Do NBA games have predictable outcomes?

[Mainstreet]

I watched a good part of 60 Minutes on television this past Sunday, 12-6-09, for part II of the Tim Donaghy story. What caught my eye is that Donaghy was able to predict correctly 70 to 80 percent of his NBA bets. I thought this might be because of his betting on the games and having a consequence on the outcome. Apparently this is not the case. He describes how NBA games are very predictable with insider knowledge of the relationships among referees, players, coaches, and owners. See quote below:

"You told the FBI, this is a quote, 'You don't realize how easy this was for me knowing what I knew,'" Simon said. "What exactly did you know?"

"I knew that there were certain relationships that existed between referees and players, referees and coaches, and referees and owners that influence the point spreads in games," Donaghy explained.

Asked what a point spread is, Donaghy said, "A point spread is where a team is favored to win or lose by a certain amount of points."

"You say that certain refs like or dislike certain players? Certain coaches? Certain general managers?" Simon asked.

"And certain owners," Donaghy added.

"You told us 'I knew these guys. Knew who they liked, who they despised and who they would help or screw over,'" Simon said.

For example, Donaghy cited tempestuous superstar Allen Iverson. Some refs liked him, some did not. Natural enough.

But Donaghy said several refs would let their feelings influence their calls by either favoring Iverson or favoring his opponents. And that would affect the score.

"And I knew those relationships, whether they were positive or negative had an effect on the game," Donaghy said.

So if the referees are not calling the game they see fairly what do you call it?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/03/60minutes/main5880547.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

 

[S_Nash]

As someone who has been gambling on NBA games for 2 years, I can tell you that it's anything but predictable.

I'd love me some insider info though

 

[mojorizen7]

I would argue that it's easier to predict straight up winners in a 7 game series(from game to game) rather than taking a chunk of games from a regular season Saturday night in December and trying to predict the outcomes.
^ hopefully that made sense.

 

[Mainstreet]

The point I was trying to make, if a person who has insider knowledge of the relationships among referees, players, coaches and owners, apparently they can make bets on NBA games near 80% of the time and get it right. So are certain outcomes in games inevitable based upon relationships?

I wonder.

There is such a thing as being a professional and remaining objective.

 

[Errntknght]

Donaghy clearly wasn't betting every game - he was picking games where he had a very good idea that the particular refs would skew the game vs. the gambling spread. Still 75% is an amazing number - and if the FBI wouldn't have confirmed that rate I would have thought Donaghy was exaggerating a fair bit.

Overall Donaghy's effect should be beneficial to the game - it tarnished the reputation of the refs but it should make them aware that the fans do not like their biases, even when there is something they consider a justification like the Iverson case. We've seen the same thing with Amare - he did act like a jerk toward the refs and they nailed his butt with every ticky-tack foul in the book. (This year it looks like he's cleaned up his act some and the refs aren't as hard on him. Hmmm, maybe its not always such a bad thing for the refs to have some biases...)

The worst thing about the Donaghy affair is that it didn't knock Stern off his throne!

 

[mojorizen7]

The worst thing about the Donaghy affair is that it didn't knock Stern off his throne!

+9999.9

 

[elindholm]

Lots of NBA games are decided by only a few points. Tilt the balance even slightly toward one team, and you'll get a huge swing in terms of how many of those close decisions fall to one side.

There's no question that the referees' preferential treatment of certain players has a dramatic impact on wins and losses. The problem is that, during the Stern era, the league has consistently been more concerned with entertainment than with fairness. As long as the money keeps pouring in, the NBA really has no incentive to clean up its act.

 

[Mainstreet]

Lots of NBA games are decided by only a few points. Tilt the balance even slightly toward one team, and you'll get a huge swing in terms of how many of those close decisions fall to one side.

There's no question that the referees' preferential treatment of certain players has a dramatic impact on wins and losses. The problem is that, during the Stern era, the league has consistently been more concerned with entertainment than with fairness. As long as the money keeps pouring in, the NBA really has no incentive to clean up its act.

Nice summary. If this tilt is expanded to coaches and owners it further blackens the image of the NBA for fans who want the game to be called on the court by referees who at least strive to be impartial. It bothers me if I'm watching a close NBA game that I know may be slanted towards a certain team or player.

I believe NFL referees have risen to a much higher level of fairness in making objective calls. I think instant reviews and the ability for coaches to make challenges on certain plays has made for better referees in the NFL.

 

[jagu]

The Suns were screwed over by Donaghy that year against the Spurs. I'm still pissed off about that....

 

[Gaddabout]

Maybe we should have a federal agency that monitors referees and umpires. It's getting to the point where these billion dollar businesses simply do not have to deal with this problem, even if it's just a perception problem.

I think the NBA has some outstanding referees, but it's the cream the crop, the top 2 percent. After that, I think it gets very sketchy.

FWIW, in terms of judging a game, NBA may be the hardest, followed by football. The speed of the game on such a large surface played by giants, it's almost impossible to get everything right.

 

[elindholm]

I think the NBA has some outstanding referees, but it's the cream the crop, the top 2 percent.

So, you mean, the best one? There are only about 60 total, I think.

FWIW, in terms of judging a game, NBA may be the hardest, followed by football. The speed of the game on such a large surface played by giants, it's almost impossible to get everything right.

But that's not the problem. Outright blown calls are frustrating, but they aren't (usually) the result of bias. It's not a "mistake" when contact that is a foul, every time, against a non-star in the second quarter in December is a non-call, every time, against a star in the fourth quarter in the playoffs. It's corrupt methodology.