS record, for 57.1%.
Here are the various scenarios with series, straight up, and ATS records:
Eastern Conference First Round
#1 vs. #8: The top seed is 9-1 in series, 33-12 SU, and 22-21 ATS vs. the #8 seed.
#2 vs. #7: The #2 seed is 9-1 in series, 33-13 SU, and 22-20 ATS vs. the #7 seed.
#3 vs. #6: The #3 seed is 5-5 in series, 25-21 SU, and 21-24 ATS vs. the #6 seed.
#4 vs. #5: The #4 seed is 7-3 in series, 30-22 SU, and 26-26 ATS vs. the #5 seed
Western Conference First Round
#1 vs. #8: The top seed is 10-0 in series, 34-12 SU, and 23-23 ATS vs. the #8 seed.
#2 vs. #7: The #2 seed is 10-0 in series, 34-13 SU, and 30-17 ATS vs. the #7 seed.
#3 vs. #6: The #3 seed is 9-1 in series, 31-14 SU, and 20-25 ATS vs. the #6 seed.
#4 vs. #5: The #4 seed is 5-5 in series, 26-20 SU, and 24-22 ATS vs. the #5 seed.
Eastern Conference Second Round
- The better seeds have combined to go 16-4 in series, 71-41 SU, and 57-53 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
Western Conference Second Round
- The better seeds have combined to go 15-5 in series, 71-42 SU, and 52-52 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
Eastern Conference Finals
- The better seeds have combined to go 5-5 in series, 29-31 SU, and 24-32 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
Western Conference Finals
- The better seeds have combined to go 6-4 in series, 30-26 SU, and 30-24 ATS vs. the lower seeds.
NBA Finals
- The better seeds have combined to go 3-3 in series, 14-17 SU, and 13-16 ATS vs. the lower seeds. Note, that in four NBA Finals Series', the teams shared the same seed number.
Comment