Testing for Bias and Manipulation in the National Basketball Association Playoffs
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.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 5 (2009)
Issue (Month): 3 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://www.degruyter.com|
|Order Information:||Web: https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/jqas|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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.
- Todd Kuethe & Timothy Zimmer, 2008. "Major Conference Bias and the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(17), pages 1-6.
- 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.
- Justin Wolfers, 2006. "Point Shaving: Corruption in NCAA Basketball," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 279-283, May.
- 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.
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)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.