A professional gambler’s view of the Tim Donaghy mess

You know that we like to go just a little beyond the original story with links and insight that are a little deeper than the story itself.

With that said, we ran across this blog entry that includes some links to the news stories if you have an interest in following them.

There is a ton of good stuff in the entry. Just take a look at just one of the answers of the interviewee:

As far as the retroactive analysis in the article you linked to goes, some of the line moves that are mentioned the line moves were due to injuries. After the scandal broke I have done a lot of research regarding what games were likely fixed and which ones weren’t. I have also made some contacts with some bookmakers who have given me information on some of the games Donaghy bet — some of the stuff in that article is just conjecture and speculation, but some of it is accurate.

I can say with a large degree of certainty that this game was one of the more blatant fixes. That Phoenix vs. New York game was a game that I was told was bet by the crew associated with [alleged Donaghy co-conspirator James “Baa Baa”] Batista, it was also a game where Phoenix shot 14 free throws in regulation and New York shot 36.

There aren’t that many games in the last five or six years where a team had a 20 point free throw edge. In a sample of 6,373 games I show there being 167 games where the home team shot 20 more free throws than the visiting team, and 78 where the visiting team shot more. I hate trotting out numbers to prove my point because you can cherry-pick whatever statistics you want, but I think if someone with an objective eye goes and watches this game, focusing on Donaghy especially they’ll come away thinking that it was pretty clear the Knicks got a huge advantage in the game.

Here are couple of other Tim Donaghy games that may make for some interesting viewing. Miami at New York on February 26, 2007. There was a 39 to eight free throw disparity in that one.

Tim Donaghy refereed a 2003 Knicks at Lakers game that had a 47 to six free throw disparity.

In a 2006 Orlando at Utah game refereed by Tim Donaghy, there were two technicals called against Orlando in the final two seconds of the game.

Most of the information I have about Donaghy is from the 2006-2007 season and its plain as day to me that Donaghy did change the outcome of the games, I don’t see how any rational human being could argue otherwise.

Additionally, this link from our original entry on this story in the summer of 2007 also includes quite a few links to past entries regarding some college officials that would be of interest.

Lastly…this is what we call a tease… a member of the SFN community has written a fascinating analysis analyzing a proposed betting system tied to the officiating of an Atlantic Coast Conference referee that would be quite relevant for us to run in today’s environment. Stay tuned over the next week or so as we work on bringing it to the blog.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

General NCS Basketball

32 Responses to A professional gambler’s view of the Tim Donaghy mess

  1. EverettBeez 06/12/2008 at 7:31 AM #

    So, if I read your teaser right, we are going to have to believe that there is an ACC Ref competent enough to fix a game? How about just getting them to run with the whistle in their mouth with out choking?

  2. choppack1 06/12/2008 at 8:16 AM #

    Donaghy dropped the big bombshell this week – implying that Game 6 of the 2002 Lakers-Kings game was fixed (LA would shoot 27 free throws in the 4th quarter) – it was quickly dismissed by Stern.

    What Stern and others can’t dismiss is that evidently, Donaghy scored pretty well in the NBA’s officiating metrics. (I can’t recall where I heard or read it, but that’s what I recall.) I listened to Stern being interviewed and he said that the NBA officials were the most scrutinized in sports – and there’s no way any “fixing” could have happened in these games. (I assume he means the games other than the ones officiated by Donaghy.) He said every call is evaluated. What about every possession and every shot? (I couldn’t tell from Stern’s answer if they were doing this kind of analysis.)

    Here’s where I’d like to see our local reporters grow some stones when interviewing Swofford. I think the NBA’s situation pretty much mirrors the ACCs. Most of us who watch these games w/ a critical eye have seen plenty which defies logic w/ officiating. Like the NBA, the ACC has a star system – and there’s a widespread perception that certain coaches and players get the benefit of the doubt – and other teams are forced to play a game by a different set of rules.

    The biggest problem w/ basketball officiating is that they have let the game get way too physical. In the half court offensive sets, the defender is almost always touching the man w/ the ball. In addition, the defender is almost always touching the cutters and those posting up. On offense, PGs routinely carry the ball and walking takes place all the time. Big men are allowed to routinely go over the back and shove a man out of the way w/ defensive position.

    Simply put, the very loose interpretation and enforcement of the rules make officiating very subjective. And any time something is so subjective, well, it really hurts the integrity of the game.

  3. BJD95 06/12/2008 at 9:07 AM #

    The NBA has about as much credibility (and commands similar amounts of my personal interest and attention) as professional wrestling.

