|
Post by 1weedhopper on Nov 7, 2015 12:00:24 GMT
i have read the top of the PVI PAGE a hundred times and still not sure what im looking for. maybe someone could explain it to me better..ty
|
|
|
Post by ATS Staffwriter on Nov 8, 2015 17:03:47 GMT
(copied from NBA post)
Post by ATS Staffwriter on Nov 6, 2015 at 11:25am
Parity. Let's talk about it.
Certain teams will do better after losing three straight, certain teams will do worse.
The only way to use PVI is to super search how a specific team does when they've W/L 3 straight.
If they have a habit of turning things around on the 4th game, then PVI makes sense. If they have a habit of not turning things around on the 4th game, then PVI doesn't make sense.
YES PVI indicates that parity is due...but at the same it...it also indicates when teams are playing sub-par and may have static issues.
Understanding if it's a static problem or just temporary "bad luck" is important.
Perhaps you could look at how many points past spread they've given up?
Teams that have lost 3 straight but have only given up 10 or less points after the spread....would mean that they've been within 3-4 points of the spread each time. Maybe parity puts them on the right side of things for the 4th game. On the other hand, if they're 25 points outside of the spread, obviously they're performing way under par and I wouldn't count on parity to describe their chances of winning their next game. It's also possible that the coach has made changes for a few games and will switch back after getting blown out 3 straight.
Tracking parity at face value has been a roller coaster and it's definitely not something that you should examine and bet on in a vacuum, but as a part of a total narrative, it absolutely has some value if you're incorporating other instances and factors.
|
|
|
Post by ATS Staffwriter on Nov 8, 2015 17:09:04 GMT
The basic idea with parity is that what goes up must come down.
If you have a team that's won 3 straight vs a team that's lost 3 straight, something has got to give.
But with that said, if a team is getting blown out, I'd put less value in Parity. It seems there could be something wrong with the team. (Buffalo Sabres for instance.) But for your average team, a team that has a chance of winning, a team that's played well but has happened to have lost the last 3...that would be a great mark for a PVI consideration.
|
|
|
Post by ATS Staffwriter on Nov 8, 2015 17:46:16 GMT
I should add... if a team has a 66% WL ratio, then if they go 2-1, then they're perfectly normal. On the other hand, if a team has a 33% WL ratio, if they go 2-1, then they'd be performing abnormally.
That's what the calculation in PVI discerns.
It not only deal with who's 3-0 or 0-3, it also describes if that's normal for a team or not.
So last place teams with a 3-0 L3G rating will have a much higher PVI than first place teams with a 3-0 L3G
So it already comes handicapped for you.
The point I'm making here is that if a team is 0-3 and they played hard, then I think there is more reason to put strength on the PVI because then not only is the 4th game "due", but they have the tools to get it done. On the other hand, if they're 0-3 because they have a completely inferior defense and a terrible goalie, the team they're playing has a 30-5 record against them, etc, then that's more systemic, and I'd expect more of the same from them. They're still "due" but just not on the level than if they had proven that they had the skill to get it done.
|
|
|
Post by 1weedhopper on Nov 8, 2015 22:18:34 GMT
awesome ,thank you now I have a better idea as I look at it and read what your saying
|
|