LA Clippers

NBA 'Seven-Year Hangover' Over

2006-07-24T12:52:00.000-07:00

Michael Wilbon has a great column in today's Washington Post on how this year's NBA playoffs are the best of the post-Jordan (Bulls) era. I share his sentiments, as these are the first playoffs in all those years that I have enjoyed so much, with so many good games in so many good matchups. It's a sign in and of itself that I've watched most of these games on TV, whereas in years past the only series I remember watching were Kings-Lakers or the Finals (and not even all of the latter; Lakers-Nets? Yawn!)

Even with my hometown Washington Wizards being bounced by the Cleveland Cavaliers in a heartbreaking first round loss, it has been a competitive and entertaining month and a half thus far. The first round, usually not worth your time, produced good matchups in Bulls-Heat, Wizards-Cavs, and of course Lakers-Suns. Unlike years past, Wilbon notes, the absence of big players hasn't hurt the playoffs. No Kobe, No 'Melo, No Iverson (whose team didn't even make the playoffs), no problem.

In the second round, three of the four series went to seven games and the game's newest stars--players like LeBron James, Steve Nash, and Dirk Nowitzki--demonstrated that they, like their predecessors from the NBA's golden era, can play playoff-worthy basketball. In the conference finals, good basketball was on display in both series, but when it was all over, the two best teams in the league found themselves playing in the NBA Finals, which start tomorrow.

But Wilbon notes importantly that this year isn't just about the success of certain individual players. After all, the NBA has been desperately trying to fill the superstar void created in the late 1990s with the A.I.s, Vince Carters, and T-Macs. This year happened to be when the right stars on quality teams became ascendant. Magic Johnson comments that "we're back to what we used to have instead of saying 'Stay tuned for Allen Iverson versus..."

Now, he says, "it's back to the team, and the guys are great within the teams. It's great and I love it." As do I, Magic. The three top teams in the playoffs, Dallas, Phoenix, and Miami, were all more than just the one star player. Dallas was not just Nowitzki but Terry and Howard, if not Stackhouse closing out games. Phoenix wasn't just Nash (who I spent most of the past month maligning) but Bell and Diaw, if not Thomas hitting clutch late-game shots. And Miami is Shaq and Wade with a host of veterans, of whom most important is the coach, Pat Riley.

The best part of all this, I think, is that this is not a one year fluke. We may be entering a new era in basketball where the big stars and upper echelon teams are clearly identified and consistent, where we can see the rivalries and competition escalate yearly. Magic specifically mentions Dwyane Wade and LeBron James, and Phoenix, Dallas, and San Antonio. How about the Wizards (wishful thinking on my part?), who are just a big man away from the top. I think the LA Clippers (who ever thought this day would come?) also have solid potential in the near future, and a couple other teams also could be close to making the jump.

If we're right that the NBA is experiencing a revival, it' s cause for celebration. For five or six years my interest as a fan had been drifting away, until I gradually started coming back in the past two years. Part of this may be due to a revival in the Wizards' own fortunes, but the major factor is the improved quality of the league's product. Here's to a new era in the NBA.

P.S. - Finals pick: Dallas. I think I'm going to really enjoy this series and both teams deserve to win. Still, in Miami's case, Wade can wait (still "too young"), and Shaq and Riley have done it. I'm not saying they don't deserve it, because if they do win, they definitely earned it, but let's give this one to Dirk and Avery Johnson!

File under: sports, basketball, NBA

How To Bet On Sports: The Basics by Chuck Greene

2006-07-20T22:51:00.000-07:00

Sports betting is the ultimate money game for the sports fan. Through any of a number of online sportsbooks you can bet on the outcome of baseball, basketball, football, hockey and soccer games, car races, boxing matches and other popular sporting events. If you know your favorite sport inside and out, you can overcome "the juice", beat the oddsmakers and fatten your wallet. Also, placing a sports bet makes the outcome of the game more meaningful and the game itself more enjoyable and thrilling.

