IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/jqsprt/v5y2009i3n4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing for Bias and Manipulation in the National Basketball Association Playoffs

Author

Listed:
  • Zimmer Timothy

    (Purdue University)

  • Kuethe Todd H

    (Purdue University)

Abstract

The following paper examines potential sources of bias in National Basketball Association (NBA) playoffs. Employing NBA playoff data from 2003 through 2008, we investigate the expected margin of victory by the favored team. This method, by incorporating potentially mitigating variables, can also be used to test for potential bias and manipulation in tournament results.We find that the regular season winning percentage, used as the method for seeding teams for the NBA playoffs, is a good predictor of post season play. In addition to regular season play, we find confirming evidence of the home court advantage hypothesis suggested by previous studies. However, the analysis does indicate potential bias in playoff results in favor of large market teams. A team from a larger market is expected to win by a larger margin in the case of being the better team (stronger seed) or lose by a smaller margin in the case of being the worse team (weaker seed). Bias is also detected which would indicate closer margins of victory in early playoff series games which increases the probability of a longer series. While financial motivation for playoff manipulation is discussed, the findings only suggest bias and do not indicate its source.

Suggested Citation

  • Zimmer Timothy & Kuethe Todd H, 2009. "Testing for Bias and Manipulation in the National Basketball Association Playoffs," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 1-13, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:5:y:2009:i:3:n:4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jqas.2009.5.3/jqas.2009.5.3.1149/jqas.2009.5.3.1149.xml?format=INT
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Todd Kuethe & Timothy Zimmer, 2008. "Major Conference Bias and the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(17), pages 1-6.
    2. Beck A. Taylor & Justin G. Trogdon, 2002. "Losing to Win: Tournament Incentives in the National Basketball Association," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 23-41, January.
    3. Justin Wolfers, 2006. "Point Shaving: Corruption in NCAA Basketball," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 279-283, May.
    4. Ed Balsdon & Lesley Fong & Mark A. Thayer, 2007. "Corruption in College Basketball? Evidence of Tanking in Postseason Conference Tournaments," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 8(1), pages 19-38, February.
    5. Jones Marshall B, 2008. "A Note on Team-Specific Home Advantage in the NBA," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 4(3), pages 1-15, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:jqsprt:v:5:y:2009:i:3:n:4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Golla). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.