Wolves win total

[FNG]

I'm not teeing up the predictions thread...merely noting that the first Vegas line has the Wolves at 34.5, tied with the Kings. Barring a significant move before the beginning of the season, I see this as about right if we can stay healthy,

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Seems about right. As fans, a lot of us will make a win prediction based on assumed improvement by our young guys. Well, that doesn't always happen. Recent history with the likes of KAT and Wiggins should be a cautionary tale. KAT was a really good rookie. Wiggins was a really good rookie. Many of us thought they would take us to great heights. Well, neither have progressed that much since then if we're being honest. The same fate could await Edwards and McDaniels. Let's hope not though!

[Coolbreeze44]

That projected win total is pathetic given our payroll.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I'm not teeing up the predictions thread...merely noting that the first Vegas line has the Wolves at 34.5, tied with the Kings. Barring a significant move before the beginning of the season, I see this as about right if we can stay healthy,

I tend to wonder how Vegas gets their projections sometimes. How much of it is a formula that simply pulls in last season's record or even the last two years and then spits out a number? How is context of the season, and the off-season, accounted for in their projections? It has to be included, but to what degree? A 35-47 record is equal to a .427 win percentage, but last year the Wolves went 13-11 in the 24 games -- good for a .542 win percentage -- that D'Angelo Russell and Karl-Anthony Towns played in together. Then there's Anthony Edwards' likely improvement in year two -- or simply last season's second half production over 70-82 games next year. Keep in mind, Edwards' productivity led to a 16-20 record (.444) in the second half. Does Chris Finch replacing Ryan Saunders not lead to a more optimistic outlook as well? I feel like Vegas definitely has an explanation for why they pegged 34.5 as the betting line, but I can't agree based on the above factors.

[Coolbreeze44]

I'm not teeing up the predictions thread...merely noting that the first Vegas line has the Wolves at 34.5, tied with the Kings. Barring a significant move before the beginning of the season, I see this as about right if we can stay healthy,

I tend to wonder how Vegas gets their projections sometimes. How much of it is a formula that simply pulls in last season's record or even the last two years and then spits out a number? How is context of the season, and the off-season, accounted for in their projections? It has to be included, but to what degree? A 35-47 record is equal to a .427 win percentage, but last year the Wolves went 13-11 in the 24 games -- good for a .542 win percentage -- that D'Angelo Russell and Karl-Anthony Towns played in together. Then there's Anthony Edwards' likely improvement in year two -- or simply last season's second half production over 70-82 games next year. Keep in mind, Edwards' productivity led to a 16-20 record (.444) in the second half. Does Chris Finch replacing Ryan Saunders not lead to a more optimistic outlook as well? I feel like Vegas definitely has an explanation for why they pegged 34.5 as the betting line, but I can't agree based on the above factors.

Cam, I tend to agree that number may be a little low. But no one is better at setting projections than Vegas is. A mistake on one side of the line or the other can cost them millions of dollars. They have the best experts and the best tools at their disposal to set these lines. And if they do put out a line that's inaccurate, the public will force them to move it by the handle.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I'm not teeing up the predictions thread...merely noting that the first Vegas line has the Wolves at 34.5, tied with the Kings. Barring a significant move before the beginning of the season, I see this as about right if we can stay healthy,

I tend to wonder how Vegas gets their projections sometimes. How much of it is a formula that simply pulls in last season's record or even the last two years and then spits out a number? How is context of the season, and the off-season, accounted for in their projections? It has to be included, but to what degree? A 35-47 record is equal to a .427 win percentage, but last year the Wolves went 13-11 in the 24 games -- good for a .542 win percentage -- that D'Angelo Russell and Karl-Anthony Towns played in together. Then there's Anthony Edwards' likely improvement in year two -- or simply last season's second half production over 70-82 games next year. Keep in mind, Edwards' productivity led to a 16-20 record (.444) in the second half. Does Chris Finch replacing Ryan Saunders not lead to a more optimistic outlook as well? I feel like Vegas definitely has an explanation for why they pegged 34.5 as the betting line, but I can't agree based on the above factors.

Cam, I tend to agree that number may be a little low. But no one is better at setting projections than Vegas is. A mistake on one side of the line or the other can cost them millions of dollars. They have the best experts and the best tools at their disposal to set these lines. And if they do put out a line that's inaccurate, the public will force them to move it by the handle.

Yeah, I'm sure they have a tried and true method of coming up with these projections. They're more often right than wrong, which is why the house always wins at the end of the day. My process of thinking just doesn't align with theirs here primarily for the reasons I mentioned above. It's also a matter of Minnesota has talent, but they have to prove it. They haven't done so year after year and Vegas has profited from it.

[Lipoli390]

I agree with Cool that Vegas is typically very accurate with their projections. But I agree with Cam's analysis. I'm sure there are instances in the past where Vegas has missed the mark by quite a bit - not often, but I'm sure there are examples. Assuming the Wolves stay reasonably healthy, I think this upcoming season will be another example.

[thedoper]

Vegas can continue to project low for the Wolves until we prove them wrong. They have likely made tons of money on dupes betting the over since the establishment of our franchise. I think we have hit the over less than 5 times since our inception.

[Monster]

I agree with Cool that Vegas is typically very accurate with their projections. But I agree with Cam's analysis. I'm sure there are instances in the past where Vegas has missed the mark by quite a bit - not often, but I'm sure there are examples. Assuming the Wolves stay reasonably healthy, I think this upcoming season will be another example.

It's also worth noting that (I would assume) they are making their projections based on someone finishing behind other teams. And win totals for other projections. So their projections aren't just based on what they put for the Wolves but for all the other WC teams too right? Maybe if we see all of the Vegas win projections that would inform us even more. I mean I don't really care as other have said I would have lost money several times if I had bet on my wolves.

[Coolbreeze44]

I agree with Cool that Vegas is typically very accurate with their projections. But I agree with Cam's analysis. I'm sure there are instances in the past where Vegas has missed the mark by quite a bit - not often, but I'm sure there are examples. Assuming the Wolves stay reasonably healthy, I think this upcoming season will be another example.

It's also worth noting that (I would assume) they are making their projections based on someone finishing behind other teams. And win totals for other projections. So their projections aren't just based on what they put for the Wolves but for all the other WC teams too right? Maybe if we see all of the Vegas win projections that would inform us even more. I mean I don't really care as other have said I would have lost money several times if I had bet on my wolves.

Monster, what Vegas tries to do is get equal wagering on both sides of the line. If they can do that, they essentially guarantee the 10% juice on half the wagers.

Sometimes Vegas will get inside information, and they will throw out a line that looks too good to be true. I'm sure you've heard the phrase: "They are just begging you to take the <xxxxx>" These are the games or event they clean up on. The public all goes one way, and the book knows the odds are in their favor.