The sportsbook and the oddsmaker

To place a sports bet, simply go to a sportsbook -- a place that accepts sports bets. VIP Sports and Inter Wetten are examples of online sportsbooks. Many sportsbooks also accept bets by telephone. You may sometimes hear sportsbooks referred to as bookmakers or bookies. These terms are generally reserved for disreputable or illegal operations -- the leg-breaker variety.

Note that a sportsbook is not the same as an oddsmaker. The sportsbook simply accepts sports bets. An oddsmaker is a person who sets the betting odds. Most major sportsbooks use odds set by Las Vegas oddsmakers. These oddsmakers typically work for major hotel sportsbooks.

Most online sportsbooks are located in the Caribbean and Europe.

Types of bets

You can place a number of different bets including straight bets, parlays, teasers and over/unders. Read on for details.

Straight bets and the point spread

Straight bets are the most common sports bets. When you place a straight bet, you simply pick the team that will win or lose the game. But of course you'll also need to consider the point spread or moneyline.

The oddsmaker sets a point spread for football, basketball and hockey games. The point spread is the number of points that the favored team is expected to win by. For example, say the New York Knicks are favored to beat the LA Clippers by a point spread of 7. That means that if you pick the Knicks to win, they have to win by more than 7 points for you to win your bet. If they win by fewer than 7 points or lose the game, you lose your bet. If they win by exactly 7 points (the point spread), the result is a push or tie. That means that you don't win or lose, your original bet is refunded.

The favorite is always indicated by a minus sign and the underdog by a plus sign. For betting purposes, the result of the game is determined by taking the actual score and subtracting points from the favorite's score or adding points to the underdog's score. In our example, we could say that the Knicks are -7 or that the Clippers are +7. In other words, we subtract 7 points from the Knicks final score or add 7 to the Clippers score to determine the winner.

If the teams are evenly matched and there is no spread, the sportsbook will display PK or PICK, which means the spread is zero.

Sometimes the points spread is not an even number but a half point. For example, 5 ½. By setting the spread at a half point the oddsmakers ensure there will not be a push because a team can't actually win a game by 5 ½ points.

So, a favorite can win the game but lose it for betting purposes and an underdog can lose the game but win it for betting purposes. If you wager on an underdog your selection can lose the game and you still can win if they do not lose by more than the point spread.

Straight bets pay $10 for every $11 wagered.

All selections must be played on scheduled date or there is no action on these selections. Make up games or games that have been rescheduled will have no action.

The moneyline

Baseball games and some other sports events are handled a little differently than football, basketball and hockey. Oddsmakers don't set a point spread for baseball games, instead they set a moneyline. The moneyline gives the odds that one team will beat another.

There is a different moneyline total for either side on a money line bet, a negative side (the favorite) and a positive side (the underdog): Seattle -170 LA +150 What this means is that Dallas is the favorite and for every $17 you bet on Dallas, you win $10 if they win. For every $10 you bet on Washington, the underdog, you win $15 if they win. By offering different odds for each team the sportsbook is able to balance action on both teams.

For example, the Atlanta Braves may be favored over the Chicago Cubs by 150. In this example, the customer must lay $150 in order to win $100 if Atlanta wins the game, no pointspreads are involved. If Atlanta loses, the customer loses $150. However, the customer could bet on Chicago, in which case the customer would lay $100 in order to win $150 if Chicago wins the game. If Chicago loses, the customer only loses $100, because Chicago is the underdog.

Total or over/under bets

A total wager is a bet on the number of points scored in the game by both teams combined. You can bet on whether the actual number of total points scored is over or under the line posted. The total points scored includes points scored in overtime.

You can also bet whether the combined number of points or goals scored by the two teams in the game will be over or under the total set by the oddsmaker. For example, if the total is 32 and you believe that the combined points scored by the two teams will exceed that number, you would bet over 32.

This is really another form of straight bet and the payoff is also $10 for every $11 bet. Again, if the total is exactly on the line, it is a push or tie and your original bet is refunded.

Parlays

A parlay is a combined bet on two, three, four or more games. You have to win all of your picks to win your parlay. If one of your picks loses then your whole wager is lost.