  4. whitefang 06/12/2008 at 10:19 AM #

    I personally haven’t watched an NBA game since the OLD Lakers-Boston, but I caught a the last few minutes of a radio talk show yesterday with a supposed “pro” gambler. He said that the pro gamblers know the NBA is fixed although it is only 2-3% of the games. This is all it takes according to him to make a large amount of money for the gambling syndicate (whatever that is). This percentage is in addition to his claim of the NBA’s fixing some games for ratings, etc. He said he had done the research which I assume includes comparing lines vs. winners. Of course that is hearsay only but did make an interesting discussion. He talked about how the NBA was the best fix for gambling because they have a long season with multiple games a night, no structured in game call review, and with lots of “play opportunities” to subtly influence the outcome.

  5. wufpup76 06/12/2008 at 2:32 PM #

    “The biggest problem w/ basketball officiating is that they have let the game get way too physical … Simply put, the very loose interpretation and enforcement of the rules make officiating very subjective. And any time something is so subjective, well, it really hurts the integrity of the game.”

    Bingo. (Particularly on the college level)

    “The NBA has about as much credibility (and commands similar amounts of my personal interest and attention) as professional wrestling.”

    Amen.

    “I personally haven’t watched an NBA game since the OLD Lakers-Boston …”

    ^Many, including myself, stopped watching ‘The Association’ long ago for various reasons – but someone saying they haven’t watched it since Lakers-Celtics in the ’80’s is an interesting point … Interest was fairly high back then in the NBA (at least, relative to the current level) – if you’re David Stern and your product thirves when you have big market rivalries, are you not going to give every conceivable benefit to big market teams (or big name players)?

    Stern can wax poetic all he wants about integrity not being compromised or having objective people in key positions … I call BULL**** … As a general spectator, if a big market team (NY, CHI, LA, BOS) or a team with a “superstar” marketable player made it to (or is “helped” to) the conference or overall finals, did you not expect the big market team or big name player to get certain advantages? I always did … Call me a loser conspiracy theorist or small town guy w/ paranoid delusions if you want to, but I believe there is some merit to feeling this way … And Donaghy’s situation confirmed it for me, at least on some level … I know Donaghy was doing it for personal gain and not under league mandate, but come on, really … If it looks and seems obvious, then it probably is obvious

    ***

    It looks like SFN may have some interesting reading available regarding ACC bball officiating … Can’t wait … I’ll throw out two names from the past just for today’s discussion: Larry Rose and Lenny Wertz

    Now, admittedly I can’t recall a lot of Wertz’s theatrics and calls b/c I was still growing up – but Rose, Larry F’ing Rose – I remember him all too well … Scumbag … I have never seen a guy make so many “questionable” or “non-” calls in my life … Ever … And yes, I am biased, b/c many happened against State, but many also happened against other ACC brethren when matched-up against “certain” opponents

    Even well before that infamous Maryland-State ACC semi game in ’04 (I think) I thought Rose personally had it in for us … when we were oblierating Maryland in that game and his convenient “timeout technical” swung the game in an irreversiable way I was convinced … I don’t know if I ever had more contempt for another human being than that day … oh well

  6. Wolf Dog 06/12/2008 at 2:37 PM #

    Want to see a consistent and blantant major free throw edge, watch a UNC basketball game with ACC refs. According to this guy, there should be an investigation. I bet Rick Barnes would cooperate with an investigation. I been watching this crap for years. Would not be surprised to see that major NBA stars like Jordan been betting on UNC games for years and that the gamblers are linked to ACC refs for years. UNC and State both had players mixed up with gamblers multi years ago. Would not surprise me to see UNC players and/or ACC refs on the take.

  7. BoKnowsNCS71 06/12/2008 at 2:56 PM #

    $5 will get you $10 that the guy is lying.

  8. redfred2 06/12/2008 at 4:28 PM #

    Let’s see now, we’re talking about gambling and fixing games in the NBA, and this guy, this gambler, who now says that he is disillusioned and feels he may have been cheated himself, while gambling on the NBA, is now saying that he, the gambler, would like to have job in the NBA, and for no money.

    Yep, that makes all the sense in the world to me. Sounds like an unpaid gambler, getting to know all the inner workings and being closely related with the NBA’s inner circle, would be the perfect way to fix Da League’s public perception problems.

    If I were David Stern I would hire this guy in a heartbeat.

  9. EverettBeez 06/12/2008 at 4:40 PM #

    Choppack is exactly right – the college game, esp in the ACC has gotten way to physical. Len Elmore quoted Coach Rat, I mean K, as saying the college game was now rougher then the pro’s. Amen – too bad much of the blame is K and dook’s, imho. Remember when the Big East were the thugs? No more, our conference is just as bad.

