Just going to state the obvious here that I am no Haralabob sportsbetting expert, but rather just a Lakers (and NBA) fan who decided to make some bets this year because I have money on Bovada (and because I think the degree of the Lakers' crappiness isn't fully understood).
With that said, I think yesterday's O/U pick was a mistake, and not just in hindsight after it lost. I don't so much regret the spread pick (even though that lost much worse), as Charlotte just completely crapped the bed in the 3rd quarter and blew the game, but I felt the logic behind the pick was still sound.
But why don't I like the O/U anymore? Charlotte has a different playstyle than the Lakers. They are much more in the slow/defensive camp than the fast/offensive camp. I felt that the Lakers' porous defense would render that irrelevant, and it was hard to picture a team that allowed 117 points per game for the first 5 games (and even more at the end of last season) holding the Hornets below 100.
However, the bet was a mistake because a team not known for its scoring (or fast pace) can still have trouble putting up high scores, even against poor defensive lineups. And on the flip side, they are more likely to stifle a fast offense used to putting up a lot of points. The Lakers did get up their usual 100-110 point output (107 in this case), but indeed Charlotte could not find an offensive rhythm and scored 15 fewer points than the previous Lakers opponents averaged.
My conclusion? I would much rather put my money on over 211 when it's the Lakers versus a high/medium-high scoring squad (where it's more likely to play fast and like an All Star game) than 203 against a non-scoring squad like Charlotte.
That's not to say I think the under was necessarily a good pick here, either. Indeed, the game still came within 4 points of tying (and beating the final line), but I'm saying it was too unpredictable and better just to stay away.