If a game is a tie, postponed, incomplete, cancelled, or rescheduled for another date, your parlay is reduced to the next lowest level. That means that a three team parlay with a tie becomes a two team parlay, or a two team parlay with a tie becomes a straight bet that is calculated at $10 to win $9.

At many sportsbooks, ties are often considered losing bets, not pushes.

The suface appeal of parlay bets is obvious -- a ten team parlay pays off at 400 to 1. Typical payoffs for winning parlays are shown below:

# of games - Payout
2 - 2.6 to 1
3 - 6 to 1
4 - 11 to 1
5 - 20 to 1
6 - 40 to 1
7 - 80 to 1
8 - 150 to 1

Professional sports bettors never bet parlays -- there's too much juice in it for the sportsbook.

Teasers

A teaser is like a parlay, but you can add or subtract points from the spread to make your bets stronger. This is called moving the line. When betting a teaser additional points are either added to the underdog or subtracted from the favorite. The odds change according to the number of points the spread is moved and the number of teams combined to form the teaser.

For example New York might be favored by 9 points in one game and Chicago might be favored by 12 points in a second game. A 6 point teaser would adjust the Chicago pointspread 6 points in the customers favor; i.e. Chicago would now be favored by 6 points (12-6=6). The customer might make a bet on a 6 point teaser with Chicago and New York. In this example the customer is betting that Chicago will win by 6 points and New York will win by 3 points (9-6=3). As in the parlay, all teams must win.

At many sportsbooks, ties are often considered losing bets, not pushes.

Teaser bets may sound good but the payout odds are even worse than parlays. Like parlays, teaser bets are to be avoided.

Future bets

At the start of a season, the sportsbook will give odds for each team winning the championship (World Series, Stanley Cup, etc.). For example, you might bet at the start of the season that the Detroit Red Wings will win the Stanley Cup. Although futures bets have considerable juice, occasionally a savvy sports bettor manages to win big with a longshot that turns into a Cinderella story.

The odds change as the season goes on but you get the odds that were in effect at the time you placed your bet.

Exotic bets

To keep life interesting, sportsbooks often post odds and accept wagers on a variety of other sports-related activities. For example, you may be able to place a bet on who will win the home run derby or how much money a movie will make in its box office debut. The oddsmaker sets the conditions and odds for these bets.

Many exotic bets are offered at 11 to 10 odds, but some will be offered at better or worse odds, depending on the bet.

Payoffs and odds

For football, basketball, and hockey the payoff is $100 for every $110 wagered, unless otherwise noted. Therefore, $110 will be wagered if you specify a $100 straight bet.

At odds of 10/11 only 52.4 percent of your bets have to win for you to overcome the bookmaker's profit and break even, so you only need a very small edge to become a winner. Do your homework, bet selectively and 55 percent winning bets is definitely achievable and 60-65 percent is a realistic target. At those levels you will have an extremely profitable, as well as enjoyable, hobby.

Parlay bets are another story. The actual odds of picking two winners is 3 to 1. But a typical payout is 2.6 to 1. This gives the sportsbook a 10% advantage. Too much! Worse still, the odds usually get even worse the more games you add to your parlay. In a nutshell, parlay bets are best avoided.

If-win bets An If Win wager is an excellent choice for money management. You wager a fixed amount on one team if that team wins or the game is tied, then another fixed amount -up to the original amount- shall be placed on a different team. Your first wager must win in order for you to have action on the remaining wagers. If the first wager loses, there is No Action thereafter. You cannot have duplicate teams in the same If Win wager. Reverse bets Reverse wagers revert to individual If Bets. You can include up to 8 teams in a Reverse. The payoffs vary depending on the number of teams wagered on. A 2 Team Reverse pays 4/1, a 3 Team Reverse pays 12/1 (if the wager is $100). Standard reverse bets are Double Action; therefore in the event of a tie the bet is still active.

Two Personality Traits Equals One

2006-07-17T13:26:00.000-07:00

I once had a cat named Puff
Who would like you 'til she had enough
Aloof as she was
It was all good because
We could leave her and not worry 'bout stuff.