    I’ve never watch the pro-game for a variety of reasons, but it comes down to this for me, I can’t stomach having to pull for a team that’s got crapolina or dook players on it. In my mind, once you are tainted with that stain, you never recover. Ever.

    well, unless you are co-ed and you suddenly are seized with the desperate need to go out with me. I can over look a lot in that situation. Too bad my wife is not as open minded.

  10. EverettBeez 06/12/2008 at 4:43 PM #

    if Donaghy is lying, he apparently is fibbing to the Fed’s too. That will get you jail time, regardless of what he’s done. Just ask Martha Stewart.

  11. Mike 06/12/2008 at 4:56 PM #

    The problem with fixing games is there are many people involved with much at stake. The players are difficult because of their competitive nature, and because it would usually take more than one player on a team to be successful. Keeping that secret would be virtually impossible.

    The way to do it is through a slug like Donaghy. I have not watched the NBA in many years for several reasons, one of which seems to be the obvious (to me anyway) assistance/aid to the superstars or teams. I never thought it was scripted like wrestling, but it would be very simple for a couple rogue refs to pull it off.

    A few years ago, several NBA refs were busted in another illegal scam with the plane tickets and travel expenses. This was a brief issue, then swept under the rug. These refs are not all saints. Many of them gamble (dont we all in one way or another?) and Stern tried to bust them for being in Vegas casinos. That did not last long either, once he realized it was a bigger problem than he wanted to admit.

    These refs are not all squeaky clean, and while the league is claiming sour grapes, I truly think this convicted felon, cheat, liar, is telling some truth in this matter. As a State grad/fan, I am not supposed to be a Jordan fan, but yes, I liked MJ and liked watching him play. The whole world saw him push off on the game winning shot against the Jazz, except thre zebras with whistles. What a joke!

  12. redfred2 06/12/2008 at 6:24 PM #

    wulfpup, little Lenny Wurtz was one of those people who irked the hell out of me just by looking at him. You know, kinda like that lady on ‘Murder She Wrote.’ And boy did he ever love being right smack dab in the middle of a crucial call. Always right there, with his little bowl haircut, big whistle in his mouth, always at the ready.

    Needless to say, I didn’t care too much for Leonard.

  13. StateFans 06/12/2008 at 7:40 PM #

    ^^He has no reason to lie at this point.

  14. Dogbreath 06/12/2008 at 8:08 PM #

    I wrote a 30 page paper for a statistical analysis class (PS420?) my senior year at State, 1998. The thesis addressed disparity in officiating in the ACC and drew a correlation between which team went into the bonus first in either half, and their likelihood of winning. I listed all sorts of compelling links between the officiating crews, teams involved, margin of victory, etc.

    Needless to say, unc and duke were extreme outliers across all key metrics, to their favor.

    It was a hell of a project, learned the ins and outs of SPSS, did a lot of research with the ACC office.

    Unfortunately, the paper was on an old floppy and I no longer have it. Does anyone know if the university archives these documents, or is that an urban myth?

    I would love to find it and post it on this site.

    By the way, I earned an A.

    Looking forward to seeing the forthcoming analysis.

  15. highstick 06/12/2008 at 8:20 PM #

    SPSS? Dang, you’re bringing back some “old memories”.

    I’d contend that it’s not a “loose interpretation” of the rules, but a total avoidance of calling the game under the rules that are clearly written and understandable. I sometimes wonder how many of these so-called stars would be “nothings” if they had to play by the official rules.

  16. John Q StateFan 06/12/2008 at 8:37 PM #

    Tim Donaghy is a piece of work, a real scumbag, but that does not mean he is not telling the truth. If you want to learn about how dirt gets done by an official, who else would be a better source? If he had been a little smarter with separating his name from the money, using a single go-between, he would still be doing dirt right now…

    The NBA is scared that all the dirt will get out in the open… They want everyone to believe that this is the only guy taking money? Sure he is. Most of what Donaghy did was changing over/under totals… Unless you are tracking them with computer software, who is going to notice a 5% swing one way or another over the course of a season?

  17. John Q StateFan 06/12/2008 at 9:13 PM #

    There are corrupt people in every walk of life, Cops, executives, doctors lawyers, teachers, factory workers, officials. Are they all corrupt? No, of course not, but some percentage are, no matter how careful you are when choosing them.
    The NBA, NFL, and the NCAA need to accept this, and actively try and police themselves, but they won’t. They will always pretend nothing is going on, even if they know something did. They are more worried about image than law and order. The longer they look away the worse the problem will get.