I once had a puppy named Mitzy
Compared to Puff she was friendly and frisky
Loving as she was
She had to leave 'cause
Dependent and needy is not easy.

So I had these two pets for many years. Puffy ruled the house and Mitzy knew not to mess with her. Puffy was a stereotypical cat and she would only pay attention to the lesser animals (the dog and the people) when she felt like it. She would enjoy it when we pet her or fed her but once she was satisfied she would ditch you without hesitation. On the plus side, it was easy to leave on extended trips and merely put a dish of food and water out for her. She could take care of herself just fine for up to two weeks without a problem. She lived to a bright old age of nineteen. (Link)

In contrast, Mitzy was the stereotypical dog. Friendly and affectionate, she would follow us wherever we went in the house. She loved to play and go for walks and would sleep in our beds at night. That being said, she was also a lot more work. She required two meals a day with regular feeding times and amounts. Feed her too much and she would pig out. We had to take her for regular walks and eventually we had to give her to my grandparents because I couldn't take care of her while I was living by myself at home and working full time. (Link)

Personality traits have two sides to them, they're double-edged swords. The very thing that we like about somebody can easily be the same thing that we do not like about them. The two parts may look different but they come from the same root. If we take away the annoying parts of a person, we would be surprised to find that we also took away the good parts at the same time. We can't carve out half of a person and take the parts we like and discard the rest. You're not left with half a person, you're left with only a shell.

Not that we should simply put up with annoying traits. Instead, we need to learn about the person and figure out why they behave certain ways in certain situations. We need to appreciate other people for who they are, not for some superficial picture that we have of them. A little understanding goes a long way.

As another example, Sam Cassell is one of the premier point guards in the NBA. He was a key free agent acquisition for the L.A. Clippers this past summer and he came just short of leading them to the third round of the current NBA playoffs. In fact, Steve Nash had to lead his Phoenix Suns to a rare comeback while down 3 games to 1 just to beat the Clippers. Sam has always been rather brash and outspoken, getting into people's faces and saying too many negative things in media interviews. That's why he is now on his seventh team and that's why teams were willing to let him go. The flip side is that he extremely competitive, confidant and passionate. The same traits that force him to move on are the traits that allowed him to lead the Clippers so far into the playoffs this year.

The one thing that many reporters observed about Cassell this year is that he seems to have matured in the way that he leads his team and the way that he interacts with his teammates and with the media. He hasn't lost his core attributes but he has gained the wisdom to soften the edges a bit. He and his team have gained the benefits of his personality (and his great skills) without being eroded by the negative aspects of it at the same time.

So I have two morals to these stories (or limericks). The first is that we need to understand and appreciate both sides of a person's personality traits. The second is that we can take this knowledge and apply it to ourselves, accentuating the positive pieces and softening the negative ones.

If you bothered to read this whole bit
And you wondered when I would quit
I just want to say
I can do this all day
I just hope you learned something from it!

LOSS HAS HIM BARKIN' MAD

2006-07-10T18:35:00.000-07:00

Well, not really. But certainly better things have come out of the Crescent City than last night's 120-108 Clipper loss to the New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets. Not their famous fried food -- you need a cast-iron stomach to eat that stuff -- but, for example, my favorite book, John Kennedy Toole's A Confederacy of Dunces. Pick it up sometime; if you don't laugh yourself hoarse, I'll buy it back from you.

Or, for instance, The Big Easy, one of the best films of 1987, with Dennis Quaid and Ellen Barkin, who was so sexy back in the day even I would have switched. Barkin appeared in a string of good movies around that time -- including Sea of Love opposite Al Pacino and the underrated Blake Edwards comedy Switch -- but my favorite line reading of hers came in Bad Company, after Frank Langella invited her to his lakeside retreat for a weekend of fishing. She leaned into his ear and whispered, "I don't want to fish. I want to fu*k."

But back to last night in Nawlins, where the Clippers' defense may have been the worst natural disaster since Hurricane Katrina. A brief review of the good, the bad and the ugly from the game:

The Good:
-- The Clips jumped out to a 12-3 lead and did a lot of things right. They shot 55.4% overall (including 4-5 by Quinton Ross), made seven threes, converted 90.5% of their free throws and outboarded the Bees, 37-35.
-- The Clips' bench continued to produce, paced by Corey Maggette's 25 on 9-15 FGs (3-6 3FGs) and Vladimir Radmanovic's 18 on 6-12 (4-7). The Clips' reserves outscored the Hornets', 45-31.
-- I love the way the Clips reacted to the loss. Take this excerpt from the Long Beach Press-Enterprise: "'We shouldn't have let these guys beat us, man,' said Clippers guard Cuttino Mobley, who later cursed and punched a locker." Sam Cassell and Maggs also lamented the team's lack of toughness. These guys hate to lose, and as an L.A. Kings fan, let me assure you not every professional athlete does.
-- Although the Clips are in no position to play Santa Claus and give games away, the Hornets and their fans have been through enough in the past year to derive special meaning from their win. Better, it moved the Hornets to within a game of the Lakers for the eighth spot in the West (which the Lakers' unbelievably cushy remaining schedule should allow them to retain).

The Bad:
-- The defense took the night off, particularly on the perimeter. I'm not overly concerned, because the Clips have been one of the top defensive teams in the league this season, but the Hornets shot 51.8% overall and an ungodly 54.5% (12-22) from behind the arc. As Ralph Lawler noted, "Dribble penetration is killing the Clippers."
-- Chris Kaman took the week off. After subpar outings against Philadelphia and at Houston, The Big Silly evacuated The Big Easy with an unimpressive six-point, four-rebound performance. Shaun Livingston also never showed up, missing three ugly shots in 13 forgettable minutes.
-- The Hornets dictated the tempo. Nobody will confuse them with the Phoenix Suns, but they play a similar run-and-gun style and the Clippers cooperated, taking 20 three-pointers. Although 35% went down, that's not the Clippers' game. They're first and foremost an inside-out team, and Elton Brand, who scored 24 on 15 shots, needed many more touches.
-- The Clippers made Rasual Butler look like an All-NBA first-teamer. ROY-to-be Chris Paul and David West ran a two-man game to the tune of 21 points apiece, but Butler -- after going 1-for-9 against Denver -- went off for a career-high 32 on 12-16 FGs (7-9 3FGs!) as the Clippers struggled with both the pick-and-roll and individual coverage. Butler later showed class by apologizing to the Clippers for taking a meaningless three-pointer as time expired.

The Ugly:
-- The stat of the night: the Clippers turned the ball over 19 times. As Ralph said, "You have to cherish the ball. Possession is more than nine points of the law, it's everything." Or, to quote Cat, "We had 19 turnovers and they got 34 points. What's left to say?"

Click on Clipper Talk and join the discussion. -- Jordan

2006-05-07T20:51:00.000-07:00

The St. Louis Local Organizing Committee will be hosting the 2005 NCAA Final Four at the Edward Jones Dome on April 2 and 4, 2005. The committee is a partnership between the Missouri Valley Conference, St. Louis University, the St. Louis Convention and Visitor's Commission, and the St. Louis Sports Commission.

The City of St. Louis, which is hosting it's third Final Four in 2005 has played a prominent role in the development of the NCAA Division Men's Championship. In 1973, Bill Walton and UCLA met Memphis at the old St. Louis Arena in the first ever Monday primetime national championship game.

Here's a list of FREE activities that will be taking place on Laclede's Landing throughout the four-day Championship Weekend, April 1-4, 2005:

LA Clippers

2006-02-21T19:32:00.000-08:00

In 1984 the Clippers moved to Los Angeles, California, playing in the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena while the Lakers, with a better reputation, continued to play at the Great Western Forum in Inglewood, a few miles south. The Clippers were completely overshadowed by their cross-town counterparts, who were in the midst of a championship run with future Hall of Famers, Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and James Worthy. The Clippers, under head coach Jim Lynam (and later Don Chaney) and new acquisitions Marques Johnson, Junior Bridgeman, and Harvey Catchings (all acquired via trade from the Milwaukee Bucks), finished with a disappointing 31-51 record in the first season in the City of Angels.