  18. choppack1 06/12/2008 at 9:39 PM #

    Dogbreath – I’d like to see that. I have heard in the past that someone did an analysis on ACC, said that the advantages seen by the elite teams were different than the other leagues. Sadly ,I can’t find it.

    One thing I would say – there have been games – think our game at Duke this year, where the officials in the first half keep the favored team in the game. A lot of the pundits like to point out that foul shots are close or they are even – but they fail to mention that one team may be much more aggressively/dirty than the other team. In other words, the foul shots could be dead even, but the game may not be officiated evenly.

  19. Dogbreath 06/12/2008 at 10:00 PM #

    When a team goes into the bonus is perhaps the most reliable predictor of success, thus the theorem, basis, and findings of my research.

    Glancing at the box score over breakfast might show an equitable distribution of FT attempts, but what is important is who went into the bonus first, and how much time elapsed between when (and if) the opposition goes into the bonus.

    It completely alters the complexion and tone of the game, as the advantage swings to the team who can adopt a more physical style of play and attack the basket for “and 1” opportunities.

    I am going off of distant memory, but in my paper, I demonstrated that both UNC and Duke went into the bonus first an alarming ~90% of the time, regardless of who they were playing – except of course when they were matched against one another.

    I wish I could find the damned paper. It was tight and concise. Very empirical and lots of supporting, counterbalancing analysis.

  20. PackerInRussia 06/12/2008 at 10:40 PM #

    As far as the NBA’s image and worries of disenchanting fans are concerned, their market outside of the U.S. is so large that this may not have much of an affect on overall interest levels (i.e. advertisement, merchandise, $$, etc.). I read in an article not too long ago that said there are 300 million NBA fans in China. That is the population of the U.S. In many countries, corruption, dishonesty, and scandal are normal ways of life and are even expected, so there is probably no moral outrage over a referee who was gambling. The NBA image is a “thug image” anyway, so this all goes right along with it. Of course, none of this is based on any actual facts of what is being reported and how people are actually reacting overseas, but just a general perception and a reminder not to forget about the millions of fans that live overseas that companies pay big money to advertise to and when it comes down to it, it’s all about the money.

  21. MrPlywood 06/13/2008 at 1:35 AM #

    Hey Dogbreath, perhaps you could contact the department to see if by some chance your prof kept a copy? The project sounds really interesting, and since it was a higher level course maybe the work was archived. Every once in a while a Google search turns up a result that looks like archived projects from State, usually through the library. Heck, search your own name! You never know.

  22. packpigskinfan23 06/13/2008 at 5:25 AM #

    hey dogbreath- think you could help me with my Stat 311 class?! Numbers are the devil! =)

  23. VaWolf82 06/13/2008 at 8:15 AM #

    The thesis addressed disparity in officiating in the ACC and drew a correlation between which team went into the bonus first in either half, and their likelihood of winning. I listed all sorts of compelling links between the officiating crews, teams involved, margin of victory, etc.

    Needless to say, unc and duke were extreme outliers across all key metrics, to their favor.

    This would be interesting to see…but it doesn’t sound like you can really use this sort of analysis to prove anything. The key metrics needed to prove officiating bias are not determined or reported in the box score.

    For instance, personal fouls are tracked….but phantom foul calls and missed foul calls are not.

  24. choppack1 06/13/2008 at 10:10 AM #

    Dogbreath – You need to get an intern and have him watch all ACC games over the last 20 years and see if this holds up. Very good stuff. And it totally makes sense. If you put a team in the bonus – you probably already have guys in foul trouble and you can’t play as aggresively.

    Now is when the pundits say, “Well, Duke and UNC-Ch just have better players.” And this is true. However, this doesn’t mean that Duke and UNC are fouling less or that the opposition is fouling them more.

  25. redfred2 06/13/2008 at 11:46 AM #

    Just take Tyler Hansbrough for instance, would anyone describe him as in any way a finesse player? Does he have touch and the ability to shoot over people?

    Not hardly.

    He plays with muscle, nothing wrong with that, but the ridiculous part is that he has NEVER, EVER!!! been in serious foul trouble. Maybe he is better than the competition, but the competition can still throw two or three guys out there to guard him at different times. That’s a two to one, or even three to one ratio in fouls to give, but Tyler has beaten and banged all comers, and still never had over three fouls called on him in any particular game, this is if my memory serves me correctly.

Leave a Reply